@Johnny BeeHam Wow! The Catholic Church is according to you one Roman Prince who stands before God in Pride and Arrogance! Lording it over the Church the Personal Play thing or Whore of the Pope of Rome. What a Blasphemous vision of the Church of the Living God! "You know that the Rulers of the Gentiles Lord it over then, and their great men exercise Authority over them. It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave; even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and give His Life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:25-28).
Excellent refutation. The Dimond Brothers have a long history of attacking Orthodoxy, but fail when the sword is aimed at their own discourse and doctrines.
@@SAHOVNICUHow can the Cappadocian Fathers be heretics when they are ranked among the Church Fathers? Palamism isn't a heresy. Exhibit A, many Eastern Catholics do believe in Palamism today. In fact many Catholics, both Eastern and Western/Latin Catholics venerate St. Gregory Palamas as a Saint. Him and the other two pillars of Orthodoxy. Eastern/Byzantine Catholic Churches even celebrate the Sunday of Orthodoxy as Orthodox Christians do. So much for Catholic "unity".
@@siervodedios5952 The Cappadocian Fathers never taught the Essence/Energy distinction heresy. Eastern Orthodox heretical apologists twist the words of the Cappadocian fathers. The council of Constantinople III clearly teaches that God's Essence or Nature and his operations are not distinct but the same, hence divinesimplicity. The heretical teachings of Palamas was condemned by the Catholic Church at the council of Zamosc. It is the Vatican II sect that has revived the heretical teachings of Palamas.
This video reuted nothing. You are just too ignorant on what the early Church taught. The early church never taught this Polytheistic heresy of Palamas, creating a real distinction between the unknowable Super Essence and knowable uncreated energies of God. The Early church has always taught the Absolute divine simplistic nature of God. You clearly have never read the documents of the 6th Ecumenical council and it shows
Any Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America. That is if you’re in the States. I attend one in the Midwest that is Russian Orthodox, however, it’s in English since most attendees/ members of the Church speak English. Hope this helps, God bless.
Don't know if you've read much of the Latin Fathers, but you will find the Substance/Operation distinction (Operation can loosely be defined as a movement of a Substance) and Divine [Uncreated] Grace; St. Ambrose explictly calls the Light on Mt Tabor "the Glory of God' and no less St. Augustine hints that the Star of Bethlehem is the Divine Glory Also worth noting that denying the Divine Operation technically makes one a monothelite since that would mean to confess Christ possessed only human operation
Pope St. Leo the Great, highly venerated by both Catholics and Orthodox because of Chalcedon, explicitly stated that the light of Tabor was the glory of Christ’s glorified humanity. I doubt that makes him a monothelite especially since St. Leo was the least monothelite person on the planet. It was Chalcedon that condemned Monophysitism.
What are you talking about? All of the Fathers - both east and west - believed that God is absolutely simple. Your so called "proofs" to the contrary prove nothing.
@@bman5257True, but he is alone on that. The Fathers doverge sometimes, just like the theophanies on the OT had many interpretations from the fathers, but there was a consensus.
@@the4gospelscommentary Yes he is absolutely simple, the energy is indivisible from the essence. Thats why the e/e distinction is only "conceptual/in the mind" (kat'epinoian) as the Tomus of 1351 taught.
Lol, I was kinda worried about this being a critique to actual Roman Catholic doctrine (I mean worried about you caring about critizising Rome), but turned out it's this sedevacantist channel. I'm gonna love the ride. Btw, Christ is risen! Christos anesti!!
How about they answer the outstanding debate challenges by dyer, Ubi, etc first? Also you realize you’re less than one percent of the one percent of all “Catholics” right? You’re not Catholic, you’re not Orthodox, you’re of no apostolic origin. You’re a cult who the fathers reject and anathematized time and time again
LoL. The guys from NFTU even phone called the so called "monastery" and they refused and they run every proposal of debate, wheter on the Filioque, Florence, E/E Distinction.
