Nestorius is considered a heretic in the Greek Orthodox Church.

@BinaryTechnique

3 жыл бұрын

He is a Saint in the Ancient Assyrian Church of the East

@Ggdivhjkjl

2 жыл бұрын

Ironically, the Church of the East refers to him as one of the 3 Greek Doctors of the Church, which would appear to be what this clip meant even though what it said was one of several mistakes, not least of which was the repeated mispronunciation of 'Ephesus'.

@KarmaKraftttt

2 жыл бұрын

@@BinaryTechnique Then that church is a heretical movement. Nestorius said Christ was born as ordinary man. That's completely heresy. Also Mary being mother of God has nothing to do with herself. She got that title because of Jesus. Not because of anything she did.

@DW_Kiwi

Жыл бұрын

Yes! Catholic at heart

@DW_Kiwi

Жыл бұрын

@@KarmaKraftttt Jesus. The Son of Mary.

5:49 completely false: Nestorius is only considered an important hierarch in the Syriac church of the East (Nestorians) not the Greek Orthodox Church

@bellatordei3440

Жыл бұрын

Same for the other orthodox churches

@newmapper5939

8 ай бұрын

And in syriac catholic churches we employ the anaphora of Mar nestorius in every service

@masonpithyo2090

6 ай бұрын

It's the Assyrian church of the east

@newmapper5939

6 ай бұрын

also in tge ancient assyrian church of the east and tge syro malabar catholic church

