Joseph P Farrell: A Pious Man Mistranslated a Word and Split Europe. Joseph Farrell with Kelly Em

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ธ.ค. 2024
  • Aurelius Augustinus was a Christian bishop, born in Algeria in the year 354. By all accounts, he was a devoted Christian servant and a busy man. He was known for his pragmatism and was highly educated.
    If you look up Augustinus, or St. Augustine, in the Encyclopedia Britannica, it describes him as :
    “one of the Latin Fathers of the Church and perhaps the most significant Christian thinker after St. Paul. Augustine’s adaptation of classical thought to Christian teaching created a theological system of great power and lasting influence.”
    But did his thinking include an inadvertent error that led to the split into two Europes?
    According to Dr. Farrell’s research, Augustinus did not have the time to fully investigate the Classical Greek words he was using in his writings.
    Classical Greek is perhaps the most subtle European language ever devised. A few writers who thought in Classical Greek were tabloid scribblers like Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Plotinus. Even the Gospels were written in Greek, which was the most prominent intellectual language in the ancient Mediterranean and widely spoken even in Jesus’ day.
    If you want to understand what that word was, and why it split Europe, you will need to head up to LuLu.com and purchase the four volume set of Dr. Farrell’s masterwork, God, History, and Dialectic, a detailed study of the role that theology played in the political development of Western Europe, and by extension, how it lost contact with the original understanding of Christianity still practiced in East Europe and North Asia. In an age of attention deficit, it takes determination to read, but the rewards are endless. You’ll finally understand what factors created the West and why it is circling the bowl. There is no study like it.
    www.lulu.com/s...
    Or you can choose the Cliff Notes version here on The Common Surface. If you are the type who likes to listen, here is my recent, long-form interview with Dr. Farrell, where we DEEP dive into the history starting near the end of the Roman Empire. It’s really mindblowing information. No longer will your cultural circumstances puzzle you.
    People in the West have no idea how different the “original” Christianity is to the “Western Christianity” practiced today. They look somewhat similar, but at the level of their foundational assumptions, definitions, and cosmology, they are almost unrelated, especially at the level of meaning.
    And as a result, people in the West do not have any sense of Eastern Christian belief structures, the culturo-behavioral results of that, nor any way of understanding what Orthodox societies want.
    In my own view, it is easier for a Westerner to understand Chinese Dao than it is for them to understand the Orthodox viewpoint. This has dire political consequences, as Dr. Farrell lays out in this interview.
    The study also makes it clear why the West is descending into nihilism, decay, and abandonment, and how it lost sight of its reasons to be.
    Check out my zine on Substack, and subscribe if you like. And of course, tell people you respect about The Common Surface!
    Thecommonsurfa...

ความคิดเห็น • 344

  • @RepairRenovateRenew
    @RepairRenovateRenew 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +91

    The mission is simple - listen to every single Joseph Farrell interview. Infinite gratitude sir thank you

    • @340ironman
      @340ironman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Good plan👍🏻👍🏻

    • @paulocorrea521
      @paulocorrea521 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      It would not be a hundred hours wasted.

    • @xprettylightsx
      @xprettylightsx 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@340ironman it’s hard to comprehend the information that is organized and retained in this man’s mind.

    • @xprettylightsx
      @xprettylightsx 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@paulocorrea521 it’s hard to comprehend the information that is organized and retained in this man’s mind.

    • @oldgaffer9212
      @oldgaffer9212 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Iv done it

  • @Loenthall88
    @Loenthall88 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    Dr. Farrell is one of the most brilliant people I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. A truly original thinker. It's always a delight to hear him.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      He is an original thinker, but I always remind myself how he actually does the work, knowing him and how hard he works to put together a book you would not believe!

  • @beaches2mountains230
    @beaches2mountains230 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

    SO HAPPY WE DIDNT LOSE THIS MAN WHEN HE HAD HIS HEART ATTACK ALMOST 2 YEARS AGO IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY. WHAT A MIND AND ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE HIS THOUGHTS FOR THE LESSER MINDS LOL. CHEERS

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  4 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      It was a terrifying moment. Thanks for the note.

  • @Grace777BC
    @Grace777BC 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    wow... probably the most profound conversation i have heard. i am seeing the mind viruse everwhere. i am listening to this over and over and my mind keeps getting blown. Farrell is a high level genious

  • @panokostouros7609
    @panokostouros7609 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    Imagine sitting in on the professor's lectures back in the day. We are truly blessed to have him with us even in the TH-cam Samizdat

  • @nateo6806
    @nateo6806 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    This is one of the most densely packed Farrell conversations I've ever listened to, and I've been a fan since his Forum Borealis interviews. Thanks for sharing this! Incredible stuff.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      I am so glad that you found this recording, and that you appreciated the material as much as I do! Dr. Farrell is unbelievable.

  • @Tessa1111
    @Tessa1111 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Really enjoy Kelly Em's interviews with Dr. Farrell, learn so much information...all the multiple puzzle pieces...

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      So glad!

  • @NenneSez
    @NenneSez 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    fastest thumbs up for me too! How lovely to hear Dr Farrell again. Thank you

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you enjoyed it!

  • @CharlotteKnight-fh6tx
    @CharlotteKnight-fh6tx 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    All i can say for now is somehow the deepest parts of me really needed this about now....very inspiring on so many levels.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      aww. i know how you feel.

  • @ihn
    @ihn 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Thanks for the interview with Joseph. Highly appreciated as he is a brilliant mind. 😊

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you enjoyed it!

  • @Yourchocolateastrologer
    @Yourchocolateastrologer 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    I love Dr. JPF!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      A treasure beyond measure

  • @jasonallen332
    @jasonallen332 14 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    This is one of the best videos on YT. Thank you for covering this book; I can’t wait to go back and reread it!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 วันที่ผ่านมา

      The four books are such a critical resource!

