• For users new and old: the forum rules were streamlined when we transitioned to the new software. Please ensure that you are familiar with them. Continued use of the forum means that you (a) know the rules, and (b) pledge that you'll abide by them. For more information, check out the OrthodoxChristianity.Net Rules section. (There are only 2 threads there - Rules, and Administrative Structure.)

Why is Orthodoxy a declining denomination?

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
But would you not agree that Arian belief in God is more logical to understand and explain? There is no confusion about who God is and who the Son of God is.

Why do you think the terms such as "God the Son", "Eternally begotten", "God is one in essence in 3 persons", "true God from true God", "co-equal and co-eternal", "begotten but not made" are missing from the Bible?
Its missing because the bible alone isn't a blueprint for salvation. Many things were taught by word. And the church was given power to make changes to terminology as it saw fit. Like during a controversy. Things were formulated so there is no confusion.

Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle
 

sestir

bokareis
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
325
Reaction score
12
Points
18
Location
Wist Po Marein / Zachodniopomorsk
Website
weihos.eu
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
independent
Please read a Greek dictionary.
Liddell & Scott include 'first cause' as a meaning of ἀρχή but give no example, so it is probably based on the traditional understanding of Rev 3:14.

Lust-Eynikel-Hauspie note that ἀρχή in the Septuagint is an "often stereotypical rendition of ◇ראשׁ ", where the rhomb is wildcard. The article is a half page long but among the most interesting examples listed is Gen 49:3, i m o.

BDAG lists 7 meanings. (3) 'the first cause, the beginning' gives Rev 3:14 as its only biblical example, which is a bit suspect. Edition 2 noted: "but the meaning beginning='first created' is linguistically possible. Edition 3 changed this to: "but the meaning beginning='first created' is linguistically probable.

Lampe lists 9 meanings, where "D. theol:" includes 'first cause' as possible translation. Lampe's lexicon is concerned with patristics, so the time-span is "the sub-apostolic age" to the Second Council of Nicea (p. vii.).
Under D, there is a. of Trinity (one example), b. of Father (eight examples), and "c. more Freq. of Son", listing a lot of examples.

One example—under c., thus of the Son—is Origen: ``οὐχ ὡς κτίσμα πρῶτον κτίσεως ἀρχή ἐστιν αὐτῆς, ἀλλ' ὡς αἰτία...'' — Or.Apoc.22 (p.30), which perhaps means Scholia 1-27 in Apocalypse, C. J. Diobouniotis, A. Harnack (1911). (I didn't look it up but quote from Lampe.)

αἰτία = cause.
Lampe can be downloaded from Archive.org. Just 132 Mb. :}

On topic, maybe some people feel queasy about the amount of bickering and war that has had disputes over theology as pretext, so they stay in bed on Sunday morning. Just guessing.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
But would you not agree that Arian belief in God is more logical to understand and explain? There is no confusion about who God is and who the Son of God is.

Why do you think the terms such as "God the Son", "Eternally begotten", "God is one in essence in 3 persons", "true God from true God", "co-equal and co-eternal", "begotten but not made" are missing from the Bible?
The problem is, you believe the person proceeds their nature. So , when saying god, you automatically assume its an individual.
I mention this before. That God is one Divine nature. Just like human nature is one.
Yet, many can share natures.
Its a common mistake.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
When someone gets the flu. They say I have the flu, they dont say i have Flu's.
Even though technically they have flu's. Because, the flu is compromised of multiple viruses. Yet, they are all incorporate in the one. Flu!
 

Ainnir

Taxiarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
667
Points
113
Age
38
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Antiochian
When someone gets the flu. They say I have the flu, they dont say i have Flu's.
Even though technically they have flu's. Because, the flu is compromised of multiple viruses. Yet, they are all incorporate in the one. Flu!
This is a biologically unsound argument.
 

Ainnir

Taxiarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
667
Points
113
Age
38
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Antiochian
How so?
I just received a flu shot today. Did I receive one shot or multiple shots?
When you get sick with the flu, you are sick with one strain of influenza. It's possible for you to get sick with more than one strain at a time, but that is not necessarily what happens every time you come down with the flu. It only takes one. When you get a shot, "they" (whoever "they" is), select the handful of strains they feel will be most active/severe that year and create the annual shot to target them. The other strains are not vaccinated against at all.