@85AngelRogue

6 ай бұрын

I’m Syriac , we are not Nestorian’s , a small group of Assyrian’s are

It is actually kind of funny how everyone in here is speaking on Assyrian church christology being Nestorianism when they don’t even know the reasons of veneration, the reason of preferring christokos over theotokos, and etc. Let me break it down in bullet points. 1. ACOE accepts Dyophysitism, they believe Christ is 1 divine person with 2 inseparable united natures (the divine kyana and the human kyana). Kyana = nature 2. A lot of theotokos fanboys ultimately just say “OoOoOo Christ is God, Holy Mother Mary Gave birth to Christ, who is God, therefore she gave birth to God, aka God bearer OoOoOoOo”. Like, when did the ACOE deny that framework? That’s the whole reason they accept christokos over theotokos, because christokos makes clear it is in reference to THE SECOND PERSON OF THE HOLY TRINITY. When you express theotokos, what part of theotokos does it say specifically birthing Christ, or what part of it adds limitations to theotokos so one doesn’t read it as Holy Mother Mary being the source of the Godhead when you label her “MOTHER OF GOD” as if she CREATED the divine kyana? Ultimately their reason of preferring christokos over theotokos, is to not stir confusion on CREATING VS BIRTHING the divine kyana, and many more other reasons they believe theotokos does not address that christokos address. Ultimately, this is what they believe: “Holy Mother Mary gave birth to Christ who is God, therefore she bore God, therefore she is christokos”. Notice how you buffoons are starting to realize they mean the exact same things as you guys when you say “theotokos”, they just prefer the linguistic christokos because they believe it’s more specific. But if I had to be more specific, it’s very easy to understand; the name “Christ” denotes a union of inseparable natures, when you say christokos, you confess God the Word who has a union of inseparable natures. Therefore, ACOE always took christokos to emphasize on the union of natures, rather than mean “man-bearer”, which is wrongfully asserted on Nestorius and ACOE, since Nestorius himself denied the term anthropotokos (mother of man), and accepted theotokos in its pious manner in his letter to Saint John of Antioch; the combating reasons of the term was due to the fact it was being taken up by followers of arius and apollinarius. For example “mother of God = She created Christ’s divinity, but not The father’s divinity, making the father and son NOT homoousia (of the same essence). This was the reason Nestorius did not like the term, but accepted the orthodox/pious understanding. 3. ACOE believes Christ was ALWAYS divine, they do not believe the divine kyana comes at a later time, or that he was an ordinary man, they ultimately believe in the hypostatic Union (from an orthodox and Catholic perspective). However, if you read any of Cyril’s work or just look up the scholarly consensus, there’s a vast sea of Cyril’s work proposing “miaphysitism”. For example, Cyril of Alexandria saying the 2 natures of Christ are done away with after the union, and there becomes only 1 nature of the son. I think the issue here is that when it comes to ACOE, everyone just throws out the Miaphysite interpretation of Cyril out the window. If we agree that there’s 2 interpretations of Cyril when debating the orientals, then why does ACOE get the bad end of the stick as if they purely disagree with Cyril only for the reason that they propose Nestorianism? 4. The veneration of Nestorius is true, they believe Nestorius is a Saint. However, seriously take a minute to use your brain and see how all of their beliefs above contradict with the beliefs of Nestorius. Doesn’t make sense right? How can one believe in all that stuff, but also believe in Nestorius who didn’t believe those stuff?!?! 😱😱 Simple answer, they don’t believe Nestorius taught Nestorianism, and was misrepresented on his beliefs, and was accused for his hardcore linguistics of understanding the natures of Christ. Now it makes sense why they’d reject Cyril, Ephesus, and the hypostatic union, because to them; confessing those things is a confession of miaphysitism. So they’ll hold to the prosopic union instead, but the prosopic union is not a union of persons, but rather it’s the orthodox or Catholic interpretation of the hypostatic union (NOT THE ORIENTAL INTERPRETATION). The reason it’s named “prosopic union” is because the union is IN THE ONE PERSON (Christ/God the Word). Now since I’ve explained this much already, I’ll explain ACOE’s perspective on “God dying”. ACOE does NOT REJECT that Christ who is God, dies. The second person of the holy trinity did suffer, but in virtue of the humanity, not the divinity; the divine nature is immortal and immutable. This is perfectly orthodox. However, you’ll notice ACOE say “Christ dies but the word does not die”. They’re not saying Christ and the word are distinct persons, but rather they’re distinguishing between names upon the same 2nd person of the holy trinity. The word denotes the divine nature, but Christ denotes a union of natures; when you say Christ dies, you are saying Christ who is the logos, God the word, dies when he has a union of inseparable natures. The distinction of names upon the same person is necessary to avoid implying suffering to the divinity. So ACOE tries to avoid “Theopaschitic language”. So they’ll confess the exact same thing as an EO when it comes to Christ dying, but then they’ll say “God does not die”, same thing confessed, different lingusitcs, you’ll notice by now they’re hardcore dyophosites. All of this makes sense, and you’ll start to realize ACOE has been more consistent with the term “God” then the melkites; as God denotes the divine nature, is there ever a situation in which one can call another God; when that individual does not have the divine nature? Absolutely not; therefore, If God denotes the divine nature; why is it that the linguistic of “God dying” does not imply suffering to the divinity? For a better term, it is accurate to say God does not die, to avoid the confusion of suffering attributed to the divinity. 5. Now, lastly, I’m not going to explain what hypostatis means for ACOE. But if you read Saint Basil’s 38th and 236th letter, you’ll see even Saint basil distinguish between a particular and a general. Hypostatis, also known in Syriac as “qnoma/qnome”, DOES NOT MEAN PERSON. So they’ll confess 2 qnome, 2 kyana, 1 parsopa. I’d be here all day if I try to explain what qnome means, so for short summary, I’ll just say it’s a “particular/instantiations nature/concrete reality of an abstract/universal nature”. Now let’s say, they’re wrong, ultimately they’re wrong about their veneration and they’re wrong about Nestorius. What part adds up that they believe in 2 persons, or separation of natures, or believe that Christ has not always been divine? I say to you all, actually learn what they believe before you accuse one of Nestorianism. It’s a shame how one wants unity of all apostolic churches, while refusing to learn the ones they condemn. Unrighteous judgment. Just read up on one book “The Christology of Mar Babai the Great”, free PDF online, and maybe if you guys are somewhat intellectual enough to learn, you’ll read the bazaar of heracleides.

