Peshitta Forum
Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Printable Version

+- Peshitta Forum (http://peshitta.org/for)
+-- Forum: New Testament (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity (/showthread.php?tid=2751)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Thirdwoe - 01-04-2012

Brother Allen, I don't disagree with any of what you say there, nor disagree with the teaching that The Holy Spirit proceeds from The Father...this is what Holy Scripture and the Creed teaches us. I was showing there how the various passages touch on the procces of the sending forth of The Spirit of Truth, and how it shows that it is both The Spirit of The Father and The Son, that is both IN and by means of Him, that They dwell within us, through Their Holy Spirit, They "The Trinity" being ONE GOD, ONE SPIRIT....and we being God's Temple/People.

The Original Nicean Creed is correct in every part, I don't dispute any line of it, and it should not have been changed from the Original 325 A.D. version. Have you ever read Bishop Theodore's Commentary on it? It is a blessing to read.

I believe that GOD is triune, The Father, The Word, and The Holy Spirit....Being ONE GOD, yet distinct in function and position and in aspects of the relationship...The Father being Greater than The Son, for instance, not in essence, but in position and relationship....but I don't see that Holy Scripture, nor the early Church teachers of the late 1st-early 4th centuries, so far as I have found, taught what later became more of a Tri-Theistic trinity model, as they tried to combat Arianism and Gnostisim and in doing so went too far from what is taught in Holy Scripture, which led to the teaching that Mary, the Mother of The Messiah, becoming in their minds, The Mother of GOD, and GOD bleeding and dying on the Cross.

In any case, I don't believe that we will have the full grasp of this Holy Mystery until God so choses to reveal the whole understanding to us...And if you see a particular thing that I said that does not agree with what The Scriptures teach, then please point it out, so I can reconsider it in further study and prayer.

Shlama,
Chuck


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Alan G77 - 01-04-2012

Hi Brother Chuck,

Yes the orthodox did take it a little far by calling the blessed virgin the Theotokos, but in their defense they do not believe she is the Mother of God's divinity. They believe, as we do, that Christ is God and therefore the logical conclusion (for them) is that the blessed virgin deserves such a title.

What I disagree with is your objection to God dying on the cross, if Christ is God then God died, hear me out. The divinity of Christ did not die, for how can the divine nature die? But even though it was His humanity that died, we should never forget that Christ in His humanity was still God incarnate. The church of the east maintains that the divine and human Qnume were preserved in their natures without co mingling or confusion and that they were undivided and inseparable.

The reason (shamasha Paul can correct me here) that we do not state the term 'mother of God' or affirm that 'God' died is due to the fact that in semetic terms it would imply that God's divinity was born and God's divinity died.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - TrueVineBranch - 01-04-2012

I agree with Nestorius as Maryam as the Bearer of the Messiah. While the Messiah was the Miltha in the Flesh, Mary birthed the Flesh the Miltha was present in, just as the Miltha is begotten of the Father. As human beings we can agree that the Holy Spirit is God and "proceeds". We are not present at the Throne of Glory to ascertain the Technical Details.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Paul Younan - 01-04-2012

Alan G77 Wrote:What I disagree with is your objection to God dying on the cross, if Christ is God then God died, hear me out. The divinity of Christ did not die, for how can the divine nature die? But even though it was His humanity that died, we should never forget that Christ in His humanity was still God incarnate. The church of the east maintains that the divine and human Qnume were preserved in their natures without co mingling or confusion and that they were undivided and inseparable.

The reason (shamasha Paul can correct me here) that we do not state the term 'mother of God' or affirm that 'God' died is due to the fact that in semetic terms it would imply that God's divinity was born and God's divinity died.

This is the hardest part about Christology. The realization of the duality of Christ's Natures forces us to wonder about the extent to which each nature shared in the experience of the other. When we declare that there is no "co-mingling or confusion" with the two natures, we mean that God's nature is impassible. It cannot suffer death, it cannot be tempted by the evil one in the wilderness, it cannot bleed on the cross, it is not mortal.

And likewise Christ's humanity cannot raise the dead, it cannot forgive sins.

Each nature is preserved in its own Qnuma, in One Person whom we call Christ.

While "Theotokos" is not technically incorrect, it is horribly incomplete. It only tells half the story. She was not merely "Mother of God". She was Christotokos - "Mother of Christ", who is both God and Man. Isn't that a more respectful and complete title?

+Shamasha


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Thirdwoe - 01-05-2012

:

Bishop Nestorius thought so, Shamasha Paul. And if it was adopted among the majority of the Greeks and Latins, then there would not have been the terrible thing that happend.