  • @gypsymoonX
    @gypsymoonX 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Wow, to be able to think on that level is absolutely mind blowing to us mere mortals! Dr. Farrell is on Legendary status in my book. Thank you Kelly for sharing this conversation. To say it was enlightening doesn’t even begin to express how I’m feeling. So THANK YOU BOTH! My journey is just beginning…

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Wow, thanks!

  • @CharlotteKnight-fh6tx
    @CharlotteKnight-fh6tx 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    So thankful for this interview.
    Thanks to both of you.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      sure thing, Miss Charlotte.

  • @robholt54
    @robholt54 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Truly just thinking of the dilemma we are in with binary code and debate... starting listening to Joseph, and wow, mahalos for working with to see the solution... stop all the debates, and humbly work together for solution... ego defeated, but humility triumphs... thx Joseph 😊

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      lets hope so. i just banned my first from the channel. Why? personal attacks instead of real engagement. if someone needs their diaper changed, not my problem.

  • @Loenthall88
    @Loenthall88 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    I've heard quite a few interviews with Joseph. I have to say, he never disappoints.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I know, right?

  • @rendelawenzel239
    @rendelawenzel239 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Fantastic interview!!!! Thanks so much.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      it really is a total privilege to be able to bring this contact to y’all

  • @claeslillieskold2398
    @claeslillieskold2398 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I'm not christian, and cannot really explain why I feel some kind of comfort listening to Joseph when the future prospect presented is either disaster 1 or disaster 2.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  4 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      Thanks for the note. His knowledge and understanding provides comfort because it is in contrast to the narrative chaos.

  • @johnbaran577
    @johnbaran577 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Thanks Kelly Em

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      So welcome!

  • @Bizarreparade
    @Bizarreparade 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I agree that the phone adds a nice nostalgic flavor to the conversation. Sounds great to me.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I know, its like stepping backward/foreward in time. Lol

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@kellyem33 "Hello everybody, This is George Ann Hughes, and this IS the Byte Show...."

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@panokostouros7609 i miss her SO much. Did you know she was a supermodel who was modeling in Paris; and who was acquainted with all the top leaders of the time? And she gave it ALL up to move by herself to Alaska?

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@kellyem33 Amazing! I had no idea

    • @jameshitt3263
      @jameshitt3263 3 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@panokostouros7609 Now that is a vibe!! That took me right back about 10 or 12 years, up late in a dark apartment listening to those great interviews...

  • @bretrath6073
    @bretrath6073 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Awesome!!! Thank you Kelly and Joseph for your efforts!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you too!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You are so welcome!

  • @Yourchocolateastrologer
    @Yourchocolateastrologer 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Amazing! Thanks in advance, btw!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you too!

  • @RiccardoFerreira
    @RiccardoFerreira 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    You gotta love the audio quality! Classy

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      sometimes you have to back down to older technologies to get through it

  • @QuixEnd
    @QuixEnd 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    No kidding. I've been putting the pieces together for a while, but he really did all the work.
    * i put the crux of it a bit differently, Goes back to Plato v Aristotle. Either I obtain absolute truth and the world must be remade in my image (the 'best' image) or I must conform my entire image to some unobtainable truth.
    Jesus came at this perfect time in history where Truth was consciously up for grabs.

  • @adamrobbins2091
    @adamrobbins2091 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Doesn't get too much better than this

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks Adam!

  • @oknizhoni
    @oknizhoni 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Thank you for your discussion. I learned so much from JPF’s perspectives. Our human relationship with God is to thank Him and to ask for help. He is our Heavenly Father. We are His adopted children. Love & respect. … The limitations of ascribing logical constructs to God fall short. For example, since God knows everything, why would Jesus say, “Only the Father knows.” ? Because the relationship between the persons of the Trinity is one of respect & love. Jesus respects the Father’s role. Jesus does not know. Because it did not please God the Father to share when the end of the world will happen with Jesus or the Holy Spirit. This love & respect is our example to follow. It is the basis for the family- the foundation of civilization. The evil one seeks to destroy the family. We have to ask God for help and to thank Him with daily offerings of self sacrifices. Modelling our lives after Jesus will allow God’s graces to overcome the problems of the world. These Doctrinal foundations that underly conflicts and the collapse of civilization can be overcome with prayer, fasting and thanksgiving to our Heavenly Father.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      people mistakenly think that entering the Kingdom of Heaven is going to bind and restrict them. When one enters that gate, a vast, creative canvas for good works becomes apparent, one that a man or woman can take up with joy.

  • @vibrationaltonic9560
    @vibrationaltonic9560 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I do really like that ‘talking on the phone’ sound! Awesome breakdown of this book as well

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      it harkins back!

  • @DawnieRotten
    @DawnieRotten 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Kelly, I was RE-listening to your other interviews with Dr. JPF when this one came out, and I didn't notice, until your Substack post. Then I got all excited......'Could there be?......a NEW Dr. JPF vid?......!!!'. Off, back to YT I went, where I had another of your Dr. JPF vids on pause.
    Another great interview!!
    Happy-Happy! :)

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I have been hanging onto it for a couple of days because it’s a lot of work to actually put the show together in iMovie. but eventually need overcame sloth, and here we are

  • @bringuptheWolfsHead
    @bringuptheWolfsHead 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    much appreciated. ..

  • @vladimirkraynyk
    @vladimirkraynyk 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Looking forward to more of these

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks so much!

  • @parkeranderson7599
    @parkeranderson7599 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    What a beautiful discussion this was. I wish I could give it two likes.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      That is very kind of you to say!