@archbishoptrevorelihugreene

5 ай бұрын

Amen! Totally accurate description of the Assyrian Church and the beliefs of Mar Nestorius of Constantinople.

@FIASCOGAMING

Ай бұрын

Never read such a complete explanation. Thanks for the reading suggestions.

@davidthomas9276

13 күн бұрын

Thank you for expressing my exact thought - that Mary could not have produced Jesus' divine nature. It is a fine distinction, to be sure, but I like the way John puts it: "In the BEGINNING was the Word. . ." This was long before Mary came on the scene.

You completely misrepresented Nestorious. He believed Christ was is fact fully human and fully God (via the Word a.k.a. Logos) from inception. He also didn't say two natures and two persons. He said two natures, two hypostasis, ONE person. His emphasis on the title Mother of Christ was was simply so there would be no confusion in having anyone try to claim that the Logos was created from Mary.

@liquidh5226

3 ай бұрын

But it's so blatantly obvious Mary a creature cannot birth the Creator. It doesn't need any explication. So, I find such defence of Nestorius (that he wanted to "clarify") quite incredible. EDIT: Mary, Theotokos, could birth the Logos (or Jesus) in flesh because He allows it! And Mary accepted too.

@burtonsankeralli5445

3 ай бұрын

Nestorius used the Greek word prosopon which is weaker than our word person.

@NIMRODWARDA

3 ай бұрын

​@@burtonsankeralli5445 Nestorius said Christ has two distinct "hypostases", united in one "prosopon". That is similar to our formulation in the (Assyrian) Church of the East, as we say Christ has two distinct "qnomeh", united in one "parsopa". This is why we wouldn't condemn him, and subsequently were labeled as "Nestorians" despite Nestorius never being a part of our church. We both emphasized Christ's union in the incarnate person (i.e. tangible/physical), rather than in the underlying state (i.e. not tangible/physical).

@burtonsankeralli5445

3 ай бұрын

I think Nestorius got a,raw deal but at the time the language was fluid prosopon like the Latin persona could mean mask. Thats why Calcedon had to say one hypostasis. The catholic position is that persons have mothers not natures hence the communicatio idiomatum

@liquidh5226

3 ай бұрын

@NIMRODWARDA So according to Church of the East, Christ (the Word of God) is 1 person. Can you affirm that?

Mar Nestorius of Constantinople never taught two persons. In fact, one of his writings literally says that he didn't: "I did not say that the Son was one (person) and God the Word another; I said that God the Word was by nature one and the temple by nature another." ~ Saint Nestorius "the Bloodless Martyr", Archbishop of Constantinople When Saint Nestorius, Archbishop of Constantinople, spoke of the nature and will of Christ Jesus, he spoke in a manner that would in fact line up with the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th ecumenical councils. He spoke saying "God's will was His will", his opponents taking this to be "Two Sons in the one Christ" when in fact this was "Two Natures in the One Son that is Christ". His own words were these: "Christ is indivisible in that He is Christ, but He is two fold in that He is both God and Man. He is one in His sonship, but He two fold in that which assumes and that which is assumed. In the prosopon of the Son He is indivisible, but as in the case of two eyes, He is separate in the nature of manhood and Godhood. The result is we do not acknowledge two Christs, or two Sons, or Only Begottens, or Lords. We do not say One Son and another Son, not a first and a second Christ, but one and the same who has been seen in created and uncreated nature."

Another great production guys, the music and tasteful art-work serve it well.

@HistoryJunkie

3 жыл бұрын

James, Thank you!

In Assyrian Church and Syro malabar Church we commemorate Mar Nestorius as a saint.

@allpoints-tv

11 ай бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/mHuMyqyYm6WXZLA.htmlsi=LMJf7EpqRnrZhSCz

@nate4z

10 ай бұрын

you shouldn't. Nestorius did not believe that Mother Mary was the Bearer of God - Theotokos but only the Bearer of Christ - Christotokos. although the second one is not entirely wrong, it is incomplete. Jesus Christ is God and Mary having bore Him thus makes Her the Theotokos.

