Qnoma?...definition

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi George,

So in the Aramaic psyche I can or "must" go:

1. From abstract human nature to/through "individuated" human Qnoma to concrete human Person, and

Yes.

2. From abstract divine nature to/through "individuated" divine Qnoma to concrete divine Person.

No. There is no such thing as a Divine Person. We do not speak of God as a "person", because a "person" means that you are physical.

We speak of the subject of the Incarnation, Meshikha, as a "person" because he had both a human nature(abstract)-qnoma(concrete) as well as a Divine nature(abstract)-qnoma(concrete) in one "person" and was born of a woman - he materialized here on earth among us and became a person like us.

But that does not mean that God is a "person" - God is three Qnome and not a "Person."

In the person of Meshikha, one Divine Qnoma (out f three) was joined together with one human qnoma (out of billions) to form a single "person", who was the subject of the Incarnation and the object of our worship.

The Father never became a Parsopa, neither did the Holy Spirit. These two Qnome remained distinct from the Qnoma of the Son which took for itself a body from us as a temple (Yukhanan 1:1), and thus became a "person."

When we speak of the Godhead, we speak of spiritual things and not physical things.

Appreciate your confirmation, and thereafter most probably I would raise a question.

No problem, raise away!