Palamas taught that 'energies' of God are also God, that those divine 'energies' are many, and that the 'energies' (which again, to Palamas are also God) can have a beginning: that is to teach that God is many and not entirely from eternity, as if parts of God are created. That's obviously blasphemy and heresy. It denies divine revelation on God's oneness & his eternity. Also, God doesn't have parts, and nothing in God derives from something different than Himself, so the blasphemies in Palamism just increase as one tries to honestly explain it. Of course, no early church father believed in Palamas' ideas, which are profoundly blasphemous & obviously contradictory - ideas which Palamas "developed", as both of the deceitful "Orthodox" adherents admit in the video. To teach that divine doctrine develops after the death of the last Apostle is to teach a false Gospel according to holy scripture (2 John 1:10). Palamism also teaches that the 'energies' (which Palamas purported to be God) can change, which contradicts holy scripture (Malachi 3:6, Hebrews 13:8 & James 1:17) regarding God's immutability. It was shockingly evil and very revealing when the one Eastern "Orthodox" heretic in the video said at 1:24:45-1:24:52 "We can truly become God, by grace." Of course, the early church fathers never taught such a demonically selfish view of Christianity. Rather, they taught to be united with God - the fathers never taught that one should seek to become God, as the astoundingly blasphemous heretic in the video poisonously and foolishly teaches. It's just another example of how similar Eastern "Orthodoxy's" false hesychasm is to the practices of Eastern false religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. It should be obvious to someone of good will after viewing MHFM's material refuting Eastern "Orthodoxy" that it is a false religion that is incompatible with Christianity. The "Orthodox" have no explanation for their own councils (e.g., Nicaea II) approving papal supremacy, the Filioque and the Catholic view on the divine essence, among many other things that can be mentioned. They also allow divorce and remarriage, which goes directly against the words of Jesus Christ (Luke 16:18). To be truly Christian and saved, one must be a traditional Catholic, as shown in MHFM's material. czcams.com/play/PLGVSKByrYzss4weDvPDa-2SANNmPrxaqD.html
The Catholic Church is comprising of Eastern traditions and Latin tradition..... I hope u know that in the Catholic Church there are eastern churches also.... U should ask them why they are there... And the play of words that you are doing.... In the councils... Greek and Latin was used
The Latin Church woth the use of money and extorsion bring some greek churches under its communion, they were not always under the papacy. In the councils no latin was used. When some legate used latin and know nothing of greek, the imperial staff had to translate to the other 99% of greek bishops. The language of the church was always greek.
@telosbound Still sounds incoherent because you are implying that God has a whatness while in the same breath trying to say that no words are applicable to it (including "whatness").
@@tomtemple69 This has nothing to do with whether the position at hand is true or false though, just because someone thinks they are correct doesn't mean they are or aren't. That's why we can utilize basic logic and reason to argue why a system is false and contradictory
I'm Catholic and believe in the Essence Energy distinction. It's not "Eastern Orthodox" Theology. It's just not Thomism. You don't have to be a Thomist and be Catholic
You can’t believe in a real distinction, since the Council of Florence defined, that everything in God is one where no opposition of relation prevents this. Since there is no opposition of relation between the essence and energies, they are one and there is no real distinction.
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f I don’t know what you’re talking about, but I was just making the point that you cannot believe in the essence/energies distinction and be a Catholic.
@@danieldeiturbide9001 well if that is the case how you as catholics participate in the byzantine catholic eucharist see it as the one true eucharist of your church but in it is Gregory palamas as a saint .explain yourself
The Church has never taught this Palamite heresy. The Cappadocia n fathers were not Palamite heretics, they use operation or energy in the singular, and not the plural. It is the unity of divine energy that proves the unity of the divine essence/nature (ousia). The Palamite heresy teaches a plurality of energies. Why were there 2 councils to define the natures and wills of Christ? 😂 Because Monophysitism asserts that Christ is solely divine, if Christ has 2 natures then dyothelitism correlates the distinctiveness of two wills with the existence of two specific natures. God's attributes (will) are equal to His Essence. 2 councils were needed to further clarify the humanity and divinity in one Person of Christ.
@@SAHOVNICUThe Most Holy Theotokos always apoears in Holy Orthodoxy. Since 2000 years. These apparitions are the same since 2.000 years. Not like catholic "visions" - they are often deceptions. Hysteric, blood flowing, stigmata, ....crying, weeping...lik Medjugorje or Akita, this is all nonsense
@@alexpanagiotis4706 The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima was witnessed by 70,000 people. Your bogus Theotokos conceived in Ancestral sin that appears to you heretics is satan himself. Your apparitions are always private which cannot be verified whereas Fatima was made public
Augustine says that when Christ says “the Father is greater than I” he means to say that in the person of a servant in which he condescends to, as Paul says “He being in the form of God emptied Himself and saw equality with God something not to be grasped”. How can we square this with essence and energies distinction? Sorry I’m just trying to learn. It seams Augustine makes a distinction between God the Son and His divinity and His Incarnation as a servant.