Further reading from Mr. Google:
 

biro

Protostrator
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
23,765
Reaction score
274
Points
83
Age
48
Website
archiveofourown.org
I’m going to fall off the couch if he makes me type this again:



Matthew 28:19
King James Version



19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
When you get sick with the flu, you are sick with one strain of influenza. It's possible for you to get sick with more than one strain at a time, but that is not necessarily what happens every time you come down with the flu. It only takes one. When you get a shot, "they" (whoever "they" is), select the handful of strains they feel will be most active/severe that year and create the annual shot to target them. The other strains are not vaccinated against at all.

Further reading from Mr. Google:
Youre correct, but this isn't what im arguing.
The way a virus infects is by numerical advantage. The way one gets the flu is millions of viruses attack and gain footing in a host.
When we call a virus a name like flu. We tend to describe it in singular fashion., but whats really happening is plural results.
Tis the same when describing god. God is multiple persons, three in this case.
But, we call him god, singular. Because nobody concentrates on the singular.
Singular polarization leads to nonexistent reality. Because, one would equal zero. Meaning no god. God can't theoretically exist in this sense.
Just like a single virus cant exist without communion with other viruses.
 

Ainnir

Taxiarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
667
Points
113
Age
38
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Antiochian
Youre correct, but this isn't what im arguing.
The way a virus infects is by numerical advantage. The way one gets the flu is millions of viruses attack and gain footing in a host.
When we call a virus a name like flu. We tend to describe it in singular fashion., but whats really happening is plural results.
Tis the same when describing god. God is multiple persons, three in this case.
But, we call him god, singular. Because nobody concentrates on the singular.
Singular polarization leads to nonexistent reality. Because, one would equal zero. Meaning no god. God can't theoretically exist in this sense.
Just like a single virus cant exist without communion with other viruses.
Gotcha. I see what you're saying now. (y)
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
279
Reaction score
89
Points
28
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
OCA
[
Liddell & Scott include 'first cause' as a meaning of ἀρχή but give no example, so it is probably based on the traditional understanding of Rev 3:14.

Lust-Eynikel-Hauspie note that ἀρχή in the Septuagint is an "often stereotypical rendition of ◇ראשׁ ", where the rhomb is wildcard. The article is a half page long but among the most interesting examples listed is Gen 49:3, i m o.

BDAG lists 7 meanings. (3) 'the first cause, the beginning' gives Rev 3:14 as its only biblical example, which is a bit suspect. Edition 2 noted: "but the meaning beginning='first created' is linguistically possible. Edition 3 changed this to: "but the meaning beginning='first created' is linguistically probable.

Lampe lists 9 meanings, where "D. theol:" includes 'first cause' as possible translation. Lampe's lexicon is concerned with patristics, so the time-span is "the sub-apostolic age" to the Second Council of Nicea (p. vii.).
Under D, there is a. of Trinity (one example), b. of Father (eight examples), and "c. more Freq. of Son", listing a lot of examples.

One example—under c., thus of the Son—is Origen: ``οὐχ ὡς κτίσμα πρῶτον κτίσεως ἀρχή ἐστιν αὐτῆς, ἀλλ' ὡς αἰτία...'' — Or.Apoc.22 (p.30), which perhaps means Scholia 1-27 in Apocalypse, C. J. Diobouniotis, A. Harnack (1911). (I didn't look it up but quote from Lampe.)

αἰτία = cause.
Lampe can be downloaded from Archive.org. Just 132 Mb. :}

On topic, maybe some people feel queasy about the amount of bickering and war that has had disputes over theology as pretext, so they stay in bed on Sunday morning. Just guessing.
ἐγὼ τὸ Ἄλφα καὶ τὸ Ὦ, ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος, ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τὸ τέλος.

