Trinity Doctrine, Catholicism Vs Orthodoxy & Palamas on Essence - Energy - Jay Dyer (Half)
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 07. 2018
- #trinity #palamas #orthodox
Click Subscribe!
My Site: jaysanalysis.com
My Patreon: / jaydyer
My Book: jaysanalysis.com/shop/
My TV Show: www.gaia.com/series/hollywood...
Follow on Twitter: / jay_d007
Follow on Facebook: / jaysanalysis
Follow on Instagram: / jaysanalysis
A review of the debate with Dr. Feingold and a talk on the Triads of St. Gregory Palamas. The second half of the talk will be available for paid subscribers to JaysAnalysis at the PayPal links at JaysAnalysis.com for 4.95 a month or 60.00 a year. - Zábava
Something that Jay brought up in the debate has really stayed with me: God is not like any created thing. This seems obvious, and we often take it for granted, but it's quite a profound insight when you consciously meditate on it.
“Man’s problem is not that he lacks the facts.” That’s so significant, thank you
This is amazing. You have become my go to source on Orthodox theology. God keep you!
Try the Fathers. They are an excellent source
@@Thetruthisnoteasy It's funny, two years after writing that comment I know own a small library's worth of books written by the Fathers.
@@hyundisuper100 Time to own a big library of books written by the Fathers
Fr. Peter Chamberas's full translation has a ton of content important for Orthodox apologetics that I don't recall being in this Paulist Press abridged version. For those interested I would recommend buying a copy at new found publishing.
Glad to hear about the new translation in the works. The version pictured is what I own. I'll keep an eye out for the new translation. I'd love to see a side by side Greek/English version like St. Vlad's has done in the past with other texts in their "Popular Patristics" series.
This is very helpful. Thanks. I believe that Saint Gregory is inspired and correct.
Took me so long to get over my worshipping of the one. These videos make it much more easier for me to see the truth of The Trinity as three in one and the balance between the one and the many.
The second part of this talk is on Jay's site under a different name. In fact, on his site both talks are listed under another name: "The Essence-Energy Distinction Debate, St. Gregory Palamas & The Triads" in the Theology section. I noticed that the second talk had only 198 views (as opposed to 3,777 for the first), so I figured people might not be finding it under the different name. Jay, this is Una from The Society of Grandmothers Against Absolute Divine Simplicity.
@Einar Björkman Ireland, originally.
[CONTINUATION] the main point is, I'm still not a Christian Orthodox for some of the reasons I outlined, BUT also for a very fundamental fact. Namely, the fact while you focus your criticism on Roman Catholic theology and its relationship with Eastern theology, there are many issues of Roman Catholic theology that other complex metaphysical systems and "Traditions" in the East never fall into.
Now I'm not a perennialist, but I admit that my interest in Eastern religiosity had been awakened by a nihilistic youthful moment. I always felt my life empty of purpose, and it seems like the modern stuff and the modern cosmology never seem to answer these issues satisfactorily. So I became imbibed with a Platonist cosmology, and began to explore the exotic world of "eastern mysticism", from the most banal and simplistic falsifications to the deepest and most authentic things with a long history beyond them.
I can't really subscribe to a strict Christian view that sees all pagan doctrines as evil, or conflates all pagans into the same pot... Well, that's not really true insofar as we can tell. It's a simplifcation, and the Western Christians did it as much as the Eastern Christians.
But Augustine himself was deeply imbibed with a sort of Hermetic cosmology which later found its room in the Renaissance, and which basically postulated the existence of a sophia perennis - and this many centuries before the first perennialist authors. But down to the point: the main issue is that Roman theology has become what it is thanks to a misguided concoction of pagan notions and pagan philosophy, a problem which never appears with other religions in the East. So the problem and issue of Roman catholic divine simplicity, to make it simple and straightforward, is that it adopts a notion that would fit much better a Pagan monad that doesn't intervene in the Universe and has no personal qualities than the highly personal Christian God.
The truth is, the Roman Catholic notions of composition, divine simplicity and even its analogia entis make sense when we speak of a Pagan cosmology which segments the Cosmo s into this sort of impersonal harmony, which works all by itself without the need for a special providence, historical linearity, personhood or even the very notion of final causality, if we deliberately focus not just on Aristotle of course. There's little room for that God of prophecy, the God who came to Moses on the burning bush, in sum a God who's more than a distant impersonal divinely simple "essence" and has actually the attributes of a loving Father.