  • @MrParondo
    @MrParondo 27 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    This is a fascinating take on the évolution of the morality of accounting and original sin. ❤

  • @javierjalisco17
    @javierjalisco17 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Keep up the good work Joseph 👍

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  หลายเดือนก่อน

      ill let him know

  • @Yourchocolateastrologer
    @Yourchocolateastrologer 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Sounds great on my end…. And I’m in Costa Rica!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Disfruta!

  • @kyleelsbernd7566
    @kyleelsbernd7566 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Wow he is brilliant

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I know, right? Have you checked out his books?

  • @Dragorama11
    @Dragorama11 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Hey, we can hear you. It's all good..

  • @VisibleTrouble
    @VisibleTrouble 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    GeorgeAnn! That is awesome. So cool.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      GeorgeAnn was such a dear friend of mine. She asked me to take over the byte show when she got sick. i promised to do that, and have finally made an approximation…

  • @whollybraille7043
    @whollybraille7043 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Kelly, let your guests finish their thoughts. Excellent, Joseph. wow. This will change a lot of lives and people's faith.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      yeah, I know. It’s hard to believe I’m broadcasted trained. But I’m getting better.

    • @whollybraille7043
      @whollybraille7043 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@kellyem33 Doing fine, dude. Just keep up the great guests and shows. Thanks

    • @oliveeisner8964
      @oliveeisner8964 16 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ​@@kellyem33it was a perfectly conducted interview. I hope to hear more talks between you and Dr. Farrell. Blessings, sir. 🙏

  • @joshua_finch
    @joshua_finch 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Interviewer: "Wow"

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I mean, what else can you say? lol

    • @jacob6088
      @jacob6088 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33Joseph: “yeah, wow”

  • @tinkserval1
    @tinkserval1 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Really love this interview, relistening 😊 I do not subscribe to any Ismes yet study many. Would be great if you could have Dr Joe come back and break down gnostisim...

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Noted

  • @jasonloh9417
    @jasonloh9417 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The host gets it in every respect ...

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I am often reminded of Christ’s comment about a prophe, not being respected in his own city. almost nobody in my life life takes seriously anything I do with respect to this channel or blog…. so I have to depend on the “kindness of strangers” to feel like I am less alone in the world than I feel…

    • @jasonloh9417
      @jasonloh9417 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@kellyem33 Keep up the good work, brother ...

  • @kyleelsbernd7566
    @kyleelsbernd7566 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Wow I always thought that we went off the rails with nominalism, and Farrell boils it to its essence

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      That he did. Even I got it.

  • @quantumkid1097
    @quantumkid1097 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Top notch! Thank you again

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you liked it!

  • @katekelly1
    @katekelly1 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Dr. Farrell very accurately describes the false dichotomy/dichotomies at the foundational heart of, primarily, Western Christian theology, as illustrated by the existence of the Trinity dilemma.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      So true, and yet still one of many examples!

  • @bet034717
    @bet034717 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Im' listening, Joseph. 😮

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  หลายเดือนก่อน

      you can contact joseph at his website email.

  • @kyleelsbernd7566
    @kyleelsbernd7566 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Brilliant thesis

  • @ClearLight369
    @ClearLight369 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    What was the beautiful theme music? Bach suites? Thanks for the fascinating discussion. Dr. Farrell is always brilliant.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      “Come Holy Ghost” by Johann Sebastian Bach. It is always performed on the organ, so I took the midi file and passed it into a music synthesizer. After that, I edited it so that I could eliminate the notes that the computer could not process. From there, I switched it to a Grand Piano synth. I actually like it far more on the Piano! The German name is Komm Heiliger Geiste. Here is a yt video of it being performed on organ:
      m.th-cam.com/video/aufa8GvwS9w/w-d-xo.html

    • @ClearLight369
      @ClearLight369 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@kellyem33 Thanks!

  • @chriswatson9668
    @chriswatson9668 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Hi Kelly, I love this channel. Phenomenal interview with Dr. Farrell. Thank you. So, I was wondering what would be your top ten books any authors, God , History and D already included Thanks again, Kelly.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      For me:
      1) GHD
      2) Atlas Shrugged
      3) king james bible
      4) The Einstein Myth
      5) The Cosmic War
      6) Hamlet’s Mill
      7) Paradise Lost
      8) Wholeness and The Implicate Order
      9)Transhumanism in Dialogues
      10) Genes, Giants, Monsters and Men

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Fiction:
      1) Foundation series
      2) CS Lewis Space Trilogy
      3) The Man Without Qualities
      4) Vatican
      5) The Past Recaptured
      6) Pillars of The Earth
      7) A Canticle for Leibowitz
      8) The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
      9) 2001: A Space Odyssey
      10) Greek Mythology

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks so much for your comment

    • @chriswatson9668
      @chriswatson9668 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      ​@@kellyem33No, thank you, Kelly. Listening to your interviews with Dr. Farrell and others helped pull me out of the swamp of nihilism, out of the matrix of meaningless materialism, and eventually back to my Orthodox faith. Please pass on my deep gratitude and kind regards to Dr. Farrell. All my best to you, Kelly. God bless.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@chriswatson9668 Me too. Living in the actual kingdom of heaven is adamantine joy.

  • @xprettylightsx
    @xprettylightsx 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    YES!

  • @qichick
    @qichick 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Awesome and enlightening journey of mind. Powerful.

    • @qichick
      @qichick 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      But NO! - tiny print is torture for visually-challenged people. A magnifying glass imposes its own distortion and visual stress. It's not a good solution. Bigger print is..

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It’s manageable, and not actually that tiny. Just hold it close with adequate light.

  • @oldgaffer9212
    @oldgaffer9212 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Dr Farrell hooray

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I know, right?