@newmapper5939

8 ай бұрын

​@@nate4zwe believe Mary wasn't Devine we believe she was human

@thieph

6 ай бұрын

​@@newmapper5939who claim Mary is divine? Spoiler alert: nobody

@chaoslord07

4 ай бұрын

​@@nate4zMary is not the Mother of LOGOS. She is Mother of Jesus Christ. On incarnation LOGOS assumed Human Nature from Mary. So she isn't the Origin of Jesus Christ's Divine Nature. Now I don't understand how that's Heretical? Mother Always implys Origination/Originator. She was not the Origin of Divine Nature, Therefore she shouldn't be referred to as Theotokos (when you use it to mean 'Mother'/Originator of GOD) Theotokos can also have another meaning one who bore GOD, that's correct as the Hypostatic Union of the LOGOS Incarnate was wholly/fully Divine and wholly Human. She indeed bore and gave birth to Jesus Christ (who was wholly GOD) so it is CORRECT.

I don’t think you guys are correct in saying Nestorius thought Jesus was an ordinary man when He was born

@HistoryJunkie

2 жыл бұрын

Hmm.. that’s exactly what he thought. Would you care to elaborate?

@Vinsanity997

2 жыл бұрын

@@HistoryJunkie sure “Some, as we have indicated, jumped to the conclusion that Nestorius was an adoptionist, splitting the God-man into two distinct persons artificially linked together in a moral union by the exercise of mutual good will. Repeatedly he insisted against his detractors that God the Word and the man in whom He came to be were not numerically two. Rather, Nestorius held that in Christ there are two natures… These two natures remained unaltered and distinct in the union, the Godhead existing in the man, the man, in the Godhead without mixture or confusion. Divinity and humanity remained objectively real, each retaining its own characteristics and operations.” The First Seven Ecumencial Councils (325-787) Their History and Theology By Leo Donald Davis Pages 145-146

@HistoryJunkie

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the response! From our understanding he believed Mary’s baby was human.

@Vinsanity997

2 жыл бұрын

@@HistoryJunkie thanks to you guys as well. I agree with most the video and it’s very beautiful but I felt that the way it was stated sounded like adoptionism which I would argue wasn’t his position

@Ggdivhjkjl

2 жыл бұрын

@@HistoryJunkie What Mar Nestorius was trying to emphasise is that the flesh the Logos/Word took from St Mary was not divine on account of it being her flesh. Or to use modern scientific language, Mary's body did not produce a divine egg/ovum of its own accord. Rather, the egg of Mary was natural human 'flesh' (according to the classical terminology) which the divine Word united with at the moment of the incarnation. So yes, Mar Nestorius did teach that St Mary's baby was human yet in doing so he did not deny that Christ was divine. Rather, he denied that St Mary's body generated divinity. That is to say, he held that the Spirit of the Lord came upon Mary and she conceived by the Holy Ghost who acted within her, not that she produced divinity as a product of her own nature; for as a human, she could only produce human nature not divine nature. Does that make sense?

History Junkie getting me hooked! Classy presentation really stands out and appreciated!

@HistoryJunkie

3 жыл бұрын

Happy to see familiar faces!

I am not sure of Nestoriua being evil, maybe stupid, I have not read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, so I do not understand this much.

@anthonyp6055

2 ай бұрын

God bless you. I think Nestorius' was a good but poorly mistaken man, he is right, there is Two Natures in God. "The goal of my earnest wish, then, is that God may be Blessed on Earth as in Heaven. But as for Nestorius, let him be anathema… And would to God that all men by anathematizing me might attain to a reconciliation with God; for to me there is nothing greater or more precious than this-" - Patr. Nestorius Of Constantinople

His teaching was heresy. Christ is fully man, fully God. Scripture is clear on this. Good stuff.

Luke 1: 43 And whence is this to me, that the MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me?".