Now the main issue is, of course, how we should view it broadly? Greco-Roman philosophy developed the way it did because it was closely associated with pagan mystery religion at first. As such you can't really divorce Plato from Pythagoras, as I wrote in an article of mine, you can't really take away these guys from the pagan mysteries of their times. The thing is, as the pagans forgot their own Mysteries, this kind of pagan cosmology became more and more profane and secularized until it assumed the guise of a human science, but still its origins in Mysteriosophy and esotericism remain clear to the trained and well studied eye.
But pagan religion and Christian religion are not the same thing. And so the attempt which was done from the start in the West to synthesize the old Rome with Christian Rome by bringing in pagan philosophy and notions into Christian theology is what actually set in a schizophrenic synthesis which was doomed to fail on the grounds of its internal contradictions.
Now if we look further East, say if we look to other cosmologies, we can find some interesting takes. Now a friend of mine told me the Orthodox Christian notion is just very very similar to the Hindu (or Dharmic) notion of acynthia bheda abheda, down to the minor details. But the main thing is, many of the issues which you identify as logical and cosmological contradictions inside the framework of Roman Catholic Christianity do not arise in other religions: it's hard to find inside Hindu or Islamic cosmology a single instance of God's essence being confused with its own attributes predicated as an analogical substance, of God's essence being similar to Creatures, or its ineffability being violated by analogical and anthropomorphical categories arbitrarily inserted by purely deductive concoctions.
The role of philosophy is also very different in the East as it became in the West. The very first issue being the fact that it's hard to find instances in Islamic or Hindu theology where an Aristotle-like figure could rise to prominence. Aristotle and his disciple, like Ibn Rushd, were only really popular in the West with its excessive emphasis on a special sort of rationalist and essentialist dianoetic teaching. As such the dilemmas of a purely philosophical God - a dettached simple monad thinking itself - are as foreign to these Eastern religions, including Islam, as they are to Eastern Christianity itself.
The thing is, if you actually bother to read some of the perennialist authors, which you actually seemed to have done, and also some of these great authors from the more well cemented Eastern spirituality centres, you're well within grounds which would be hard for the Scholastic mentality of the West to grasp precisely because they don't rely on a closed system ontotheological framework as a basis for their whole understanding as the West wound up falling into, which was clearly an illusion and a trap from the start. In sum, the "Eastern" worldview seems to retain a sort of orthopraxis that was forgotten in the West since the days of Scholasticism and its disporportionate emphasis on mental word games above and beyond anything else. As such the West has surrendered not only to wordgames and mental puzzles to answer their most vital questions, but also to what could be easily termed as a human all too human way of conceiving things, including religion itself. To prove that last point, it's easy to grasp in Eastern Christianity a sort of conception and dimension which lends to it a genuinely "Mystical" and "Mysteriosophical" framework, as in other Eastern religions which retain this dimension, while Rome has reduced itself to a bunch of ultra-rationalistic and legalistic prescriptions all concoted in a dry and sterile rationalistic fashion. Or to be even more sutile, the idea of a nature divorced from "supernature", of a purely natural theology reliant on natural law, etc... all of these notions seem to be the byproduct of Western thought, and they emerge primarily there, alone, and are rarely found elsewhere until very recently.; the very word "META-physics" is a very badly concocted and recent term mostly used by the Western mind and developed by a disciple of Aristotle. It seems hard to apply this word, I mean this particular term, once we step out of this peculiar ground into Eastern Orthodoxy, let alone other religions in the East. You get what I mean. There's no Metaphysics in Eastern theology. Rather another term for this would be adequate, but it's still hard to conceive it so let's just call it "Orthopraxis", anyway.
Brilliant. God bless. Love this. Knowing about God DOES NOT mean you are close to Him.
Coming from a reformed background I am beginning to see and understand the orthodox position on the Trinity. How intriguing specially on the fact that Nicea seems to support the monarchy of the Father within the Trinity. Any books on this and the topic at hand? Thanks
You need to do a video on the full translation of the Triads. Fr. Peter Chamberas did the full translation and it is printed under newfoundpublishing. This paulist press version is 1/3 the size of Fr. Peter's full translation.
