Yea when I was involved in the Messianic movement I heard that before and also later from Catholics. I had a mutual feeling about it as well then but the refresher is nice as well.
Hi Sam I just thought of a reason why I love your trio with Beau and Isaiah. I once heard that there is a certain way Hebrews wrote things down. I tried to track it down and I failed to do so. It's along the line of: There are two things witnessing for it and a third thing (from a different category) is also witness. What I found in the Bible is from Proverbs 30,15 onwards, but with the numbers 3 and 4 instead of 2 and 3. I also thought the preacher saying this connected to the passage in John 8.16. But there Jesus only said Jesus and the Father is witness, but didn't apply to the miracles or the scripture as a third witness. So either the preacher was wrong or I have a bad memory. But what I wanted to say is that there is a Christian who is the bible guy (Isaiah) and another who is the early church guy (Beau) which both fall under the category of "orthodox" Christianity and a third one outside of the "orthodox" Christianity camp (you) who talk about Christianity. And besides that you all come from very different angles and ask questions which I would never have thought of. Please do something more regular. I love your dynamic.
Hi Sam, when you were talking about the old test. sacrifices, had you realised that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin, as I thought you seemed to think it could, thanks
It seems to me soteriology and Trinity are different issues. People think that you have to have a whole new explanation for soteriology if you’re not a trinitarian, because they’ve found away to weave the Trinity into every bit of their theology, until they feel like *it’s* the thing that explains it all. But it’s not. Being a Unitarian doesn’t affect Romans 3, or Romans 10 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.” “because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”
2:09:00 “did God just roll the dice on _____?!” In regard to Open Theism & possibility, this doesn’t represent open Theism correctly. Because on that view, as I’ve heard Boyd say, just because the future is “open” and indeterminate, that *doesn’t* mean that God is not omniscient to respond to all “free” choices equally. In their view, he’s equally sovereign. Just in a different way.
1:12:55 “God’s individual essence and type essence are the same.” This is important and gets into equality of “sameness” and equality of “oneness”/essence. The “is” of identity and the “is” of essence/spirit perhaps. Which ALL ties into the Modern problem of biological sex & gender identity. What’s primary/per accidens causal? Masculinity/femininity or biological sex? Can they be divorced? Why or why not?
Thanks for listening. Dr. Branson would likely say that Christ can be called "our God" but it's a slightly different meaning of the word "God" than when we say "God" is "God the Father."
"Our God" in that the divine nature and energies are being predicated of Christ, principally the energies. God is the Father by identity, but Jesus is God by nature and energy. Even as the perfect Image of God the Father, certain phrases such as "the one God" and "the God of...," which would refer principally to the Father, can be also predicated of the Son. It just depends on how and in what context you use the word, "God." This kind of thinking derives from passages such as 2 Corinthians 4:4-6. Hebrews 1:3, and other like passages, which Dr. Beau has gotten into in some of his other talks.
@@transfigured3673 Btw Sam, thanks for being a great host and one of the few non-Trinitarians who I've seen represent the Orthodoxy view of the Trinity charitably!
1:58:40 Yes, it does. What are you taking about, Dr. Branson? Deuteronomy 18:10, Leviticus 18:21, multiple times in 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, and in numerous prophets such as Ezekiel and Jeremiah. It's often listed as a major reason why a person is being condemned.
Yes, if they *literally* sacrificed their child. What I meant was that the *principle* isn’t just eliminated. Rather, what God says is that there is a way to “buy back” that first-born child. And furthermore, one is *obligated* to buy him back. But the principle that the first-born’s life is owed to God is never simply done away with by fiat.
@@beaubranson2515 You're right, forgive me. They say theology without prayer is the theology of demons, and, when I made this comment, I was perhaps engaging in that. I've become quite fond of your work since making this comment. I would say it is, actually, almost *essential* material to return to if we're going to Orthodoxy in the fullest sense and prove her merits against unitarianism and Islam. God bless.
@@beaubranson2515 Hey, Doc, you went through the trouble of getting a Ph.D., which, in most fields these days, no longer guarantees a stable, let alone a tenured job, so prefacing your name with "Dr." is the least that can be done, haha. Thanks for the response. Looking forward to more theology from you. God bless.
Yikes. Just stumbled on this comment of mine again. I'm cringing, haha. Sorry once again, Dr. Branson. I still find the "Dr. Breau" gag very funny, though, lol.
@@zurich5607 Bingo! John 1:1 is plain, as is Irenaeus’ Proof of Apostolic Preaching, pt 47 (uses same “ton theon” and “theos” distinction). Origen’s Commentary on John 1:1.
