Issue here is that this doesnt particularly prove its a forgery just that the manuscripts are under some contestion, though the language shift in the Greek argues against a lot of your points in their contemporary time it wouldve been clarification of the older texts to have cause be the exclusive reading, so questioning their shift of the usage of cause to exclusivity you would also have to question equally why unbegotteness shouldve been the one used exclusively in its place.
Essence is what is common. Personal property is not common. Father and San cause the HS. Therefore another category outside of essence, and outside of person is only common to the Father and Son, and subordinates the HS.
@@bradspitt3896 The Son also is subordinated to the Father, because the Father eternally generates Him. That's why we say Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that order never changes.
@@djo-dji6018 The Father is the sole cause, but that isn't what I'm talking about, that also doesn't mean the Son isn't God. You've created another category that only Father and Son fall into. Something that isn't common to the essence, and that isn't hypostatic. The HS lacks this and so is subordinated.
This does not subordinate the Holy Spirit, as we recognize the Father possessing the 'Generative power' (the ability to Generate the Son) does not make Him ontologically greater than the Son and the Spirit, because according to Nicene Orthodoxy all Persons are co-equal. So, the Father communicating the 'spirative power' to the Son in no way makes the Holy Spirit lesser than the Father and the Son, since the productive powers in no way distinguishes the numerically one glory of the Persons. Anyone who says the Filioque leads to subordinationism needs to stop reciting their favorite online apologist and actually use their own reason and see what such an objection entails. If the spirative power makes the Son greater than the Spirit, then the Eastern Orthodox cannot maintain the Father is equal to the Son and the Spirit, since He has the productive powers which they lack. So, if you were consistent with this objection you would subordinate the Son and the Spirit. Now, clearly this is heretical.
Yes, I've seen this forgery thing many times, and no matter how you splice it, even with your nuances described here, all you are doing is proving that BOTH SIDES, depend on "misatributions" "forgeries" "assumptions based on faith" "additions" "subtractions" and other matters of confusion. I don't trust any of you. All this stuff is just a cover for other differences.
yeah, I think you are right: in the discussion, it lacks the consideration of the fact that the idea of 'through the Son' was understood according to a linear scheme of Father-Son-Spirit, not a triangular scheme) --- but it remains that, during the fourth and fifth centuries both the triangular scheme of the filioque and that of the 'through the Son' are sustained throughout the ancient Church, East and West
@@jalapeno.tabasco Not really. Words are written by people. I just see Christianity as too "human centric." We need a religion that doesn't put Man and his "scripture" at the centre of the universe.
@@jalapeno.tabasco What does it EVEN MEAN to say that something "comes from God?" I see the words of Plato and Pythagoras who believed in all kinds of nutty things to contain at least JUST AS MUCH of what "comes from God" as anything and perhaps more than what is found in the words of Moses or Isaiah. Yes, these texts are VALUABLE and should not be mocked in the Leftist or Foreign Philia way. But continuing on in your exclusivist delusions when you KNOW you are not ALLOWED to behave like an ancient tribal person or even like all the Sub-SCUM we must politely navigate around today.....will GET YOU KILLED.
I have to say, I admire the AMOUNT of work you have done on this and your KNOWLEDGE is enviable. But I just don't care. I am merely a Neo-Platonist with Mithraic aspirations for founding a Future Neo-Platonist Mithraic Religion which will sweep all of this nonsense away. You Christians are worn out, just as bombed to bits intellectually as the Muslims are physically. I merely find these debates ( ignoring the arrogant personality wars, a la Jay and others, merely annoying and insulting entertainment ) profoundly fascinating. I am comfortable with a ritual and group formation around a single universal source. We don't need to be "saved." That doesn't matter. No one outside the Western world takes that concept seriously, nor do they understand it. Christianity is our Kryptonite. I want a new immunity to it.
Without even looking a video, I can give you two arguments against filioque without even looking for further evidence: John 15:26: "And when the Comforter has come, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He shall testify of Me." And the second one: no Christian ever came up with such idea for the first 1000 years of Christianity! So, you can twist the facts, play with words and logic, but the truth is one: Roman Catholics altered the true teaching and fell into heresies which only multiplied throughout the centuries.
@@tanjagantner6685 As I said, no need for that. Apostle John wrote clearly that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, so whatever argument you find it is not based on the Scripture, but it's a fabrication of a fallen human mind. So, are you arguing with me, or with Lord's disciple?
@@tanjagantner6685 And you should be careful of satanic deceptions. It's easy to justify sin. The Scripture speaks for itself. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. Filioque is a heresy that occurred centuries after Jesus, Apostles, Church Fathers, Ecumenical Councils (in which Rome participated) that established the Creed. And regarding my pride, let the Lord be the judge of that, for his judgment is right. "Judge not, that you be not judged."
You might want to consider how poorly it reflects on you to put the word Orthodox in quotes. It doesn't matter what your argument is or what facts you have at your commend. When you take a disdainful attitude like that, you're going to influence against you anybody who might have been open to considering your arguments if they had been presented courteously.
If they do so, they are being dumb. If you don't listen to an argument because you don't like who is giving it, you are not searching the truth in an honest way.
There's only one true Orthodox Church my dude, despite our desire to approach with schismatics ecumenically, we can't act like using a word that denotes to 'truth' so loosely isn't a dangerous precedent
Thanks for this. You have really helped me see the other side of this whole issue.
Yay. Finally a video on this.
Issue here is that this doesnt particularly prove its a forgery just that the manuscripts are under some contestion, though the language shift in the Greek argues against a lot of your points in their contemporary time it wouldve been clarification of the older texts to have cause be the exclusive reading, so questioning their shift of the usage of cause to exclusivity you would also have to question equally why unbegotteness shouldve been the one used exclusively in its place.