    • @oldgaffer9212
      @oldgaffer9212 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@kellyem33Always good and I mean always

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      appreciated more than you know

  • @jtlemay4878
    @jtlemay4878 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Art bell styley

    • @apchsiri1156
      @apchsiri1156 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Landline aesthetic.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      That is about the highest compliment ever

  • @POLARIStheTRUE
    @POLARIStheTRUE 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The material planes is taught and lives in binary/polarity/etc.. The spiritual world, which encompasses everything including the cosmos, and the earth plane is always taught in a trinity/ or threes. People thing there are only two choices against each other, but there is always a third choice, hence the heart center/the Christ consciousness/ the Middle Path.

  • @jasonloh9417
    @jasonloh9417 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The host gets it ...

  • @davekiernan1
    @davekiernan1 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Lawyers latin by John by John Gray. Is the book, if you don't have it Farrel and others. You ought to get it. Turned the world of law with this book with a load of courts.

  • @scottcairns2933
    @scottcairns2933 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    fastest click of my life

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      :)

  • @mamborickyclassicalmusicac4733
    @mamborickyclassicalmusicac4733 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    wonderful

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you think so!!

  • @PabluchoViision
    @PabluchoViision 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Re free will, c. 28:00: How does the fact that not every choice is one between moral action and sin, gainsay that there can be no choosing between moral conduct and sin, when we are faced with such choice, without the existence of free will? And, more importantly, the concept of sin can have no meaning without free will.

    • @robertcox14
      @robertcox14 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You have to know the meaning of "sin" before you can "Use it" to formulate morality....OR define Good things First, then form morality based on sin being the "bad/opposite to good." Cain and Abel is supposed to be a BAD Example of ill will towards others, but where is the definition of GOOD?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This is dialectic thinking; so pervasive that it is used to analyze itself!

  • @markhughes7927
    @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    1:13:53
    Did Plato try it in the Republic? - I take that work to be an extended analogy (like the biblical books Leviticus and Numbers) useful for the enquiry into the transmissibility (or otherwise) of Virtue. (The two ‘heroes’ of the work making a very late and very brief appearance in the work as Reason and the Muse!)

  • @KronosSion
    @KronosSion 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    This seems very recent. I had heard rumors that Dr. Farrell either no longer believed or has a very strange relationship with the church, but he seems aa passionate about it as ever.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      He has a relationship with the faith; and theological positions based on his research.

  • @h3nk1pro2
    @h3nk1pro2 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is a great conversation. Thank you. You could perhaps consider having the audio file «cleaned up» in order to improve the quality.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Its a done deal and not a standard discussion method for us. Glad you enjoyed it

  • @CarlitosHablada
    @CarlitosHablada 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    God, the infinite and eternal source of Life and Existence, is One and there is no division whatsoever. These 'divisions' are only in the minds of men and reflect a psychological 'peculiarity' which is simply wrong, an illusion... God is eternal and omniscient, He experiences everything at the same time Now forever and since ever with no divisions. The sentient beings on the other hand despite being part of God, (because God is Reality, Existence, and we are part of It) don't have and will never have the same level of conscience as God, and in trying to understand the mystery that is God they make mistakes, misinterpretations, and create a lot of confusion in the process. The best explanation of this Reality is in the Bhagavad Gita, the concept of Atma and Paramatma as explained by Krishna to Arjuna. So Atma is 'part of God', not an 'aspect of God', just like my cells are part of me and not an aspect of me. God is One in everything, His conscience is One omniscient conscience. And we are a part of God, have always been and will always be, part of an unique, unified and indivisible One. So, even in the same Vedanta we have Vishnu, Shiva and Krishna, just like God and Sofia, or the Trinity in other religions, but these are all Maya, illusions, the only Reality is the Existence and eternal interaction between God (Paramatma) and all sentient beings (Atmas). God is One and we are part of it, eternally, that's all.

    • @paulducharme60oo
      @paulducharme60oo 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      That is all Hermetics 101.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Hi Carlos. Thanks for sharing your viewpoint.

    • @CarlitosHablada
      @CarlitosHablada 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@kellyem33 thank you, great podcast!!

  • @kyleelsbernd7566
    @kyleelsbernd7566 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The trinity corresponds to classical ethos pathos logos. Plato and Aristotle advocated harmony between head hands and heart. Government and society corresponded to this trinity, with 3 classes thinking working and judging. The Middle Ages and nominalists began to chip away at this balance.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      and nominalism is just a long-winded way of saying gnosticism.

  • @dagon99
    @dagon99 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank-you.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you too!

  • @javierjalisco17
    @javierjalisco17 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    What is the intro-outro music? I've found the classiest intellectuals topic shows start w classical music including you and Dr. Farrell.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      hello javier, Komm Heliger Gheist, “come holy ghost”, by bach. it is an organ piece about the Pentacost. I found an open source midi file, which I edited heavily for timing, and then fed it into a really fine grand synth. I was stunned how lovely it came out on the piano. To my knowledge, it is the only recording of KHG ever recorded on piano! I am so happy so many appreciate it as much As I do!

    • @javierjalisco17
      @javierjalisco17 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 deal bro got it. I've always wanted Joseph to do a show on history of organ and/or music since thats his other wheel house maybe you could do one with him?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@javierjalisco17 good idea. He did talk about it somewhere, but not in detail.

    • @qichick
      @qichick 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 SOOO beautiful.... dare I say even more beautiful than the original ~
      I really hope you fellows talk some more about this subject. Unbelievably interesting!!

