Zaia the Mopsuestian

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@sajjadfcps His peace is reconciliation with God and, through that, we have reconciliation between people (Ephesians 2:14–18). That peace can be offered and rejected, its rejection produces conflict between people. Quite simple if you ask me.

[✥ Y O U S I F 𓂀 🇪🇬 @egyptian_yousif]

Debate challenge to the @muslimorthodoxy
X

2v2 any person of your choice
@ZaiaCoE
@orthoalexandria
@ApostolicOrtho

Agen & Zaia
You and anyone

Everyone message Libyano !!!

[ܕܢܝܐܝܠ ܩܲܩܝܫ ♰ دانيال قاقيش @subdeacondaniel]

@muslimorthodoxy debate challenge. Orthodox Muslim Libyano and a partner vs @orthoalexandria @ApostolicOrtho & @ZaiaCoE

[ܕܢܝܐܝܠ ܩܲܩܝܫ ♰ دانيال قاقيش @subdeacondaniel]

with Deacon @ZaiaCoE & Deacon Ahda of the Church of the East

https://t.co/QKNMiEtnxq

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@TertiusIII Only three chapters later, St Irenaeus asks what Christians should do if the apostles had left no writings. Read it.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@muslimorthodoxy The context of Sirach 42 is that of the concern of a father towards his daughter, her friends, and his disgrace. It is not a rule of Christianity that ranks the morality of an individual based on the gender as practiced in Islam. Sirach 26:3 states that a good wife is God’s gift.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@subdeacondaniel Great stream with Shamasha Daniel, pleasure and honor to be on.

[ܕܢܝܐܝܠ ܩܲܩܝܫ ♰ دانيال قاقيش @subdeacondaniel]

with @ZaiaCoE

https://t.co/Nue3t9uaIt

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@UntoldFortune @AssyrianTheo I don’t think John Behr presents a strong case against Diodore and Theodore. His arguments seem to rely heavily on reading their terminology through later theological categories rather than engaging it within its own Antiochene context. I’d be open to writing a response.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

New article is up

https://t.co/In1tBhqQoX

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@KhalilAndani That only works by redefining “Son of Man.” In Daniel 7 and the Gospels, it is a specific eschatological figure who receives universal dominion, not a reusable metaphysical Logos with multiple human manifestations.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

St. Evagrius

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou You still have to show it asserts your doctrine of procession from the Son as cause, not just language of shared activity. So there’s no contradiction, I’m testing your claim, not adopting it. You’re saying it’s from Diodore, sure, now what? Engage the text.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou Like I said, grant it’s authentic, now what? How does it teach Filioque? It doesn’t follow because authorial belief ≠ what a specific sentence formally teaches. Especially in this case where I’m granting it’s from Diodore so we can progress. You know better than to engage this.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou That doesn’t follow at all. Since you’re trying to bind this upon the CoE, even if, for the sake of argument, it were a later interpolation by someone who believed in the Filioque,you still have to prove the text itself actually teaches the Filioque in the strict sense. Don’t run

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou If it is, or if it isn’t my interpretation of the passage remains the same. If it’s authentic, then what? Does it prove your Filioque doctrine? It does not, which is why you have refused to engage me on it.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou I’m granting you it’s authentic for the sake of the argument, you’re sticking on this point because you’ve never been pressed on this point and it makes you nervous, I get it.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @JoeyEsto @RabbanPithyou So engage me on the interpretation if it’s so clear

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@JoeyEsto @Wayne899111 @RabbanPithyou I’m presenting the plain reading of the text, it does not necessitate your view. Wayne is afraid to argue based on that, but he wants to push the authenticity of a passage he has already conceded is fake to other AcoE.

[Zaia the Mopsuestian @ZaiaCoE]

@Wayne899111 @RabbanPithyou So you’re running, got it. I’m granting you it’s authentic, but you will not engage, you’re the one reinterpreting it to fit your theology. You’re taking a Father who explicitly grounds his statement in shared activity, and reading your later metaphysical claims into it