I believe it is best to say this: That it was The Son of God, who died on the Cross. Which is 100% true. He died in His humanity, not in His Divinity, He being the Perfect sacrifice as sinless/without blemish both in His Body and His Soul.

And, as to His Divine nature not dying or suffering, which nature He shared/Shares with His Father, they being of One Spirit, and Christ posessing The Spirit of The Father, without measure...we see upon the Cross, when He was to become the Curse and bore all our sins, The Father seperated from His Son, which we know caused great travial in Christ. And Jesus, before He died, released His Spirit to The Father...and died in His Body and Soul for our redemption.

The Father of Christ did not die, nor did The Holy Spirit of God, nor became a curse on the Cross, but the Human Body & Soul of Christ did, which The Word/Son of God took from mankind, which was for the Atonement for our transgressions.

Again, Brothers, Paul and Allen. If you see anything that I am saying, here or elseware, that is not according to what is taught in Holy Scripture, then please point it out and I will re-consider, study further, and pray that God will show me my error. I take these matters very seriously and do not want to mislead anyone, who may read what I say.

Shlama,
Chuck


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Arkady - 03-03-2012

Oh, Lord.

Thanks be to Almighty God that I am not a part of your movement you call "the Church of East".

Paul Younan Wrote:While "Theotokos" is not technically incorrect, it is horribly incomplete. It only tells half the story. She was not merely "Mother of God". She was Christotokos - "Mother of Christ", who is both God and Man. Isn't that a more respectful and complete title?

Do you still wonder why they call you nestorians?:

Nestorius Wrote:If anyone says that the Emmanuel is true God, and not rather God with us, that is, that he has united himself to a like nature with ours, which he assumed from the Virgin Mary, and dwelt in it; and if anyone calls Mary the mother of God the Word, and not rather mother of him who is Emmanuel; and if he maintains that God the Word has changed himself into the flesh, which he only assumed in order to make his Godhead visible, and to be found in form as a man, let him be anathema.

These commandments of men you adhere to will bring you nowhere, guys.

How dare some of you to say that this decision of Rukha Qadisho at the Council of Ephesus was politically driven. I bet, you've stripped your church naked of the Aloho's Grace in the same way as you failed to ascribe the proper title to Her who is the Mother of Aloho indeed. It was Aloho Himself who's given her this title.

I feel sorry for you, guys. I do. Let the people know the kind of the doctrines you profess.

I do not say that you can not be saved. But as the one who seeks favours from the King and does not pay the due respect to His Mother he's really going to have to knock harder, much harder on the door of his eternal Salvation (to say the least):

And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. (Luke 11:9)

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3810.htm">http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3810.htm</a><!-- m -->

Council of Ephesus Wrote:If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, The Word was made flesh] let him be anathema.

Council of Ephesus Wrote:This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word being personally united is said to be born according to the flesh. These things, therefore, I now write unto you for the love of Christ, beseeching you as a brother, and testifying to you before Christ and the elect angels, that you would both think and teach these things with us, that the peace of the Churches may be preserved and the bond of concord and love continue unbroken among the Priests of God.

Council of Ephesus Wrote:And since the holy Virgin brought forth corporally God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh.

I believe this to be the teaching of the Orthodox Church:
The Blessed Virgin Mary
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm">http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm</a><!-- m -->

what's up with these word-imagery? Mariam, Eemmeh d'Aloho intercedes to the Lord on our behalf while we are showing the outmost disrespect towards Her. I think Aloho will not withhold from you the answer if you ask Him.

But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. (Matt 9:36)

May Aloho show you the right path.

Arkady. Russia.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Thirdwoe - 03-03-2012

Hi Arkady,

None of us here have any disrespect for the Blessed Virgin, Maryam, the most honored and blessed among Women, the Mother of our Lord and Saviour. Your charge is false Brother.

And salvation is not dependent upon ones 100% correct understanding of these matters, as if ones salvation is based and contingent upon ones ability to understand them perfectly.

And just because some might condemn others they don't agree with, does not mean that God condemns them, as if God does what we say He must do.

Shlama,
Chuck


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Arkady - 03-03-2012

Hi, Chuck.

Thirdwoe Wrote:None of us here have any disrespect for the Blessed Virgin, Maryam, the most honored and blessed among Women, the Mother of our Lord and Saviour. Your charge is false Brother.
I'm glad to hear this.

Thirdwoe Wrote:And salvation is not dependent upon ones 100% correct understanding of these matters, as if ones salvation is based and contingent upon ones ability to understand them perfectly.
But sin of heresy separates man from God.

Thirdwoe Wrote:And just because some might condemn others they don't agree with, does not mean that God condemns them, as if God does what we say He must do.

Chuck, you talk about this Council in a manner as if some ordinary meeting took place.