  • @qichick
    @qichick 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    What was that exquisitely beautiful piece of music at the end?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Come Holy Ghost, by Bach, piece for organ. th-cam.com/video/g0saZqGChzs/w-d-xo.html

    • @qichick
      @qichick 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 💜❤🤎

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@qichick i think it sounds better on the grand piano than the organ. but there are no recordings on youtube of it arranged for piano,

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@qichick he wrote it also as a chorale, to create Lutheran equiv. to the Latin mass. Here is a good version. So astonishing. m.th-cam.com/video/HLQSsc0o3S4/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygU2Y2hvcmFsZSBzZXR0aW5nICJLb21tLCBHb3R0IFNjaMO2cGZlciwgSGVpbGlnZXIgR2Vpc3Qi

    • @qichick
      @qichick หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 Beautiful indeed! Thank you -

  • @pinchee13
    @pinchee13 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Excellence.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks!

  • @RafaelRestau
    @RafaelRestau 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Wow indeed. So the augustinian dialectic is the original schism that led to the great schism that led to the reformation that led to 30000 sects that led to countless secular cults by the endtime?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Thats what the evidence suggests. The good news is that its a fixable problem if the culture acknowledges the error. The truth in the Patristic Tranditiion is apostolic and a much better template for the whole person.

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@kellyem33 It's a shame that many Orthodox don't treasure their own Patristic Faith. This "corrective" theology is impregnated in their services and hymns, and not only in the Scriptures

  • @johnf6267
    @johnf6267 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    WOW

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ???

  • @MasoudSargon
    @MasoudSargon 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Yeeeeeees

  • @Timdalf1
    @Timdalf1 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    At 1:32:00 There is an unfortunate digression into Tibetan Buddhism… which is alien to Farrell’s focus on Orthodoxy vs Western Christianity… and he fails to correct it. It is another example of the superficial fad of recent decades to prefer Oriental (Hindu-Buddhist) worldly and naturalistic physical imagery which obscures the even better, loftier Orthodox Christian imagery… This is a Buddhist feminist image which is falsely enticing and alluring… The stronger and thus more helpful masculine Orthodox counterpart image of Divine mercy that signifies even more and with greater intensity is of course the image of the Divine Saviour crucified… His pedestal is the Cross… His action (Energy) of voluntarily ascending it, is one of complete perfect sacrifice of human nature, but should be contrasted to the only physical Latin crucifix with its depiction of domination by exclusively bodily agonies, in that the Orthodox Christ is manifestly serene and regal as revealing His state of soul ruled by Divine dispassion, nothing negative, but pure spiritual mercy. This preference for Orientalism is a consequence of Western Scholastic insensitive abstractionism and psychopathic naturalism which provokes another extreme counter-reaction parallel to the Protestant over-reaction by elevating orientalist exoticism. Thus skipping over the Orthodox synthesis which is formed by the Jerusalem-Constantinople-Kiev/Moscow axis which avoids the extremes of both Westernism or Orientalist polarization. Orthodoxy also has the superior and fuller image of the noetic and theologically aware compassion of the All-holy ever-virgin Theotokos binding afflicted humanity with its healing Saviour, contrasted with the sentimental and passion ridden images of the Latin BVM…

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      You are mostly correct but missed my point. My decision to include Buddhist operations was to make the point that many of these operations are not exclusive to Christianity; but they do arise on a different basis, and with great respect, they are missing the quality of patristic Christianity to complete the full human person, and bring them in the direction of the likeness and image of the Father.

    • @Timdalf1
      @Timdalf1 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33
      The only true image of the Father is Jesus Christ.... if that is what you Tmean. Trees, grass, sunlight are not exclusive to Christianity, nor are kindness, meekness and the like but that does not warrant replacing the Second Person as sole Creator and Saviour. Christ and the Church will not be found, nor enhanced by poly-religious ecumenism and pan-heterodox imitation imagery fantasies. There is no question that non-Orthodox religions are fundamentally a deceptive distraction according to the Church Fathers.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      It is called an analogy, and I will continue to use them.

    • @vanessasmith6502
      @vanessasmith6502 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      it was all perfectly understood - hEAR.

  • @vangannaway1015
    @vangannaway1015 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Gurdjieff, Ouspensky and Mouravieff address these issues

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Right.

  • @markhughes7927
    @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    1:13:47
    ‘You cannot reduce human experience to a scientific formula’ - again the savour of Kant? - the ideological dialectics characterising the neo-Kantian philosophies being a distended equivalence to/a begetter of - the socialist bureaucracies which must perforce break down.. (Saving Plato and Biblical philology as better guardians of (a mentally spacious) Academe from the cultural tourniquet applied by Kant and his homogenous derivatives. No?

  • @richardhelder9521
    @richardhelder9521 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Killer. Thank you so much! So important. So timely. I wonder if there's a connection between the trinitarian diagram and the Tree of Life diagram in the Kabbalah?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      There are surface similarities; but the meaning is very different, imo

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No idea! There are some similarities with all the triangles, but they come to very different conclusions and operations, so it might just be a coincidence

  • @chriswatson9668
    @chriswatson9668 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Hi Kelly, I hope you are well. So, my physics and math education is sorely lacking; could you recommend the best books and resources to gain a solid foundation? I have recently started Khan Academy Physics, and I'm also reading the Everything You Need to Know series.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      MIT Open Courseware and the Walter Lewin Lectures, the best physics explainer ever. The Feynman Lectures: www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu; great videos with him too. But to keep your wits about you, read afterwards: archive.org/details/oldphysicsfornew0000phip. And also www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/50230/dark-matter-missing-planets-and-new-comets-by-tom-van-flandern/. When you get deep into it, you realize both that there is more than one way to skin the cat and how you skin the cat determines what you think the cat is. The skinning method can also hide things that the cat pertains to… I’m glad you’re so inspired!

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@kellyem33 Thank you, sir

  • @medicalmisinformation
    @medicalmisinformation 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you! The antonym for "inadvertent" is "advertent" not "vertent."