"I am the Beginning and the End." It's an ontological and not sequential statement, whether or not it should be directly translated as first cause or origin.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
106
Points
63
Age
57
Location
USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Antioch
Picking apart Orthodox understanding outside it’s traditional framework leads to heresy. One can say that there is no specific scripture that states abortion is murder but is testified as such in the Didache. As I have said before Enoch 48 testifies to the Trinity. Understandings like these are part of holy tradition which formed as the canon of the Bible formed within the framework of holy tradition. Plus as another poster has rightly & repeatedly quoted Matthew 28:19. Another poster provided evidence Eusebius recanted of Arianism. Arianism is a lie.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
True, but that is how natures operate and why science and medicine have adopted the framework.
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Its missing because the bible alone isn't a blueprint for salvation. Many things were taught by word. And the church was given power to make changes to terminology as it saw fit. Like during a controversy. Things were formulated so there is no confusion.

Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle
How about what Jesus said in Mark 7:8: ' For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men— the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.” ? Jesus condemning man-made traditions of Pharisees because they place them above the God's Commandments, why would Jesus be ok with the church man-made traditions?
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
The church at st. Constantine's time had formulated the baptismal rites to include the trinity. It was in the canons during his life. So the bishop would have had to use the correct terminology during baptism.
But the question remains, why Jesus's apostles never baptised in the name of 3 at all but only in Jesus's name?
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
The problem is, you believe the person proceeds their nature. So , when saying god, you automatically assume its an individual.
I mention this before. That God is one Divine nature. Just like human nature is one.
Yet, many can share natures.
Its a common mistake.
This is because God of the Bible speaks in a singular personal pronoun and the Bible refers to God as a singular He, not an "It" as in essence...I have already shown you that God speaks as a singular person.

When I asked you a question " And which person of the Trinity ‘causes His sun to rise?’ Which person of the Trinity ‘gives rain on the earth and sends water on the field’? You had answered that all 3 Persons doing the actions, but I had shown you that it was not the case, it was actually the Heavenly Father who was doing those and showed you the verses to prove my point, so your presumption about the God speaking/doing things as Triune deity is wrong then...
 
Last edited:

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
I’m going to fall off the couch if he makes me type this again:



Matthew 28:19
King James Version



19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
This is because I have already answered this, you often come up with this one verse in particular, but since I have answered this before I chose not to answer it again. Thanks
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Picking apart Orthodox understanding outside it’s traditional framework leads to heresy. One can say that there is no specific scripture that states abortion is murder but is testified as such in the Didache. As I have said before Enoch 48 testifies to the Trinity. Understandings like these are part of holy tradition which formed as the canon of the Bible formed within the framework of holy tradition. Plus as another poster has rightly & repeatedly quoted Matthew 28:19. Another poster provided evidence Eusebius recanted of Arianism. Arianism is a lie.
You may think what you wish, Arianism is logical and fits with the Biblical reading of the singular God being a He, not an "IT" or a "what" (the essence) or they (the 3 persons). God is a HE- singular person.

20 Now, Yahweh our God, deliver us from his hand, so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that You, Yahweh, are the only God.”-Isaiah 37:19 and then Jesus confirms Isaiah 37:20 in John 17:3:

“3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus the Messiah whom You have sent.”(This verse clearly states that there is only ONE true God. The key word is ONLY which excludes anyone else to be God).

" yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. "- 1 Corinthians 8:6

"One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. "- Ephesians 4:6

" Do we not all have one Father? Did not one God create us? Why do we profane the covenant of our ancestors by being unfaithful to one another? "- Malachi 2:10 .

Reading the above, I wonder how one can see a Triune deity in those verses?
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Anyway, let's leave it at that.
Thanks for discussing this, it's been very informative.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
This is because God of the Bible speaks in a singular personal pronoun and the Bible refers to God as a singular He, not an "It" as in essence...I have already shown you that God speaks as a singular person.

When I asked you a question " And which person of the Trinity ‘causes His sun to rise?’ Which person of the Trinity ‘gives rain on the earth and sends water on the field’? You had answered that all 3 Persons doing the actions, but I had shown you that it was not the case, it was actually the Heavenly Father who was doing those and showed you the verses to prove my point, so your presumption about the God speaking/doing things as Triune deity is wrong then...
Its not wrong because the divine nature has one will. This is also in the church canons and was formulated at the 3rd, 5th and 6th councils. If you care to read them.
 

Ainnir

Taxiarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
667
Points
113
Age
38
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Antiochian
This whole thread has been a twisted campaign to trap andrewlya on OC.net for as long as possible.
 