I have it now.
@@JayDyer Are you planning on doing an updated video with that text? I'm about 2/3 finished with Fr. Peter's translation and have taken quite a bit of notes to compare to the Paulist Press version. I'll probably do a second read and take even more notes.
Hey jay I have two questions I’m curious about how do you answer someone that brings up the existence before essence objection and the boot strapping objection to divine conceptualism
Theophanies as The Logos manifesting in time and space to the prophets and patriarchs connects poetically with the Transfiguration.
It is the apophatic basis of all true theology which the great Cappadocians
were defending in their controversy with Eunomius. The latter maintained the
possibility of expressing the divine essence in those innate concepts by which it
reveals itself to the reason. For St. Basil, not the divine essence alone but also
created essences could not be expressed in concepts. In contemplating any
object we analyse its properties: it is this which enables us to form concepts.
But this analysis can in no case exhaust the content of the object of perception.
There will always remain an ‘irrational residue’ which escapes analysis and
which cannot be expressed in concepts; it is the unknowable depth of things,
that which constitutes their true, indefinable essence. In regard to the names
which we apply to God, these reveal his energies which descend towards us yet
do not draw us closer to his essence, which is inaccessible.
For St. Gregory of
Nyssa every concept relative to God is a simulacrum, a false likeness, an idol.
The concepts which we form in accordance with the understanding and the
judgement which are natural to us, basing ourselves on an intelligible
representation, create idols of God instead of revealing to us God Himself.
There is only one name by which the divine nature can be expressed: the
wonder which seizes the soul when it thinks of God
From
The Mystical Theology of The Eastern Church
Vlad Lossky
Nate Armstrong yep!
This is just excellent Jay, including the second half. This is the heart of true Orthodox faith exposing the root problem of western Christendom, both RC and Protestant.
Orthodoxy does allow remarriage up to 3 times, but not a forth. Re-marriages are accompanied with a season of penitence. I am only a lay Christian and not an authority by any means. Priests may marry only once. Orthodoxy conforms to the teaching of Christ, the Apostles and the Spirit of pastoral grace in the face of human weakness.
Orthodoxy does not teach the immaculate conception of Mary. She was conceived by natural procreation.
Yes, sorry my mistake, though I have heard that discussed. No, thankfully Orthodoxy doesn't teach her freedom from original sin. St. Chrysostom in his 14th Homily on Matthew 12:46-49, says that when Mary tried to interrupt Jesus' whilst he was teaching she showed 'a superfluous vanity..and vainglory' out of which Christ delivered her. Though this is kept concealed by most exponents. The attempt to make her sinless makes me greatly uncomfortable. I am with St. Chrysostom (and St Basil the Great) in this regard. I am only in my third year as a convert to Orthodoxy and have much to learn.
I don't think that this is about 'rights' or 'justice' as such, but about the inevitability of human weakness, marital breakdown and the need for compassion and grace. The Church decided three times, not me; extending grace to 3 but 4 perhaps demonstrates a deeper ill?
Jay, I have a couple of words for you after watching this. First off, your videos are superb from an intelectual point of view. I mean, for one thing, you look like an intellectual clone of mine on 90% of your worldview. Seriously. I've never met a person with views so close to mine on morality, the decline of the West, politics, civilization, esoteric subjects, humanist learning and even theology. We must be drawing roughly from the same sources, but yeah you're also intelligent and patient enough to record these obscenely long videos where you expose your views. Others might not be so forthcoming.
The main point is: having been a close friend and confidante of many Orthodox people myself, I've gained a lot of insight particularly into the phenomenological nature and praxis of "Eastern" Christian spirituality, ergo Orthopraxis. I wasn't that deeply aware of the doctrinal brick and mortar outline which formed in the East, though, and your long posts and also lenghty discussions where you even quote Scripture to justify the essence energy distinction are simply brilliant - it's inconceivable, for a Westerner, to interpret John in a way which clearly signifies the distinction between God's acts and His own nature after sooo many centuries of being imbibed with Augustine. That's simply an impossibility: Protestantism is even the typical Roman Catholic heresy, in that the Protestants took many of Augustine's thesis to extreme conclusions. As such you're never gonna see Protestants emerging in the East, in the same way you're never gonna see Old Calendarists and the like emerging in the West. So these intellectual notions and interpretations which Tradition has built and transmitted are vital for our understanding of what legitimate Christian doctrine meant.