THE PRIMACY OF PETER & INFALLIBILITY Applies to St Peter himself (reveals St Malachys prophecy of "Peter the Roman) the first come as the last, leading the Church in the spirit,,The Faithful Church (off whom I be a witness, Thank God) revealing Joels Prophecy to the Army of God in the latter rain of the Spirit, the first fruits of the Lamb, who tend to the flock during the tribulations come from within forced from without, them behind administering the Blessed Scraments of the Alter against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, as stated by Our Blessed Lord, where there is no Catholic or Orthodox but "Christian & Apostolic" For the followers of Christ were first called as Christians in Antioch,
@approvedofGod Genuine question: I find Beau's arguments on the whole pretty convincing, so where else should I go to get the history? What are the best books for this topic in your opinion?
@@joshuadonahue5871 The ten volume set of the Ante-Nicene Fathers is probably the best to learn what the second century fathers taught. Their letters reveal the opposing parties of their time. That can be quite revealing! That is why I wrote the comment. Dr. Beau's title of "Monarchical Trinitarianism" is false. The majority of believers back then were Monarchical but they opposed the Trinity. See for example, "Tertullian's letter to Praxeas." My channel has much comments on the Ante-Nicene Fathers. I also wrote the book "Philo's Trinity." My video's reveal much on all these subjects.
What a great conversation. I learned so much from both of you!
For Orthodox, the “best” explication of Jesus’ relation to “the God and Father” is in the anaphora of the Liturgy of St. Basil.
Very excellent conversation. Really fun origin story and compelling philosophy discussion.
Interesting about binding and loosing! Have always wondered about that verse.
Religion is Latin for "to bind/loosen"
Yea when I was involved in the Messianic movement I heard that before and also later from Catholics. I had a mutual feeling about it as well then but the refresher is nice as well.
So interesting to learn this guys perspective
Thank you both for a civil - even friendly! - discussion. I found it informative and refreshing.
Awesome! Thanks for commenting. More where that came from
Great interview and good stuff!
Thanks for listening
1:03:30 “the uncashed “causeness” of the Father is unique.
Enter Filioque.
Hi Sam
I just thought of a reason why I love your trio with Beau and Isaiah.
I once heard that there is a certain way Hebrews wrote things down. I tried to track it down and I failed to do so. It's along the line of:
There are two things witnessing for it and a third thing (from a different category) is also witness. What I found in the Bible is from Proverbs 30,15 onwards, but with the numbers 3 and 4 instead of 2 and 3. I also thought the preacher saying this connected to the passage in John 8.16. But there Jesus only said Jesus and the Father is witness, but didn't apply to the miracles or the scripture as a third witness. So either the preacher was wrong or I have a bad memory.
But what I wanted to say is that there is a Christian who is the bible guy (Isaiah) and another who is the early church guy (Beau) which both fall under the category of "orthodox" Christianity and a third one outside of the "orthodox" Christianity camp (you) who talk about Christianity.
And besides that you all come from very different angles and ask questions which I would never have thought of. Please do something more regular. I love your dynamic.
I hope the three of us do get to talk more
I have also heard this witnesses in which the third are the angels
Hi Sam, when you were talking about the old test. sacrifices, had you realised that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin, as I thought you seemed to think it could, thanks
It seems to me soteriology and Trinity are different issues. People think that you have to have a whole new explanation for soteriology if you’re not a trinitarian, because they’ve found away to weave the Trinity into every bit of their theology, until they feel like *it’s* the thing that explains it all. But it’s not.
Being a Unitarian doesn’t affect Romans 3, or Romans 10
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.”
“because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”
They Trinity IS in everything.
It’s true that our confession of Romans 10:9 does not include a lesson in Christology.
2:09:00 “did God just roll the dice on _____?!” In regard to Open Theism & possibility, this doesn’t represent open Theism correctly.
Because on that view, as I’ve heard Boyd say, just because the future is “open” and indeterminate, that *doesn’t* mean that God is not omniscient to respond to all “free” choices equally.
In their view, he’s equally sovereign. Just in a different way.
1:12:55 “God’s individual essence and type essence are the same.”
This is important and gets into equality of “sameness” and equality of “oneness”/essence.
The “is” of identity and the “is” of essence/spirit perhaps.
Which ALL ties into the Modern problem of biological sex & gender identity.
What’s primary/per accidens causal? Masculinity/femininity or biological sex? Can they be divorced? Why or why not?
Where can I find the book mentioned in 18:00? How is it properly spelled??
