Below the reader will find the work of St. Theophan the Recluse, “On Truth and Love.” On some of my social media accounts, I posted the recent statement from the Synod of the OCA, “On Same-Sex Relations and Sexual Identity.” In it, Glory to God, the Synod upholds Orthodox teaching. It was striking to me how a number of folks “Online,” even those claiming to be Orthodox, were decrying the statement as “unloving” and such. St. Theophan addressed the modern miss application of “love.” Sadly, many who would be Christians have put their faith in the message of the world over that of the Gospel and Holy Fathers. Everyone will choose to believe something. The modern message of “love” is not truly more loving, rather those who claim to be Christians and who accept it have made a willful choice. They have made a choice to believe the world over Christ and His Church. The type of “love” they champion is not Chrisitan Love but a false love that St. Theophan calls “indifferentism.”
Join me as I am interviewed by Vartan from Full Armor Apologetics as we discuss Scripture, Traditions, Church History, Epistemology, and the Canon.
David Erhan gives a brief theological presentation on the Filioque and why Orthodox Christianity rejects it.
Another Filioque video, this time a response against Catholic Answers. This video refutes Tim Staples’ article on the Filioque and the Filioque quote mine to illustrate that not only is Catholic Answers wrong on the Filioque, they in fact reject Roman Catholic dogma on the Filioque!
Of course there will be people very angry at the fact that I even dared to defend my faith and critiqued an article that stated many factually wrong things, but those who can see through the matrix I think will genuinely appreciate to see the genuine eastern patristic tradition being used to understand the Filioque controversy which is exactly what’s needed.
This video is based off of Fr. George Dragas’ article “The 8th Ecumenical Council: Constantinople IV (879/880) and the Condemnation of the Filioque Addition and Doctrine”
I am addressing a particular Roman Catholic pseudo apologist today. He attempted to stop the bleed of Roman Catholics converting to Orthodoxy due to Roman Catholicism’s anti-patristic doctrine of Filioque but utterly failed in his defense. He went as far as to vindicate the thesis that the filioque doctrine has an inherent arianism applied to the Holy Spirit to it. I will be going through various patristic sources on the filioque and statements to prove my case.
Matt Dillahunty and Jay Dyer square off in a long-requested discussion about the existence of God and the validity of the transcendental argument. Matt Dillahunty is a well known public speaker and debater who has appeared in debates with Dr. Jordan Peterson and remains a skeptic, while Jay Dyer is a philosopher and author. The debate will be moderated by Alternate Current Radio’s Hesher.
The Roman Catholic devotion of the Sacred Heart worship which was popularized in the 17th century has become one of the most popular devotions in the west, documents from the Vatican describing the theology behind the sacred heart worship such as Haurietis Aquas currently exist but have not received much of an analysis from the Orthodox perspective that is accessible today, aside from off-hand comments by Fr. Michael Pomazansky, there hasn’t been much said regarding sacred heart worship. This article looks at the sacred heart devotion from a Cyrillian-Chalcedonian paradigm which differentiates between the object of adoration, which is proper to hypostasis, and what pertains to adoration which is proper to nature. As such, the human heart of Christ becomes treated as a hypostasis, moreover, the implications of the sacred heart devotion is that one worships Christ dually according to His natures, which is the position of not only Nestorius but also Diodore of Tarsus. The Cyrillian condemnation of two worships in his 8th anathema is evaluated along with his response which is that we worship the hypostasis of Christ, not the natures of Christ.
How are we saved? What is the process by which God is saving us? Is it enough to agree with the historical reality of Christ’s death and resurrection? To say, I believe this? Is it enough to say a certain formula of words or say a certain prayer? And that is it, we are saved. Well, to answer this question, we simply need to look at Jesus’ own teaching.
St. Maximus the Confessor’s Letter to Marinus is a somewhat popular prooftext used by Roman Catholic Apologists in which they attempt to argue that St. Maximus was a filioquist. This video explains in detail why such an argument is untenable.