BUT still one issue remains, in that the Orthodox zeitgeist has become pretty much parochial and ethnonationalist, and doesn't seem to have the stomach, the vision or even the willigness to tackle a potential new wave of converts from different backgrounds.
As the child and grandchilds of proud slavs, I'm well aware that nationalism in the East developed close ties with the Church, whatnot with concepts like the Symphony of powers, Sobornost, Narod and the likes - all of which postulated not only a common folk identity for Eastern Slavs, but also tied it intimiately with the Church. YET, and there's big "?" in this, the Church today seems very reluctant to move beyond an immigrant ethnical basis if you're in the West, as we're now. They're stuck with being their own little immigrant ghettoes, if you know what I mean, especially when they are in places like Michigan or South America. I've seen cases of people - colleagues of mine - who have gone so far as being ordained Deacons leaving the Church due to the issue of bringing and fitting new converts into the old immigrant-centred mould, and others who also left for a variety of issues with the Church hierarchy.
I'm from Larin America, Jay. The Catholic Church is dying ------ffaast------ in here, being replaced with thousands of different evangelical denominations. In fact the Latin Church seems pretty much to be on its way to becoming a corpse, after so many years.
Can you do a live Q&A?
There appears to be another translation titled Holy Hesychia: The Stillness That Knows God, have you heard of it?
Jay, I really appreciate your content, and would say you have me leaning toward converting to Orthodoxy from Catholicism. I would appreciate as much debate as possible with as high-quality Catholic apologists you can find, since this a gravely important matter.
I want to ask you about reconciling the apparent incoherence of being a Westerner with being Orthodox. How do you personally "fit" being someone with an ethnic and cultural context that is deeply different than that of your faith? I ask this with the understanding that the truth is more important than any tribalism.
I jus did a debate with a PhD Thomist. I have tried many, many times to find a RC apologist to debate and they always decline.
Jay Dyer I listened to it last week. I found you more convincing. What really raises red flags in my mind is when you are raising key points about the other side's doctrine that he is unaware of.
He offered to follow-up, and I think that would be great for all.
czcams.com/video/tKf8Af-QN8Q/video.html
Jay, are you aware of the youtube channel called Jay Myers Documentaries? The content seems suspiciously similar to your Hollywood topics although most likely full of disinfo. I'm wondering if it is genuine or if there's another motive going on.
joe joe wow I just checked it out you’re right. Very strange
Jay, do you by any chance have a list of the proven forgeries (letters/"church fathers") of the Latin Church that attempted to make the Bishop of Rome the Universal Bishop? Asking because I see Catholics posting a lot of contradictory quotes among Church fathers regarding that matter. Many even use Maximus the Confessors words as proof of Rome keeping the faith.
I see many of these quotes on Catholic answers, funny because I dont think anyone of those forums would discuss/debate with you.
50:00 saint Benedict
Please read to the end, i think this comment will be helpful to anyone familiar with this video's topic.
To the video's creator - thank you for an illuminating content. Now, as an oriental orthodox christian, I like Thomas Aquinas's work here. I think thomism along with good trinitarian theology can solve some of our difficulties.
First, God is a mystery to creation (as Niagra Falls is unknowable to a mosquito). How a transcendent God creates and interacts with created beings is also a mystery.
But Palamas's concern with a silent God that doesn't have "energies" can be solved by the Word of God i.e. God speaks and has the eternal Word. But "divine energy" lumps the power of God with the works of God and calls both uncreated. But the works of God are creations i.e. created, while the power/word by which God created his works is the uncreated Word of God.
The Word also fulfills thomism's divine simplicity criteria because the Word is of the same essence as God i.e. is truly God.
I'm just a regular christian so this analysis could be wrong, but I hope it helps.
THE LOOOOGOOOOOOS! LOOOOOOGOOOOOS! LOOOOOOGOI! LOOOOOOOOOOOGEEEEEEEEEEE!