It's hilarious watching people argue about which variation of a complete fairytale has slightly better excuses within the group, but is still nonsense! Lol!!!!!
Yet you believe that giant lizards and giant bugs once roamed earth, and that we are apes. somehow the mere idea of a God makes you go batshit crazy. you have no idea what ur on about, nor any idea about the schism or Christological knowledge, Autismo.
>VaticanCatholic
>not based in the Vatican
>not Catholic
I agree that Vatican Catholic is not Catholic, but what does being based in the Vatican have to do with being or not being Catholic?
@@adolphCat It doesn't necessarily. I've just always found their name doubly ironic.
@Johnny BeeHam Wow! The Catholic Church is according to you one Roman Prince who stands before God in Pride and Arrogance! Lording it over the Church the Personal Play thing or Whore of the Pope of Rome. What a Blasphemous vision of the Church of the Living God!
"You know that the Rulers of the Gentiles Lord it over then, and their great men exercise Authority over them. It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave; even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and give His Life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:25-28).
czcams.com/video/vusOrVbFQnk/video.html
I always wondered why they called themselves “vaticancatholic” 😅
Thanks for the shout out. Welcome to the front lines.
Excellent refutation. The Dimond Brothers have a long history of attacking Orthodoxy, but fail when the sword is aimed at their own discourse and doctrines.
This video refuted nothing. This video asserts that the Cappadocian Fathers were Palamite heretics. 😂😂😂
@@SAHOVNICUThe Catholic Church destroyed herself. It became a liberal sect
@@SAHOVNICUHow can the Cappadocian Fathers be heretics when they are ranked among the Church Fathers? Palamism isn't a heresy. Exhibit A, many Eastern Catholics do believe in Palamism today. In fact many Catholics, both Eastern and Western/Latin Catholics venerate St. Gregory Palamas as a Saint. Him and the other two pillars of Orthodoxy. Eastern/Byzantine Catholic Churches even celebrate the Sunday of Orthodoxy as Orthodox Christians do. So much for Catholic "unity".
@@siervodedios5952
The Cappadocian Fathers never taught the Essence/Energy distinction heresy. Eastern Orthodox heretical apologists twist the words of the Cappadocian fathers. The council of Constantinople III clearly teaches that God's Essence or Nature and his operations are not distinct but the same, hence divinesimplicity. The heretical teachings of Palamas was condemned by the Catholic Church at the council of Zamosc.
It is the Vatican II sect that has revived the heretical teachings of Palamas.
This video reuted nothing. You are just too ignorant on what the early Church taught. The early church never taught this Polytheistic heresy of Palamas, creating a real distinction between the unknowable Super Essence and knowable uncreated energies of God. The Early church has always taught the Absolute divine simplistic nature of God. You clearly have never read the documents of the 6th Ecumenical council and it shows
Great talk so far, also Pano is a great dude. He was at Montanica 1 and was incredibly enjoyable to be around. God bless and happy palm Sunday Bros ☦️
Thanks for the quotations on the Catholic. I've been telling them for years to quit using our words.
Catholic word belongs to the Catholic Church. Orthodoxy loves to claim what’s not theirs for some reason
May I know which Orthodox Church should I attend since I do not speak any of the languages ?
Any Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America. That is if you’re in the States. I attend one in the Midwest that is Russian Orthodox, however, it’s in English since most attendees/ members of the Church speak English. Hope this helps, God bless.
This is incredible ❤ you love to see it haha
Don't know if you've read much of the Latin Fathers, but you will find the Substance/Operation distinction (Operation can loosely be defined as a movement of a Substance) and Divine [Uncreated] Grace; St. Ambrose explictly calls the Light on Mt Tabor "the Glory of God' and no less St. Augustine hints that the Star of Bethlehem is the Divine Glory
Also worth noting that denying the Divine Operation technically makes one a monothelite since that would mean to confess Christ possessed only human operation
Pope St. Leo the Great, highly venerated by both Catholics and Orthodox because of Chalcedon, explicitly stated that the light of Tabor was the glory of Christ’s glorified humanity. I doubt that makes him a monothelite especially since St. Leo was the least monothelite person on the planet. It was Chalcedon that condemned Monophysitism.
What are you talking about? All of the Fathers - both east and west - believed that God is absolutely simple. Your so called "proofs" to the contrary prove nothing.