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      yeah, I wasn’t sure, and I was certain someone would correct me; I knew it was wrong, but I did it anyway to point out the idiocy of English. Thank you for the redirect!

  • @markhughes7927
    @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    25:37
    Q: does not Nominalism and its reduction become intensified in effect by Kantian epistemology interpreted as a dirigist confederation of innate concepts underived nor conditioned by real perception of the world in its variety/varieties? Kant being notable as the father of Hegelian and hence Marxian schools of dialectic. Perhaps Kant is a sport of Anselm and is ‘dead’ before he even begins?

  • @nachman5570
    @nachman5570 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    wow 😮

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I know, right?

  • @MarshOakDojoTimPruitt
    @MarshOakDojoTimPruitt 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    thanks

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You're welcome!

  • @dubbelkastrull
    @dubbelkastrull 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    3:20 bookmark

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks

  • @matthiasmuller7677
    @matthiasmuller7677 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I wish he would always talk about these things and not some weirdass BS.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I always wondered why the bible never mentions the pyramids… Babel is the closest they came…

  • @markhughes7927
    @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    1:24:47
    Rules Based International Order!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      No rules; just guidelines

  • @markhughes7927
    @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    46:09
    …that’s what it is - he [Augustine] is the first Progressive… (laughter!)…

    • @michaelking1091
      @michaelking1091 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The gaslighting is next level. I think all these occultists publishing their “secretes” over the past 150 years is for mass occult initiation

  • @kentvanschuyler9520
    @kentvanschuyler9520 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I forgive you for apologising to evil+++
    Christ est risen+++

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Can you provide more context to your comment?

  • @knswartz1
    @knswartz1 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Could it be worshipping the alien Elohim in a cargo cult/ Stockholm syndrome manner is bound to fail?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Whether it fails or not, the similarity with respect to Yahweh and the Mexican Demon, Yacotyl, should not to be overlooked.

  • @bologna470708
    @bologna470708 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    What does the West’s view of the trinity have to do with the understanding of predestination and foreknowledge. How does that differ from the Eastern Orthodox view? For John was the beloved disciple of Jesus and he was writing from a Jewish perspective and not as a Greek.
    For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1 John 5:7

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Read book three.

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      _Please forgive the length of this response as it's an incredibly complex topic, however, I will attempt to make it thorough along with follow-up links for further study._
      It all boils down to the West's uncritical and wholesale adoption of the Neoplatonic/Augustinian conception of Simplicity (i.e. non-compoundedness) DEFINITIONALLY applied to the Divine Essence, which is a tendancy strictly in accord with limited ancient Greek thought and not from obedient reception to revelation. In other words, everything predicated about "God" is ultimately a stand-in notional term for the same Divine "thing" .
      Tying it into your question, under this Augustinian scheme, which is the cribbed ontological schema of Plotinus, God's attribute of "foreknowledge" and God's attribute of "will" are the same (i.e. the Divine Essence), meaning that in God "to foreknow" is the same thing as "to will" leading to a kind of Divine Determinism and completely undermining the whole purpose of the spiritual life and theological epistemology in general. At the human level, this violates free will to self-actualize, to demonstrate what is to be human in your own way. It would be like a horrible parent sacrificing his child at the altar of his "family name" rather than letting his child become who he wishes to be.
      This idea is constantly in tension for those following purely in Augustine's footsteps like the Scholastics, however for the Fathers of the East, whose theology was canonically accepted by the whole Church for the first millennium, the idea of Divine Simplicity takes on a whole different conception that DOES allow for real distinctions in God without undermining His unity.
      This interview with Dr. David Bradshaw should help you better understand all this:
      th-cam.com/video/GFmZhr353xA/w-d-xo.html
      These 2 videos will help you better understand the difference between Orthodox and Western Triadologies:
      th-cam.com/video/meE1Ocwiv4A/w-d-xo.html
      th-cam.com/video/UEMh2UEwROU/w-d-xo.html
      Regarding the unity of God and its proper understanding and articulation, it is not to be had or conceived of in terms of intelligible exhaustive, and essentialist categories. Throughout Scripture, God reveals Himself directly via Personal encounters and freely proferred human reciprocal exchanges, i.e. Covenants, cosmic housekeeping via ordered Liturgical acts of worship, etc. This fundamental tendency is maintained in the East and constitutes THE starting point in their approach to God (what Dr. Farrell calls "ordo theologiae") for this unity. In other words, "Unity" is a communal category (or interplay) primarily from and ultimately towards the Person of God the Father BUT NOT synonymous with the Absolute Simplicity of the Divine Essence. To your point about Saint John, he was hitting at this in the prologue of his Gospel account and epistles. There are *3 Persons Who bear witness* . They ARE NOT 3 notionally (but not actually) distinct "cosmic processes" unfolding "themselves" (or itself) within the Creation, that we call "God" .
      This Divine Person of the Father, Who is called Father due to Him being the Uncaused Causer of the other Divine Persons, eternally gives of Himself to the Person of God the Son via unique-generation (only begotten-ness) and the Divine Person of the Holy Spirit via Spiration.
      The Divine Person of the Son, Who is called Son by His being Eternally Generated by the Father as well as the Logos of all Creation (Hypostatic Structure of Divine Thought). He "engineers" His Father's pure intentions into place within the framework of Creation as a way to glorify His Father and because His Father wishes to glorify His Son Whom He loves in return within a wholly distinct and new "context", the context of which is the Creation itself. This is where the Incarnation, Christology, and the Topological Metaphor come into play as this Creation we inhabit was not only created by the Person of the Logos but is also a "garment" worn by Him as Saint Maximos the Confessor says. All the archetypes, topological principles, exemplars, and ontological "seeds" inherent within this Creation in their entirety are the Son's handiwork made to glorify and reflect His Father as well as a "place" for Him to inhabit and extend His Father's Love. Simply put, the role that the Father plays within the Trinity, the Son plays within Creation. Regarding His relationship with the Holy Spirit, the Son is He in Whom the Holy Spirit eternally rests but does not also proceed from as the heretical Filioque doctrine insists. Divine Persons do not share Personal properties as this would undermine their distinctions. The Spirit is the one Who worked throughout the time in the Old Testament to prepare the Son's coming in the flesh and after the Son's death, burial, resurrection, and ascension to His Father, the Holy Spirit is the Person Who has been guiding the Son's Church into all truth before His return to the Earth.
      Video from Dr. Torstein Tollefsen outlining this Orthodox Christological Ontology:
      th-cam.com/video/pYxnJ5s8tjw/w-d-xo.html
      The Divine Person of the Holy Spirit, Who is called Spirit by His being the Personal Animating Principle in the Trinity, is the One Who sets the Father's intentions and the Son's creations into motion. His primary role is to facilitate love, wisdom, strength, and cohesive unity between the 2 other Divine Persons within the Trinity and all of us here on earth via the Church established by the Son.
      Video that summarizes this Trinitarian theology from a Romanian Orthodox Saint:
      th-cam.com/video/sBEEq9yxSGI/w-d-xo.html