I love niche apologetics
David erhan type aaah video
More Es Skee knee
That’d be how you pronounce that.
Essence is what is common.
Personal property is not common.
Father and San cause the HS.
Therefore another category outside of essence, and outside of person is only common to the Father and Son, and subordinates the HS.
Lol
@@catholic_m Catholics used rhetoric.
@@bradspitt3896 The Son also is subordinated to the Father, because the Father eternally generates Him. That's why we say Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that order never changes.
@@djo-dji6018 The Father is the sole cause, but that isn't what I'm talking about, that also doesn't mean the Son isn't God.
You've created another category that only Father and Son fall into. Something that isn't common to the essence, and that isn't hypostatic. The HS lacks this and so is subordinated.
This does not subordinate the Holy Spirit, as we recognize the Father possessing the 'Generative power' (the ability to Generate the Son) does not make Him ontologically greater than the Son and the Spirit, because according to Nicene Orthodoxy all Persons are co-equal. So, the Father communicating the 'spirative power' to the Son in no way makes the Holy Spirit lesser than the Father and the Son, since the productive powers in no way distinguishes the numerically one glory of the Persons. Anyone who says the Filioque leads to subordinationism needs to stop reciting their favorite online apologist and actually use their own reason and see what such an objection entails. If the spirative power makes the Son greater than the Spirit, then the Eastern Orthodox cannot maintain the Father is equal to the Son and the Spirit, since He has the productive powers which they lack. So, if you were consistent with this objection you would subordinate the Son and the Spirit. Now, clearly this is heretical.
Yes, I've seen this forgery thing many times, and no matter how you splice it, even with your nuances described here, all you are doing is proving that BOTH SIDES, depend on "misatributions" "forgeries" "assumptions based on faith" "additions" "subtractions" and other matters of confusion. I don't trust any of you. All this stuff is just a cover for other differences.
yeah, I think you are right: in the discussion, it lacks the consideration of the fact that the idea of 'through the Son' was understood according to a linear scheme of Father-Son-Spirit, not a triangular scheme) --- but it remains that, during the fourth and fifth centuries both the triangular scheme of the filioque and that of the 'through the Son' are sustained throughout the ancient Church, East and West
yeah... its almost like sola scriptura has some basis
@@jalapeno.tabasco Not really. Words are written by people.
I just see Christianity as too "human centric."
We need a religion that doesn't put Man and his "scripture" at the centre of the universe.
@@charlesnunno8377 so you deny the inspiration of Scripture?? you deny they are the words of God????? really?
@@jalapeno.tabasco What does it EVEN MEAN to say that something "comes from God?"
I see the words of Plato and Pythagoras who believed in all kinds of nutty things to contain at least JUST AS MUCH of what "comes from God" as anything and perhaps more than what is found in the words of Moses or Isaiah.
Yes, these texts are VALUABLE and should not be mocked in the Leftist or Foreign Philia way.
But continuing on in your exclusivist delusions when you KNOW you are not ALLOWED to behave like an ancient tribal person or even like all the Sub-SCUM we must politely navigate around today.....will GET YOU KILLED.
I have to say, I admire the AMOUNT of work you have done on this and your KNOWLEDGE is enviable. But I just don't care. I am merely a Neo-Platonist with Mithraic aspirations for founding a Future Neo-Platonist Mithraic Religion which will sweep all of this nonsense away. You Christians are worn out, just as bombed to bits intellectually as the Muslims are physically. I merely find these debates ( ignoring the arrogant personality wars, a la Jay and others, merely annoying and insulting entertainment ) profoundly fascinating. I am comfortable with a ritual and group formation around a single universal source. We don't need to be "saved." That doesn't matter. No one outside the Western world takes that concept seriously, nor do they understand it. Christianity is our Kryptonite. I want a new immunity to it.
Without even looking a video, I can give you two arguments against filioque without even looking for further evidence: John 15:26: "And when the Comforter has come, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He shall testify of Me." And the second one: no Christian ever came up with such idea for the first 1000 years of Christianity! So, you can twist the facts, play with words and logic, but the truth is one: Roman Catholics altered the true teaching and fell into heresies which only multiplied throughout the centuries.
😂 Right. Not listening to an argument is what makes you best qualified to prove it wrong. 😂 😂😂
@@tanjagantner6685 As I said, no need for that. Apostle John wrote clearly that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, so whatever argument you find it is not based on the Scripture, but it's a fabrication of a fallen human mind. So, are you arguing with me, or with Lord's disciple?
@@vladimirjevremovic4449 as l said 😂 Also: be careful with your pride.
@@tanjagantner6685 And you should be careful of satanic deceptions. It's easy to justify sin. The Scripture speaks for itself. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. Filioque is a heresy that occurred centuries after Jesus, Apostles, Church Fathers, Ecumenical Councils (in which Rome participated) that established the Creed. And regarding my pride, let the Lord be the judge of that, for his judgment is right.
"Judge not, that you be not judged."
I don't know even where to start with this one...
You might want to consider how poorly it reflects on you to put the word Orthodox in quotes. It doesn't matter what your argument is or what facts you have at your commend. When you take a disdainful attitude like that, you're going to influence against you anybody who might have been open to considering your arguments if they had been presented courteously.
If they do so, they are being dumb. If you don't listen to an argument because you don't like who is giving it, you are not searching the truth in an honest way.
There's only one true Orthodox Church my dude, despite our desire to approach with schismatics ecumenically, we can't act like using a word that denotes to 'truth' so loosely isn't a dangerous precedent
I would normally call them "Oriental Schismatics" (as our authors traditionally did), but nobody would know what I am talking about.
@@skmcee7863ok "catholic", you are filioquepath.😂