Luke

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
7,601
Reaction score
218
Points
63
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Metropolis of San Francisco

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Its not wrong because the divine nature has one will. This is also in the church canons and was formulated at the 3rd, 5th and 6th councils. If you care to read them.
Like I've pointed out before your presumption that God speaks as three persons was incorrect as I've shown.So, what other presumptions about the One God you may have that are wrong?

How can the divine essence has a will if it's not a person?
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
So he has no answer.

He writes as if Scripture only refers to God as the Father, never the Son or the Holy Spirit.

He reads what he wants and ignores the rest.

😲
I've given my answer to your favorite verse that keep bringing up before. If you are not bothered to read or remember my answer, that is for you to deal with.
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
This whole thread has been a twisted campaign to trap andrewlya on OC.net for as long as possible.
I get a bit of a sarcasm but I still like you as a Moderator. Thanks for being so understanding and co-operative :)
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
Like I've pointed out before your presumption that God speaks as three persons was incorrect as I've shown.So, what other presumptions about the One God you may have that are wrong?

How can the divine essence has a will if it's not a person?
Who said that god isn't a person? God is a monarchy. You have the father that wills and the son and HS are always in agreement.
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Who said that god isn't a person? God is a monarchy. You have the father that wills and the son and HS are always in agreement.
TriuneGod is/are PERSONS and TriuneGOD is Essence at the same time, so how can the Trinitarian God be a PERSON?
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Who said that god isn't a person? God is a monarchy. You have the father that wills and the son and HS are always in agreement.
The Bible says Jesus Christ was in agony before his suffering. We sense the intense conflict in Jesus' prayer, as his sweat contained great droplets of blood (Luke 22:44). He asked his Father to remove the cup of suffering. Then he surrendered, "Not my will, but Yours be done."How can God have two wills?

I know you will say Jesus was speaking as a human, but Jesus still had one mind, hence would have had one will...one mind=one will, or is it not the case in your belief?

"Not my will, but Yours be done."
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
279
Reaction score
89
Points
28
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
OCA
The Bible says Jesus Christ was in agony before his suffering. We sense the intense conflict in Jesus' prayer, as his sweat contained great droplets of blood (Luke 22:44). He asked his Father to remove the cup of suffering. Then he surrendered, "Not my will, but Yours be done."How can God have two wills?

I know you will say Jesus was speaking as a human, but Jesus still had one mind, hence would have had one will...one mind=one will, or is it not the case in your belief?

"Not my will, but Yours be done."
Mind and will is a characteristic of nature. Jesus has two natures, and therefore two minds and wills. Jesus only having one mind is the heresy of apollinarianism. According to you, Jesus existed as YHWH'S plan of salvation prior to His incarnation, so by your own standard Christ had two minds and wills (one as the plan of salvation and the other a sinless human will which nevertheless did not wish to suffer)
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Mind and will is a characteristic of nature. Jesus has two natures, and therefore two minds and wills. Jesus only having one mind is the heresy of apollinarianism. According to you, Jesus existed as YHWH'S plan of salvation prior to His incarnation, so by your own standard Christ had two minds and wills (one as the plan of salvation and the other a sinless human will which nevertheless did not wish to suffer)
How can one person have two minds and two wills?Assuming that Jesus had two minds and two wills, would imply Jesus being ONLY ONE person had two contradicting wills- one was willing (the divine) vs the other that was not (the human)...

I don't believe Jesus being one person had two minds and two wills. It's not logical or rational, and I don't see this written in the Bible that Jesus had two minds and two wills or even two natures for that matter...
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
279
Reaction score
89
Points
28
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
OCA
How can one person have two minds and two wills?Assuming that Jesus had two minds and two wills, would imply Jesus being ONLY ONE person had two contradicting wills- one was willing (the divine) vs the other that was not (the human)...
His human will subjected itself completely to the Divine will.

I don't believe Jesus being one person had two minds and two wills. It's not logical or rational, and I don't see this written in the Bible that Jesus had two minds and two wills or even two natures for that matter...
It's completely logical and rational. Jesus is the preexisting Logos of God and in total conformity to the Divine will. When Jesus became incarnate He assumed human nature. Will comes from nature. He has a nature with a divine will, and a nature will a human will. The divine will was for Him to be crucified. His human will did not wish to suffer but submitted to the Father.