    • @bologna470708
      @bologna470708 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@panokostouros7609 thank you so much for taking the time to go to such lengths to answer this question. I’m going to sit down and read this and follow up on the links. Thanks again I really appreciate it. Have a good day!

    • @panokostouros7609
      @panokostouros7609 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@bologna470708 Thank God. Please read "God, History and Dialectic" when you get the chance as well.

    • @bologna470708
      @bologna470708 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@panokostouros7609 will do!

  • @lazaruscomeforth7646
    @lazaruscomeforth7646 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Correlation is not causation.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No one ever claimed that; but contemporality is evidence that needs to be considered.

  • @mariakatariina8751
    @mariakatariina8751 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    1:08:16 Romans crucified Saint Peter upside down 😢

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I believe I heard it was upon his request

  • @Bruh-el9js
    @Bruh-el9js 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Compelling as his argument is, I don't think he made any attempt to refute the idea that theology should be philosophically reasonable.
    Let's suppose he's correct. What now? Is anyone willing to write a good critique of Platonism? If so, on what basis? Aristotle clearly failed. If we're to accept any value in philosophy, we have to go back to Plato; and in doing so we'll get back to this dialectic once again. Eastern Christianity hasn't faced this problem because they invented a new kind of difference in God (one that is, nonetheless, still dialectical, oppositional, negative & etc.) through the Essence-Energies distinction. The same "problem" is there, but Eastern Orthodoxy is too philosophically bankrupt to even be aware of all of this.
    In that distinction you get things like something that is God but had a beginning and is limited spatiotemporally. Wait a minute? We already have that in the person of Christ. But the person of Christ only has a beginning and is limited spatiotemporally insofar as his "part" that accepts these determinations is concerned. It only works because the human nature isn't God. Voilá; it makes sense. But the Orthodox, nonetheless, claim that the energies are God without refering to any hypostatic union. How is the problem solved in all of this? It isn't.
    As C.S. Lewis said:
    "The tradition of Jowett still dominated the study of ancient philosophy when I was reading Greats. One was brought up to believe that the real meaning of Plato had been misunderstood by Aristotle and wildly travestied by the neo-platonists, only to be recovered by the moderns. When recovered, it turned out (most fortunately) that Plato had really all along been an english hegelian, rather like T. H. Green. I have met it a third time in my own professional studies; every week a clever undergraduate, every quarter a dull american don, discovers for the first time what some Shakespearean play really meant."
    And, as if it rhymed, every 50 years we get a Spengler or a Marx, someone claiming that they have figured out the mysteries of history by suggesting yet another Gordian Knot.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Plato’s Quadrivium hints that his philosophy was not secular; i do not think we have enough of his thinking to say one way or another. I prefer Logos over logic.

    • @Bruh-el9js
      @Bruh-el9js 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 What's Plato's Quadrivium?

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Sorry, from Wikipedia.
      For most medieval scholars, who believed that God created the universe according to geometric and harmonic principles, science-particularly geometry and astronomy-was linked directly to the divine. To seek these principles, therefore, would be to seek God.[citation needed]
      The quadrivium, Latin for 'four ways',[3] and its use for the four subjects have been attributed to Boethius, who was apparently the first to use the term[4] when affirming that the height of philosophy can be attained only following "a sort of fourfold path" (quodam quasi quadruvio).[5]: 199  It was considered the foundation for the study of philosophy (sometimes called the "liberal art par excellence")[6] and theology. The quadrivium was the upper division of medieval educational provision in the liberal arts, which comprised arithmetic (number in the abstract), geometry (number in space), music (number in time), and astronomy (number in space and time).
      Educationally, the trivium and the quadrivium imparted to the student the seven essential thinking skills of classical antiquity.[7] Altogether the Seven Liberal Arts belonged to the so-called 'lower faculty' (of Arts), whereas Medicine, Jurisprudence (Law), and Theology were established in the three so-called 'higher' faculties.[8] It was therefore quite common in the middle ages for lecturers in the lower trivium and/or quadrivium faculty to be students themselves in one of the higher faculties. Philosophy was typically neither a subject nor a faculty in its own right, but was rather present implicitly as an 'auxiliary tool' within the discourses of the higher faculties, especially theology;[9] the separation of philosophy from theology and its elevation to an autonomous academic discipline were post-medieval developments.[10]
      There was a time when theology and philosophy were one overall subject. The quadrivium was the successor to the Trivium for higher studies, particularly theology, of which philosophy was but one mode of inquiry.