If God lives in them, whoever God condemns, they condemn. This is what being spiritual is all about. Those who have the indwelling of the Spirit (or the entire Holy Trinity) will always agree on all points. Because our God is not God of dissension but of consent. So basicly Nestorius had some other kind of the spirit(s) to disagree with others.

Arkady.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Thirdwoe - 03-03-2012

Quote:But sin of heresy separates man from God.

Arkady,

Neither Bishop Nestorius, nor Bishop Theodore before him, were in any way heretical in their Theology, nor their Christology. They were ardent defenders of the Apostolic Faith, against many heretical groups of their day, including the Arians and the Monophysites to name but a few.

What Nestorius really taught, was upheld at the Council of Chalcedon, which over turned the wrong teaching and judgment of the Council of Ephesus, concerning the two natures of Christ...which Council (Ephesus) was held without the Bishops of the East in attendance, who were on their way to it, but Bishop Cryil pulled a fast one....Also Bishop Cryil started the arguement against Bishop Nestorius, not the other way around...in which he mis-interpreted and mis-represented him, and falsley accused him before the Council.

If you havent, read both sides of this matter...The letters of Bishop Nestorius to Bishop Cryil and Bishop Cryil's to Bishop Nestorius can be read online and are very revealing indeed. Also, Bishop Nestorius' book on the subject can be read as well online...but you may not take the time to look it over. I have...and it is clear that he was no Heretic, and was falsley accused and wrongly condemned. God does not condemn a man for speaking the Truth.

Quote:Chuck, you talk about this Council in a manner as if some ordinary meeting took place.

If God lives in them, whoever God condemns, they condemn. This is what being spiritual is all about. Those who have the indwelling of the Spirit (or the entire Holy Trinity) will always agree on all points. Because our God is not God of dissension but of consent. So basicly Nestorius had some other kind of the spirit(s) to disagree with others.

God can live in them, and they still can make a mistake in judgement,...and there can be two or more people who are both/all indwelt by God's Holy Spirit, which may not agree upon everything all the time. But the Holy Spirit will correct the matter if it is judged wrongly...and in this instance, it was, at the Council of Chalcedon, which the false teaching of Bishop Cryil and the wrong judgment of the Council of Ephesus. Go check it out for yourself, its all online to read.

You may not know this...but Bishop Cryil was soon after condemned as a Heretic by a 2nd Council of Bishops, held 5 days after the 1st Ephesus Council, and the former Council's judgemnt against Bishop Nestorius was annuled, and Bishop Cryil was arrested. He later bribed Emperor Theodosius' courtiers, and sent a mob led by Dalmatius, a hermit, to besiege Emperor Theodosius' palace and presured him to send Nestorius into a forced exile to a Monastery in Egypt.

And as I said, Bishop Cryil's whole argument/teaching on the Two Natures, in which he wronlgy condemned Bishop Nestorius, was overturned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451.

Shlama,
Chuck


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Arkady - 03-03-2012

Chuck, I am afraid you were misinformed. I know the way it happened.

There never assembled another Council at Ephesus. The "council" you're refering to was actually a brawl, a monks vs. bishops boxing match. It had nothing to do with the Grace (but disgrace, maybe).

Thridwoe Wrote:God can live in them, and they still can make a mistake in judgement,...and there can be two or more people who are both/all indwelt by God's Holy Spirit, which may not agree upon everything all the time.
We're talking Councils here.

Thridwoe Wrote:But the Holy Spirit will correct the matter if it is judged wrongly.
Truly He did. By anathemizing the second robber "council" of Ephesus.

Thridwoe Wrote:What Nestorius really taught, was upheld at the Council of Chalcedon
The Saints and Church fathers led by the Holy Ghost have never accepted the teaching of Nestorius neither has the Eastern Orthodox Church that used to stand in the Grace until a century ago.

Thridwoe Wrote:You may not know this...but Bishop Cryil was soon after condemned as a Heretic by a 2nd Council of Bishops
Bishop Cryil is a Canonized saint.

Thridwoe Wrote:What Nestorius really taught, was upheld at the Council of Chalcedon
It was not.

Chuck, listen. When it comes to the Grace, no arguments of a natural man do apply to it. His reasoning is of no use, but he shall follow the narrow path which the Grace has trodden. This is how one shall attain to the Truth Which is Christ and Which is in Christ.

Arkady.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Alan G77 - 03-03-2012

Arkady,

It was the orthodox church who in one point in time affirmed one incarnate nature, then re-evaluated their position at chalcedon and took on the teaching of two natures, which incidentally was the teaching of the church of the east. It is common for you guys to uphold a position i.e. Mar Theodore, and then reverse the decsion that your fathers made in future councils.

