The Eastern Orthodox’s Made Up Doctrine

preview_player
Показать описание
In this video we shall show that the Eastern Orthodox doctrine of Eternal Manifestation was completely unknown to the early opponents to the Filioque, showing it was innovated by Gregory II of Cyprus.

0:00 Introduction
0:46 Theodoret of Cyrrhus
2:08 Photius
3:48 Anastasius the Librarian
4:34 Council of Blachernae
5:32 But Greek Fathers!

Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

0:00 Introduction
0:46 Theodoret of Cyrrhus
2:08 Photius
3:48 Anastasius the Librarian
4:34 Council of Blachernae
5:32 But Greek Fathers!

CatholicDwong
Автор

Interesting, how the Orthodox keep the appearance of never change anything, by liturgy, clothes, but changed doctrine quite a lot.

cherubinth
Автор

Hello Internet, this is yoouuurrr daily dose of filioque.

daviddesalvo
Автор

Another Filioque W, Orthobros coping hard

AverageCatholicConvert
Автор

Keep up the good work, your work has opened the eyes of many through the Holy Spirit ❤️‍🔥🇻🇦✝️

hap
Автор

Amazing video once again Dwong🙌🏾🙌🏾 God bless you🙌🏾

imjustwatchingyoutube
Автор

I was seriously considering orthodoxy till I watched this I love my catholic faith❤️‍🔥✝️🇻🇦

Tommy-wl
Автор

Bro dwong it’s me your biggest fan I watch your videos great video🎉

XMZ
Автор

Filioque is good, epic and true. EO can only cope with their energies

jakajakos
Автор

how much times will you debunk eastern so called orthodoxy?

dwong: yes

Festination
Автор

any begginer theology books? currently in rcia with no theology backround. im a cs major lol

JoeSwanson-lqwu
Автор

Being manifest by the son doesn't mean 'eternal procession'. And whatever a Saint says, is not binding as contrary to what a council says (whosoever changes this creed, let him be anathema)

kianoghuz
Автор

Commented and liked for the algorithm (I was already subbed I think)

Hedgehogz
Автор

ur opinion of david erhan's refution/rebuttal of your previous vid?

ApologiaLazar
Автор

I'm going to send this to my Catholic-Orthodox scholar for his opinion.

TheMilitiaGuy
Автор

If you read the Tomos thoroughly, you'll know that no dogma is declared. The Holy Fathers of Blachernae limited themselves to clarify that filioque should be interpreted as the Spirit being of the Father and the Son, but having cause on the Father, and advising to avoid any interpretation of the filioque where the Son is cause. Manifestation is an expression by St. John of Damascus that conveys an idea similar to the filioque as interpreted by the Tomos, and all the council does is clarify that manifestation should be intepreted as the Spirit being of the Son, being shone forth by Him, but caused by the Father. This is a simple case of hypostasis-essence distinction, and it's totally in line with St. Photios' Mystagogy.

emilianoestevarena
Автор

Good video. When are you gonna make a video on the papacy?

matei_
Автор

Dwong, what do you think of the statement that the EO makes that "Blachernae condemned the "through the Son" to be taken in the sense of "and of the Son", but affirms the phrase as the eternal manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the Son, and not only temporal sending (which is something recognized and accepted by everyone)". They also say that "it was precisely the Franks who protested the use of "through the Son" by Patriarch Tarasius in Nicaea 2, because they understood that it went against the doctrine of double procession (as the filioque was dogmatized in Florence)". I would love to see an answer from you or a video about Nicaea 2 and these questions

lucasy
Автор

Gottla love when people say "the orthodox church" as if orthodoxy is one church

cheeseface
Автор

thats it? that was just 6 minutes of out of context quotes

nit
visit shbcf.ru