@@the4gospelscommentary no one is denying that, you are strawmanning
@@bman5257True, but he is alone on that. The Fathers doverge sometimes, just like the theophanies on the OT had many interpretations from the fathers, but there was a consensus.
@@the4gospelscommentary Yes he is absolutely simple, the energy is indivisible from the essence. Thats why the e/e distinction is only "conceptual/in the mind" (kat'epinoian) as the Tomus of 1351 taught.
Excellent! Y’all should refute their video on the history of Orthodoxy and their quote mining stuff
@@telosbound thanks!
Lol, I was kinda worried about this being a critique to actual Roman Catholic doctrine (I mean worried about you caring about critizising Rome), but turned out it's this sedevacantist channel. I'm gonna love the ride.
Btw, Christ is risen! Christos anesti!!
Great video. Can you refute his other video on the true history of orthodoxy
That would be interesting.
Ubi Petrus had did ig.
Excellent work. Gratitude. Dimond does not know what he’s talking about.
God bless you brothers! it pains me to see the comment sections of their videos
I like the way you say Catholic in air quotes since he’s a sede
Based
The EE is a profound theological doctrine
Dropping bombs!!!!
What books should I read on this topic ?
@@telosbound Thanks. Also, when will you interview dr. Sorem ?
The Triads are good to read
How about you debate them? I'm sure MHFM would be willing to tear you to shreads.
They wouldn’t dare lmao, they just like getting circlejerked by their fellow heretic non Christian schismatics
How about they answer the outstanding debate challenges by dyer, Ubi, etc first? Also you realize you’re less than one percent of the one percent of all “Catholics” right? You’re not Catholic, you’re not Orthodox, you’re of no apostolic origin. You’re a cult who the fathers reject and anathematized time and time again
Huge facts.
LoL. The guys from NFTU even phone called the so called "monastery" and they refused and they run every proposal of debate, wheter on the Filioque, Florence, E/E Distinction.
Palamas taught that 'energies' of God are also God, that those divine 'energies' are many, and that the 'energies' (which again, to Palamas are also God) can have a beginning: that is to teach that God is many and not entirely from eternity, as if parts of God are created. That's obviously blasphemy and heresy. It denies divine revelation on God's oneness & his eternity. Also, God doesn't have parts, and nothing in God derives from something different than Himself, so the blasphemies in Palamism just increase as one tries to honestly explain it. Of course, no early church father believed in Palamas' ideas, which are profoundly blasphemous & obviously contradictory - ideas which Palamas "developed", as both of the deceitful "Orthodox" adherents admit in the video. To teach that divine doctrine develops after the death of the last Apostle is to teach a false Gospel according to holy scripture (2 John 1:10). Palamism also teaches that the 'energies' (which Palamas purported to be God) can change, which contradicts holy scripture (Malachi 3:6, Hebrews 13:8 & James 1:17) regarding God's immutability. It was shockingly evil and very revealing when the one Eastern "Orthodox" heretic in the video said at 1:24:45-1:24:52 "We can truly become God, by grace." Of course, the early church fathers never taught such a demonically selfish view of Christianity. Rather, they taught to be united with God - the fathers never taught that one should seek to become God, as the astoundingly blasphemous heretic in the video poisonously and foolishly teaches. It's just another example of how similar Eastern "Orthodoxy's" false hesychasm is to the practices of Eastern false religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.
It should be obvious to someone of good will after viewing MHFM's material refuting Eastern "Orthodoxy" that it is a false religion that is incompatible with Christianity. The "Orthodox" have no explanation for their own councils (e.g., Nicaea II) approving papal supremacy, the Filioque and the Catholic view on the divine essence, among many other things that can be mentioned. They also allow divorce and remarriage, which goes directly against the words of Jesus Christ (Luke 16:18). To be truly Christian and saved, one must be a traditional Catholic, as shown in MHFM's material.
czcams.com/play/PLGVSKByrYzss4weDvPDa-2SANNmPrxaqD.html
The Catholic Church is comprising of Eastern traditions and Latin tradition..... I hope u know that in the Catholic Church there are eastern churches also.... U should ask them why they are there... And the play of words that you are doing.... In the councils... Greek and Latin was used
The Latin Church woth the use of money and extorsion bring some greek churches under its communion, they were not always under the papacy.
In the councils no latin was used. When some legate used latin and know nothing of greek, the imperial staff had to translate to the other 99% of greek bishops. The language of the church was always greek.
Poitier = pwa tee ay
Can you debate them?
