Honestly, growing in Muslim majority country made me felt inferior regarding the Christian theology for Triune God. But as I grow older, I realized how deep this concept is, and how unic this concept is. Glory to Triune God.

Cool image.

Wrote down a lot. I needed this explanation of the trinity in this way. Thank God for it. And thank you

Thank for this! Much needed and rarely well explained. The production is beautiful and the explanation clear.

Incredible video. Thank you for this. It occurs to me that even in the most basic geometric sense, a triangle is the first and most basic shape that can exist.

Thank you very much for this clear explanation!

Thanks man for this

Wow, you broke it down bro, you broke it down exceptionally well.

What is the relationship between the communal ontology and the CTMU idea of syndiffeonesis/sameness-in/difference? Would love to have a conversation on my channel about this at some point if you’re interested.

wow thank you!

Hi brother; if you want please join us at the Rosary Crew -- leave some intentions for prayers for any of your family or friends in need.

6:18 This reminds me Norris Clarke's relational metaphysics, action as self-relevation of being.

Whoa dude, let me hit some of that prayer and asceticism you've been smokin

You made a video titled "Towards a COMMUNAL ONTOLOGY (Part 1) - From Doubt to Faith". When will part 2 be out?

Hey, if you could answer this off-topic questions I would be very thankful: 1.How is it possible that we are created beings and still immortal? Isn't immortality only possible if we were never born? 2.What if we're only immortal beings while in communion with God, and hell which is the results of so many sins literally will dissolve our being completely? I mean, people claim that "consciousness never dies", but how do we know this for sure? Idk these are my questions im really interested in the orthodox take on this.

I just discovered you and your channel today (via Seraphim Hamilton)... and noticed that your only book Aphesis is unavailable (though apparently very recently published just couple years ago). Will this become available again or re-printed (or printed-on-demand)?? Thank you kindly for any answer/response you can offer. Cheers.

Amazing! Your explanation was clear. I feel like a need a "deeper dive", any material you recommend? Thank you.

this is the language of our design

Wow!

I’m not sure why blud has a problem with nic salt patch strengths bro you good cause chill you got an issue wit everyone 😭

Pretty deep.

Great, There Is No "Simplicity", But Only, "Complexity" In "Degrees" And There Is No "Isolation", But Only, "Relationality" In "Degrees".

Cool

telosbound bro plz answer this question what is zizekain take on john dewey educational philosphy ? is he accept it or dissmiss. also john dewey belong from american pragamtism.and also john dewey influence from hegel. bro plz answer i have assigment on people influence from hegel

One question: if Being is relational, how can there be freedom? That is: if my being is entirely gifted, my being would be constituted on what is being gifted as it is being gifted, and so my being(including an immoral being) could not be attributed as originating in the I, but in the relation. But likewise, given that each node of the relation is given, it ultimately must be a determining of God that determines the Beingness and acts of giving to others. In order for there to be freedom and hence responsibility, the determination of the act must originate on the self, and yet if the self is diluded in its relations, it is the relations themselves that would originate. Given that the ultimate origin is God, there is no freedom possible. Only if there is a self that self-originates a movement(and hence is not determined by others) could there be freedom and responsibility.

To be quite frank this sounds like Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy. I think you should do a comparative analysis on both philosophical schools, as you can tie Christianity to other eastern faiths.

Hi I'm just wondering if anyone has any suggestions for a video of how the early Christian church developed by order ie orthodox Syrian Nestorian Jacobite etc what doctrine each one believed? If anyone can help me with any suggestions id be very grateful! Thanks guys blessings Jamie 🙏

The "third, who is distinct from yet contains the two" is none other than God Himself. Like the Trinity, all of creation is one in essence and indivisible from God. Like the persons of the Trinity, each human person is energetically distinct but ontologically one. The entire cosmos is God made manifest so that through faith (i.e., conscious participation in God) we might know who we always already are - God made manifest - christs.

What about a dualism which entails an intrinsic inclination of each aspect towards the other, rather than requiring a third to facilitate this communion?

He who dies to his self shall live; And he who lives to his self shall die. William Faulker and the Bear. To find God, one must travel in faith without a compass, watch and stick. Kairos is existential time; a moment of choice - the difference between the participant and the spectator. Pray for your own discovery. Blessed are the merciful for they shall know mercy.

So what I gather from this is that relations outside of the Trinitarian God are impossible as we are made in His image? Probably very dumbed down but that's my impression.

to understand this do I just need to go deep on aristotlelian metaphysics

Amazing Teaching Honestly.