If you are glad you are not part of the "movement" of the Church of the East, which is the only church with true claim to apostolic succession (in a historical sense), then i guess we ae at odds with one another. This church has been persecuted by your church, by the RCC, by muslims and pagans, but yet we never persecuted others. Which church has displayed spiritual fruits?

The blessed virgin Mary is held to the highest esteem within our church, but the title that cyril gave her is NOT correct nor is it orthodox, as the term was NEVER used in the first or second century, nor was it ever used within our Church.

Notice your charge against us as being heretical, notice our language in the church of the east catachism "beloved sister chuches" again, who is displaying spiritual fruits?

Explain how a person who is proven to be a briber, become a canonised saint?


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Alan G77 - 03-03-2012

and please do not insult us by claiming the Holy Spirit takes sides in situations such as the politically charged rubbish that the EO found itself in.

Do not forget that all these bishops, including nestorus, were EO and not ACOE. We simply declined to condemn them and their teachings had no bearance upon our Church, which taught two natures in one sonship from its outset.

We as a church adore the EO, this is because Christ reigns in our hearts, you guys on the other hand need to start practicing what you preach, lest you find yourself being condemned by the one with authority to condemn.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Arkady - 03-03-2012

Alan G77 Wrote:It was the orthodox church who in one point in time affirmed one incarnate nature
when was it?

Alan G77 Wrote:and then reverse the decsion that your fathers made in future councils.
provide an example (only not the Creed because it was of the necessity that we've changed it.)

Alan G77 Wrote:the Church of the East, which is the only church with true claim to apostolic succession (in a historical sense)
like "apostlles used to walk here"?

Alan G77 Wrote:This church has been persecuted by your church
when?

Persecutions in themselves mean nothing. You can be a sect and still be persecuted.

Alan G77 Wrote:Which church has displayed spiritual fruits?
and they are ...?

Alan G77 Wrote:The blessed virgin Mary is held to the highest esteem within our church, but the title that cyril gave her is NOT correct nor is it orthodox, as the term was NEVER used in the first or second century, nor was it ever used within our Church.
how can you possibly prove it?

Alan G77 Wrote:Notice your charge against us as being heretical, notice our language in the church of the east catachism "beloved sister churches" again, who is displaying spiritual fruits?
So the language must be the fruit?

Alan G77 Wrote:Explain how a person who is proven to be a briber, become a canonised saint?
How can a Person Who was crucified, laid in the sepulcher and stolen by His disciples by night be alive?

Arkady. Russia.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Arkady - 03-03-2012

Alan G77 Wrote:and please do not insult us by claiming the Holy Spirit takes sides in situations such as the politically charged rubbish that the EO found itself in.
when? The sect we have in Russia nowadays is not a church. I do not know what you're talking about.

Alan G77 Wrote:Do not forget that all these bishops, including nestorus, were EO and not ACOE
They were deposed. This happens.

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. (1 Peter 5:8)

Weren't there any heretical bishops in ACOE?

Alan G77 Wrote:We simply declined to condemn them and their teachings had no bearance upon our Church, which taught two natures in one sonship from its outset.
Don't you profess to call Mariam merely "the mother of Christ"? Nestorius did. Having expressed your position in his teachings how could it have no bearance upon your church? Was it not since then that you have been labeled as nestorians. Has there no one ever followed Nestorius' teaching where ACOE physically resided?

We have a saint in (Seraphim of Sarov, 18th century) Russia who has been approved of the Mother of God Herself for calling Her and calling upon Her in this fashion. Now, has She appeared in the vision to one of your saints and said otherwise?

Alan G77 Wrote:you guys on the other hand need to start practicing what you preach
Is it brotherly love?

Arkady. Russia.


Re: Early Christian view of the Holy Trinity - Paul Younan - 03-03-2012

Shlama Arkady,

Firstly, we do not share your opinion that the Church in Russia is a sect, but she is our sister and in very good relation with her sister in Assyria.

Secondly, we do not involve ourselves with what happened in western church councils and synods. Ephesus is part of your history, not ours.

Thirdly, please do not call us Nestorians again. You may be aware that the Patriarch has explicitly requested that this term not be used. This isn't because we find any fault with the historical position Nestorius took, but because people like you use the term in a disrespectful and derogatory manner.

We are not in need of your sweeping opinions about how entire branches of the Holy Church are in error, in one post you've managed to reduce 99% of the apostolic church to the level of a sect.

We do indeed call her Mother of Christ, and Christ is both God and Man. We happen to think it is a more complete and respectful title than Mother of God. I've explained why. You can explain why you think it's not.

If it is an idea you disagree with then it is perfectly acceptable to criticize the idea, but please show respect to your fellow brothers. I think this is what Alan means by fruit. Love. Remember?

+Shamasha