21:25 "nature isn't a proper name of the divine nature".
Sounds quite incoherent
@telosbound
Still sounds incoherent because you are implying that God has a whatness while in the same breath trying to say that no words are applicable to it (including "whatness").
No one ever thinks they are heretical 🙄
They are.
@@DKjellbyI'm saying no one ever admits or thinks that they themselves are heretical
@@tomtemple69 This has nothing to do with whether the position at hand is true or false though, just because someone thinks they are correct doesn't mean they are or aren't. That's why we can utilize basic logic and reason to argue why a system is false and contradictory
Dubski
I'm Catholic and believe in the Essence Energy distinction. It's not "Eastern Orthodox" Theology. It's just not Thomism. You don't have to be a Thomist and be Catholic
Prior to Vatican 2 this opinion would have been mocked but now it’s trendy for Catholics to be “palamists”
You can’t believe in a real distinction, since the Council of Florence defined, that everything in God is one where no opposition of relation prevents this. Since there is no opposition of relation between the essence and energies, they are one and there is no real distinction.
@@danieldeiturbide9001 so then we get the essence of God when Jesus Christ talk about his Glory in john 17
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f I don’t know what you’re talking about, but I was just making the point that you cannot believe in the essence/energies distinction and be a Catholic.
@@danieldeiturbide9001 well if that is the case how you as catholics participate in the byzantine catholic eucharist see it as the one true eucharist of your church but in it is Gregory palamas as a saint .explain yourself
Based video.
☦☦☦
Always fire
Well, their thomistic theology leads to pantheism.
How?
Would you rather be a pantheist or polytheist?
@@dubbelkastrull neither of the two.
@@ralphraymondsadlucapperez8235
What if you had to choose?
@@dubbelkastrullWe don’t.
@ryrocks9487
So how is the essence and the energy one god?
The Church has never taught this Palamite heresy. The Cappadocia n fathers were not Palamite heretics, they use operation or energy in the singular, and not the plural. It is the unity of divine energy that proves the unity of the divine essence/nature (ousia). The Palamite heresy teaches a plurality of energies.
Why were there 2 councils to define the natures and wills of Christ? 😂 Because Monophysitism asserts that Christ is solely divine, if Christ has 2 natures then dyothelitism correlates the distinctiveness of two wills with the existence of two specific natures. God's attributes (will) are equal to His Essence. 2 councils were needed to further clarify the humanity and divinity in one Person of Christ.
The Most Holy Theotokos appeared to St. Gregory Palams and enlightened him against the latin heretics
@@alexpanagiotis4706
😀😀😀😀. That was satan. The Catholic faith has been confirmed at Fatima debunking your false satanic religion
@@SAHOVNICUThe Most Holy Theotokos always apoears in Holy Orthodoxy. Since 2000 years. These apparitions are the same since 2.000 years.
Not like catholic "visions" - they are often deceptions. Hysteric, blood flowing, stigmata, ....crying, weeping...lik Medjugorje or Akita, this is all nonsense
@@SAHOVNICULike catholic prayers, religious images - they are sentimental naturalistic secular carnal uncanonical depictions. Blasphemous, cheap,
@@alexpanagiotis4706
The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima was witnessed by 70,000 people.
Your bogus Theotokos conceived in Ancestral sin that appears to you heretics is satan himself. Your apparitions are always private which cannot be verified whereas Fatima was made public
Augustine says that when Christ says “the Father is greater than I” he means to say that in the person of a servant in which he condescends to, as Paul says “He being in the form of God emptied Himself and saw equality with God something not to be grasped”. How can we square this with essence and energies distinction? Sorry I’m just trying to learn. It seams Augustine makes a distinction between God the Son and His divinity and His Incarnation as a servant.
@@telosbound thank you. I know this video is older. So I appreciate the time you took to respond.
It's hilarious watching people argue about which variation of a complete fairytale has slightly better excuses within the group, but is still nonsense! Lol!!!!!
Go and get a education!
Yet you believe that giant lizards and giant bugs once roamed earth, and that we are apes.
somehow the mere idea of a God makes you go batshit crazy.
you have no idea what ur on about, nor any idea about the schism or Christological knowledge, Autismo.
Overcome your atheist illusions
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f derrrrrrr! Just like a cult member. You make a smug statement, yet show zero proof for your beliefs! Lol
@@EETMySheetYet you yourself havent provided any evidence for “evolution”.
Ur undeveloped. be quiet autismo.