Again by your own standards He has two natures. One is the "intelligent aspect of YHWH". The other is His human nature. They aren't the same.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
106
Points
63
Age
57
Location
USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Antioch
Whatever the JW heresy ( or Arian or whatever brand of heresy to choose) being posted here denies that the Lord Jesus Christ is God. Such heresy implicitly ( if not explicitly) denies the incarnation of the Word of God Who is God & that it was the same all along with God Who created all ( John 1:1-5). In Isaiah 42 God announced His Servant Who is this same Word Who is Creator ( Isaiah 42:5) this same Lord “who shall go forth as a mighty man” ( Isaiah 42:13, KJV). This is the creator St. Paul speaks of in Colossians 1:15-18. “I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images” ( Isaiah 42:8, KJV). To reduce the Lord Jesus Christ to anything less than who He is: God, the Son of God the Father is to render a graven image of Him on a base, inferior intellectual level as opposed to giving worship to Him via an icon. The Lord Jesus Christ testifies to Himself as Son of God not David in Matthew 22:41-45 in that the name of Lord for Father & Son is the same, capitalized “Lord” whereas in Psalm 110:1 it was only understood as “the Lord said to my lord” is now “the Lord said to my Lord” the Lord is God: God the Father, God the Son.

“Jesus Christ is the same…for ever” ( Hebrews 13:8,KJV). “Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings” ( Hebrews 13:9,KJV).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
279
Reaction score
89
Points
28
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
OCA
Hebrews 1:8
But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
TriuneGod is/are PERSONS and TriuneGOD is Essence at the same time, so how can the Trinitarian God be a PERSON?
Essence is what god is. Divine nature. Just as human is what you are.
Dont confuse nature and person. Person is who one is.
 

Tzimis

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
184
Points
63
Location
wilderness
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EP
The Bible says Jesus Christ was in agony before his suffering. We sense the intense conflict in Jesus' prayer, as his sweat contained great droplets of blood (Luke 22:44). He asked his Father to remove the cup of suffering. Then he surrendered, "Not my will, but Yours be done."How can God have two wills?

I know you will say Jesus was speaking as a human, but Jesus still had one mind, hence would have had one will...one mind=one will, or is it not the case in your belief?

"Not my will, but Yours be done."
You are touching on a lot of separate subjects. Just do a OC. Net search on the two wills of Christ.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Points
1
Location
Encinitas, CA
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Metropolis of San Francisco
Do you have a verse that says one must believe in Trinity to be saved?
When people say that you sound protestant, this is exactly the type of statement that they are referring to.

It neglects the entire ancient tradition of the church, without which there would be no Holy Scripture. For the blood of the Orthodox martyrs brought it to everyone.

Please refer to the Nicene Creed on what the ancients found to be fundamentally Christian, for which many gave their lives.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Points
1
Location
Encinitas, CA
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Metropolis of San Francisco
Trinity is a fundamental and very attractive element of Orthodoxy. So, the discussion of the Trinity is very relevant to this thread.
 

andrewlya

Archon
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Website
yrm.org
Faith
Unitarian Messianic
Jurisdiction
Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
His human will subjected itself completely to the Divine will.


It's completely logical and rational. Jesus is the preexisting Logos of God and in total conformity to the Divine will. When Jesus became incarnate He assumed human nature. Will comes from nature. He has a nature with a divine will, and a nature will a human will. The divine will was for Him to be crucified. His human will did not wish to suffer but submitted to the Father.

Again by your own standards He has two natures. One is the "intelligent aspect of YHWH". The other is His human nature. They aren't the same.
If Jesus had two wills, then why was he saying not my will, but Your will i.e. Father's will? Why did he not mention his own divine will but the one of the Heavnely Father's? I would have expected to find something in the lines of "but not my fleshly will, but let my divine will be done"

By my own standards...let me make my standards clear. I believe Jesus was a man with one nature like Paul said in 1 Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the Man Christ Jesus, " and Peter said in Acts 4:10 "let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this Man stands here before you whole. "

So, do you believe that Jesus is now fully God again with only one nature?
 
Top