    • @Bruh-el9js
      @Bruh-el9js 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 Well, those are medieval readings of Plato, all already tainted by Aristotelianism. I'm referring to Platonism proper. There is one science that is philosophy, and its regime is the dialectic; you may know the Good (which is the essence of God) by transcending the more particular fields of knowledge (the ones that are the corpus of the Trivium and the Quadrivium). Aristotle completely perverted this idea, so anything that comes from him or after him shouldn't be taken seriously when talking about Platonism qua Platonism.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@Bruh-el9js I found it fairly obvious at this point to know that the tool of dialectic is the mechanism leading to nihilism and nominalism, reductio ad absurdum. This is the essential reason why philosophy can’t replace theology, and atheistic societies will fail when theological ones last for centuries and centuries. Not expecting you to understand what I’m telling you. For you philosophy is religion. To me that is equivalent to being lost. I am not a philosopher, but I did study philosophy of mind at Oxford. I found it fascinating and brilliant, But also tragically flawed. If you don’t know what I mean, then I encourage you to find out. It cannot be received by explanation, only by personal seeking and understanding.

  • @robholt54
    @robholt54 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    👍👍

  • @tonym6566
    @tonym6566 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Gnostic informant n lady Babylon channels both go into the original Greek version of the Bible for anyone interested in getting the translated version

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Lool at it, for sure, but understand gnosticism’s broad rejection in the Patristic period.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks

  • @erbalumkan369
    @erbalumkan369 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Content is great but the sound is terrible. It's like some ghost is whispering along with everything Dr. Farrell is saying.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Yes, it is. Its his old 1990’s analog phone

  • @James-ll3jb
    @James-ll3jb 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Luther didn't mistranslate a word. He ADDED a word😅

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The ref was to augustine! :)

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@willchristie2650 Exactly: "forensic justification"

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 He never said so. And Augustine never interpreted the passage in that strident a fkrensic manner.
      Stop lying, heretic!

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      it sadly is the case that The West inadvertently lost the architecture of divinity. The good news is that the correct form, and all its benefits, are waiting for the West to understand and absorb. You can’t logically call those who understand the original and correct form heretics, as in fact, most people in The West have absorbed an understanding that is an inadvertent heresy with all the downstream effects. I am honored to have you with us in that you have such strong faith. Welcome.

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 Interesting social psychology; bad soteriology. Luther is a heretic now as he was then.

  • @PeterShieldsukcatstripey
    @PeterShieldsukcatstripey 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Strewth one word

  • @damnmexican90
    @damnmexican90 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Can it be that the son and the father have a special privlraged relationship, while the spirit comes from the father?
    Im catholic, but im going yo take a orthodox talking point
    It seems the fililoque and the procession from the Father is BOTH AND , after the ascession.
    I do understand why the fililoque matters. And why this dialextical tension has caused significant problems for all of humanity.
    Also, the dialectic that plauges the west and the east seems to be Abraxis.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Abraxis, in what sense

    • @damnmexican90
      @damnmexican90 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @kellyem33 abraxis was a chief aeon deity worshiped by gnostic heretics during the early church.
      I would affirm that the principalities that Paul talked about are very real and manifest in very specific ways over time. The dialectical problem that your guest describes is that "of" abraxis. A type of Non-Being participation that manifests in humans, resulting in bad outcomes. Black and white thinking essentially. A very real mind virus.
      I hope that makes sense. I apologize if it doesn't.

  • @corticallarvae
    @corticallarvae 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Apophaticism

    • @markhughes7927
      @markhughes7927 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ..the eastern (gentle) way…?

  • @bealreadyhappy
    @bealreadyhappy 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Too much waffle

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No whip cream and strawberries either

  • @decodynamo
    @decodynamo 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Lots of traditions from Babylon contaminated weakened Christendom. Trinity, hellfire, immortal soul etc have no solid basis in scripture. Stunning to contemplate the ramifications of lies being at the foundation of how most folks view spiritual matters.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Good points! I think Christ himself referred to Father, Son, and Spirit, so there is the Trinity, sort of. A friend of mine once quipped that Jesus Christ was a follower, following His Father’s will. Certainly not a coequal branch of spiritual “government.”

    • @decodynamo
      @decodynamo 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kellyem33 Sure, the three exist. However, examining the original texts and the origin of the Trinity doctrine should easily disspel the idea of Christ being co-equal with the Eternal Father. It opens the gateway to idolatry, which millions are inadvertently committing. Satan is so sly, but a love of Truth helps to guide our way forward. Peace

    • @str8904
      @str8904 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The basis for the trinity are the texts themselves. It’s all over the Old & New Testament.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@str8904 that is quite apparent. I agree that Jesus Christ never equated himself with the father. A friend of mine once said of Christ Jesus: “He was the greatest follower in history, always doing his father’s will.

  • @StephanieSoressi
    @StephanieSoressi 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Farrell keeps sounding annoyed wit h the interviewer's questions. Not a good look; if he just wants to make speeches, let him make his own video. Appreciate the platform or be known as another narcissistic ingrate.

    • @Loenthall88
      @Loenthall88 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Interesting. I got no sense of that.

    • @kellyem33
      @kellyem33  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Stephanie, I appreciate your defense of me. More people need to rise in defense of others.
      That said, Joseph and I have been friends for 14 years, and my sense of it was that he knew of the importance of what he was conveying, and didn’t want to have his train of thought interrupted. And while true, sadly, your comment about narcissism in general, in this case I believe you can rest assured. Glad to have you here.

    • @vanessasmith6502
      @vanessasmith6502 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I think Dr. Farrell loves questions