If Jesus was not fully God, the sacrifice of the cross, especially as Divine vision quest to experience human despair, would have had no meaning. Jesus and the Father are One. Including on the Cross.

@DW_Kiwi

Жыл бұрын

He suffered so that He would "Know" our (Human) suffering. Therefore He was fully Human. And by the way; fully God

@kingkoi6542

Жыл бұрын

He wasn't tempted, temptation ensues from a disparage of human will and Gods Will. "I come not to do my Will but the Will of He who sends me". Jesus was God becoming man, not man becoming God. Trying to become God is an affront to Him.

@michaelbindner9883

Жыл бұрын

@@kingkoi6542 he was crushed, not tempted, so that we can go to Him for healing when we are crushed.

@OrthodoxChristianWife

Жыл бұрын

​@Michael Bindner can you explain why Jesus says "into your hands oh Lord I commend my soul and my body"? "And Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."

@michaelbindner9883

Жыл бұрын

@@OrthodoxChristianWife He said into your hands..after he said Eloi, Eloi....and then I thirst. When he said I thirst, it marked the beginning of the kingdom because he drank the fruit of the vine.

Just found your channel and I love it! Keep it up!

@HistoryJunkie

3 жыл бұрын

I’m glad you found it and enjoy it! Thanks so much for watching it means a lot!

You must remember that the accuser, judge and jury of Nestorius were one man: Cyrillic.

Nestorius is not recognized by the Orthodox but the Assyrian church of the East.

We’ll explained and to the point Thank you

Nestor saw a case of man experiencing a metaphysical power I believe he was John Chrysostom. Then he said it maybe the same case of Jesus Christ. Alexandrian Church knew what the "Word of G-d" theology meanings which one of it's purposes is to prevent the king-prophet model on anyone experiencing metaphysical phenomena (one of the purposes not all! As the story of Jesus Christ is literally correct 100% but I believe it took place in q location is now not on Earth surface!!)

beautiful pleasure to learn and to watch/18 december 2021

MANY ERRORS IN THE VIDEO 1. The Greek Orthodox Church is the one that condemned Nestorios as heretic So did the Oriental Churches He was embraced by the Church of Persia, the so called Assyrian Church. 2. Nestorios did not teach that Jesus was born as a plain man and later was unified with the Son of God. This was what Arios claimed. Nestorios accepted that Christ was fully God and fully Man right from the moment He was conceived, but he claimed that the two Natures existed and acted individually, while the Orthodox teaching is that they are inseperabably United.

This is IT….WOW ….CONFIRMED

I wish there was an on-line quiz that would show what one's christology was. ( At times it is more complex than just Arian-ism V.S. orthodoxy.) Also- I really wish there was an on-line quiz what would show which "Saint Thomas" church one would agree with the MOST.

Could this beautiful Illustration by Sara Paldanova be a painting and where is it? What is Germanica called Today? Excellent explanation on difference between Antioch School of Theodore Mopsuestia Division of Persons Anti Theotokos versus Alexandria School of Unity and Anti mere man Christotokos by wise Cyril son of the fool who excommunicated Saint John Golden Mouth/Chrysostom Patriarch of Constantinople Nestorius Denial of Incarnation of God defended by Saint Athanasius Video too sympathetic to spiritual scorpion who appropriately died in the desert Which spiritual desert symbol of Anti Apostolic Tradition was successfully spread all way to China where Kublai Khan wife was Nestorian Chabi and has ensured Trouble and Turmoil there to this day

He was a Greek who was ex communicated during the council.

@user-xu9ji4dd4e

Жыл бұрын

He was an Egyptian and lived in Alexandria

@AssyrianEasternOrthodox

Жыл бұрын

He was a Greek speaking Syrian from Marash.

I believe he was misunderstood or Cyril Framed him/twisted his ideas. The reason He might have preferred Christostokos over Theotokos being that saying referring to the Mother of Jesus (Fully Divine and Fully Human no doubts or confusion about that) as God Bearer alongside the notion of Trinity and the Theological truth that there is one GOD. Might give rise to more heresys and possible confusion that She is the mother of not just the son but the whole Trinity.