The Philokalia
@@ST-fb1pi Thank you! 🙏🏾
Not to nit pick, but I'm pretty sure the OT does explicitly forbid child sacrifice as an "abomination to the LORD"..?
Sorry I comment on old vids. But what does Dr Branson do with all the “Christ our God” language in the liturgy? 🤔
Thanks for listening. Dr. Branson would likely say that Christ can be called "our God" but it's a slightly different meaning of the word "God" than when we say "God" is "God the Father."
Kinda like “guru” maybe? In a way... ? Is that why early writings always say “through our Lord Jesus Christ” while addressing the Father?
"Our God" in that the divine nature and energies are being predicated of Christ, principally the energies. God is the Father by identity, but Jesus is God by nature and energy. Even as the perfect Image of God the Father, certain phrases such as "the one God" and "the God of...," which would refer principally to the Father, can be also predicated of the Son. It just depends on how and in what context you use the word, "God." This kind of thinking derives from passages such as 2 Corinthians 4:4-6. Hebrews 1:3, and other like passages, which Dr. Beau has gotten into in some of his other talks.
@@transfigured3673 Btw Sam, thanks for being a great host and one of the few non-Trinitarians who I've seen represent the Orthodoxy view of the Trinity charitably!
1:58:40 Yes, it does. What are you taking about, Dr. Branson? Deuteronomy 18:10, Leviticus 18:21, multiple times in 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, and in numerous prophets such as Ezekiel and Jeremiah. It's often listed as a major reason why a person is being condemned.
Yes, if they *literally* sacrificed their child. What I meant was that the *principle* isn’t just eliminated. Rather, what God says is that there is a way to “buy back” that first-born child. And furthermore, one is *obligated* to buy him back. But the principle that the first-born’s life is owed to God is never simply done away with by fiat.
@@beaubranson2515 You're right, forgive me. They say theology without prayer is the theology of demons, and, when I made this comment, I was perhaps engaging in that. I've become quite fond of your work since making this comment. I would say it is, actually, almost *essential* material to return to if we're going to Orthodoxy in the fullest sense and prove her merits against unitarianism and Islam. God bless.
Yes, I always see the “Dr. Breau” comments, lol. Which is why I wanted to clarify. God bless you.
@@beaubranson2515 Hey, Doc, you went through the trouble of getting a Ph.D., which, in most fields these days, no longer guarantees a stable, let alone a tenured job, so prefacing your name with "Dr." is the least that can be done, haha. Thanks for the response. Looking forward to more theology from you. God bless.
Yikes. Just stumbled on this comment of mine again. I'm cringing, haha. Sorry once again, Dr. Branson. I still find the "Dr. Breau" gag very funny, though, lol.
1:23:00 key area
1:21:13 Jesus is not “the God”
1:17:43 the Theos/O Theos distinction
@@zurich5607
Bingo! John 1:1 is plain, as is Irenaeus’ Proof of Apostolic Preaching, pt 47 (uses same “ton theon” and “theos” distinction). Origen’s Commentary on John 1:1.
Yo thats my uncle
Your uncle is Dr. Beau Branson?
you should talk to sam shamoun
he isn't specialized on this topic
Protestant & their PHd rheotics,
Beau Branson is eastern orthodox for the record
THE PRIMACY OF PETER & INFALLIBILITY
Applies to St Peter himself (reveals St Malachys prophecy of "Peter the Roman) the first come as the last, leading the Church in the spirit,,The Faithful Church (off whom I be a witness, Thank God) revealing Joels Prophecy to the Army of God in the latter rain of the Spirit, the first fruits of the Lamb, who tend to the flock during the tribulations come from within forced from without, them behind administering the Blessed Scraments of the Alter against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, as stated by Our Blessed Lord, where there is no Catholic or Orthodox but "Christian & Apostolic" For the followers of Christ were first called as Christians in Antioch,
There is no such thing as "Monarchical Trinitarianism!"
better tell Beau Branson that
@@transfigured3673
I would love to! History is not on his side.
@approvedofGod Genuine question: I find Beau's arguments on the whole pretty convincing, so where else should I go to get the history? What are the best books for this topic in your opinion?
@@joshuadonahue5871
The ten volume set of the Ante-Nicene Fathers is probably the best to learn what the second century fathers taught.
Their letters reveal the opposing parties of their time. That can be quite revealing!
That is why I wrote the comment. Dr. Beau's title of "Monarchical Trinitarianism" is false. The majority of believers back then were Monarchical but they opposed the Trinity.
See for example, "Tertullian's letter to Praxeas."
My channel has much comments on the Ante-Nicene Fathers. I also wrote the book "Philo's Trinity." My video's reveal much on all these subjects.