The term _mind_ is used to represent the activating agent of spirit, supplying its creative energy. When the term is capitalized it refers to God or Christ (i.e., the Mind of God or the Mind of Christ). _Spirit_ is the Thought of God which He created like Himself. The unified spirit is God's one Son, or Christ. In this world, because the mind is split, the Sons of God appear to be separate. Nor do their minds seem to be joined. In this illusory state, the concept of an "individual mind" seems to be meaningful. It is therefore described in the course _as if_ it has two parts; spirit and ego. Spirit is the part that is still in contact with God through the Holy Spirit, Who abides in this part but sees the other part as well. The term "soul" is not used except in direct biblical quotations because of its highly controversial nature. It would, however, be an equivalent of "spirit," with the understanding that, being of God, it is eternal and was never born. The other part of the mind is entirely illusory and makes only illusions. Spirit retains the potential for creating, but its Will, which is God's, seems to be imprisoned while the mind is not unified. Creation continues unabated because that is the Will of God. This Will is always unified and therefore has no meaning in this world. It has no opposite and no degrees. The mind can be right or wrong, depending on the voice to which it listens. _Right-mindedness_ listens to the Holy Spirit, forgives the world, and through Christ's vision sees the real world in its place. This is the final vision, the last perception, the condition in which God takes the final step Himself. Here time and illusions end together. _Wrong-mindedness_ listens to the ego and makes illusions; perceiving sin and justifying anger, and seeing guilt, disease and death as real. Both this world and the real world are illusions because right-mindedness merely overlooks, or forgives, what never happened. Therefore it is not the _One-mindedness_ of the Christ Mind, Whose Will is One with God's. In this world the only remaining freedom is the freedom of choice; always between two choices or two voices. Will is not involved in perception at any level, and has nothing to do with choice. _Consciousness_ is the receptive mechanism, receiving messages from above or below; from the Holy Spirit or the ego. Consciousness has levels and awareness can shift quite dramatically, but it cannot transcend the perceptual realm. At its highest it becomes aware of the real world, and can be trained to do so increasingly. Yet the very fact that it has levels and can be trained demonstrates that it cannot reach knowledge. ACIM (Jesus) Clarification of Terms

Why do you use the Augustinian shield which implies that the Trinity is a hypostasis in its own? The Monarchial "fork" is a much better illustration of the Trinty. I suggest you use that instead.

Truth, Goodness, Beauty - On the topic of what is real. Positivity, Neutrality, Negativity - On the topic of reality being fundamentally electric in nature. Predicate, Subject, Copula - On the topic of the structure of language Material, Figurative, Spiritual - On the topic of the nature of truth I lined these concepts up respectively. Understanding the world as created through the mind of Jesus, his perspective then lines up as so: With "You" being us. and "Me" being Jesus. Me, We, You Line these up as well. Jesus is the embodiment of the logos (truth) at the most core level of understanding- to put it in somewhat conceptually digestible terms, you would imagine Angels and the like to operate more like AI or machines than you would humans. Hope you found something interesting.

How old are you bro?

Ich kann alles in Gott tun

The hypostasis in God are not distinctions in modes, that's called modalism, The Father loves how God loves, and the Holy Spirit Loves how God loves, and the Son loves how God loves, you are giving a kind of limitation to each hypostasis as if one can do something that the other can't, love is the reciprocal self giving in relation, the Father is self giving to his Son and in that self giving you have the procession of the will/Spirit of the Father to the Son, and the Son is self giving to the Father and in that you have the procession of the Will/Spirit of the Son to the Father, the Spirit/will that proceed from the Father is the same that proceeds from the Son, that Will, that Spirit is the Love between the lover and the beloved, and that Love is God himself, so you don't have that modalist distinction of the Father loving paternally and the Spirit loving spiritually, you get that the Father is self giving to his Son and the Son to his Father, and what are they giving to each other? well, their personhood, their Spirit, they are giving God to each other because the Father is God and the Son is God, so they give God to themselves and the God that they give to each other is the same God that the Father and the Son are, the Holy Spirit is the same Spirit in both, because they are both God, the hypostasis in God are distinctions in relation not in mode. By thinking of hypostasis in God in the way you do, you are describing the Trimurti theology of the Hindu just in a different code, or describing the trinity of the toltecs (a creator, a sustainer and a renewer).

The Christian trinity is 'triple standard' to reinforce the double standards of Christ and Christian 'worldview'.