@user-cg2tw8pw7j

11 ай бұрын

Constantine: Go away, you pagan, go to hell. There is only one God

Where does nestorianism survive?

@bevyn2031

Жыл бұрын

the Assyrian Church of the East

Such high quality, excellent work

@HistoryJunkie

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you this means a lot!

You have screwed up both Nestorius' and the Catholic view.

Mary saying she was mother of a God is insane....She would never claim that nor Jesus Christ calling himself God!...

There is only one way. Believe in the finished work of the cross. Jesus Christ is the only truth and the only way. On Christ the solid rock i stand all other ground is sinking sand. 💯. Religions is given by the enemy. Divide and conquer.

So Christ was 1/2 genetically god and 1/2 mary. So he was the son physically. Spiritually he was one with the father. I guess it was like a bluetooth connection in a bio suit.

I had hoped that this video might be accurate and full - sadly it is neither.

Now they have converted all most Christian's to worship Jesus as God

😭😭😭

Jesus! Spiritual: Son of God. Human and Legal: Son of Mary, Son of man

ወላዲተ አምላክ

he was right

Constantinople is Eastern Orthodox, Rome was the harlot church

@AlphonseMenkefor

4 ай бұрын

Insulting word. May peace of Christ be with us. Amen❤

If what the video says is what Nestorius believed then he is a heretic.

To be honest they invented all of this from Roam.. To seperate themselves from Christian Arabs

They persecuted him...

Completely incorrect information, skewing the story completely. Nestorius was a heretic. If you read the actual letters between Kyrill of Alexandria and Nestorius. You also incorrectly characterize his teaching. 197 bishops signed under his condemnation as a heretic, that his teaching was incorrect and Kyrills was correct. And the correct definition was stated by the agreed confession between John of Antioch and Kyrill.

@user-cg2tw8pw7j

11 ай бұрын

Constantine: A pagan says that Ali, a monotheist, is a heretic, so you are in Hell 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@Anteros_Fedya

11 ай бұрын

@@user-cg2tw8pw7j what?

@user-cg2tw8pw7j

11 ай бұрын

@@Anteros_Fedya Before his death, Constantine spread this doctrine in Europe and turned the pagan Europeans into Christian Christians. So who was the pagan Constantine or this man?

@Anteros_Fedya

11 ай бұрын

@@user-cg2tw8pw7j What are you on about? Constantine died 10 years before Nestorius was even born. What has this got to do with Constantine or pagans. I have no idea what you’re talking about.

@archbishoptrevorelihugreene

5 ай бұрын

You apparently never read the FULL history of the Council of Ephesus, nor did you actually read the letter sent from Mar Nestorius of Constantinople to Cyril of Alexandria.

A lot of misinformation in this video...

Nestorius is a Kurd. The basis of the views comes from the ancient Zoroastrian tradition.

@antidot556

2 жыл бұрын

Assyrian.

Nesteros is anti crist and mother of God marry so Jesus is a God v marry is mother of God

The "founder" of Islam.

@ryank2740

5 ай бұрын

that would be Arius, Arianism denies the Trinity, Nestorianism does not

@anthonyp6055

2 ай бұрын

​@@ryank2740Arius likely thought the Ebionites were heretics, Arius thought the Logos and Jesus were god but created and not Co-essential with the Father. The Ebionites like the Muslims thought Christ to be a mere man with no Divinity.

Nestorius is à trop caractère and jésus christ is not thé son of god and Nestorius is à good Man in that why Christian hâte him and lm à Christian and jésus Chris is not thé son of god

@HistoryJunkie

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching!

@Ggdivhjkjl

2 жыл бұрын

If you don't believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God then by definition you are not a Christian.

@user-pj7sq7ce1f

2 жыл бұрын

You are then as satanic as nestorian was

@---zc4qt

Жыл бұрын

@@Ggdivhjkjl I was going to say the SAME thing.