Ancient Christian Witness

Ok, I was reading another blog today, I think a calvinist one, I'm really not sure, but I assumed it was because of it's bias towards Reformed sources, and ideas.

But anyway, he quoted two paragraphs from a book called "His Broken Body: Understanding and Healing the Schism Between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches by Laurent Cleenewerck

As seen from his blog:
"Paul Owen is correct when he notes that the Western tradition tends to the conclusion that each Person is autotheos, but it should be clear that this has never been the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. This heresy of tri-theism was only proclaimed by John Calvin who denounced the eternal generation of the Son as “an absurd fiction”. (Page 327)

and

"For whatever reason, what we call the Western tradition has tended to theologize on the opposite extreme of Arianism. As we have mentioned, the early tendencies of the Roman Church were on the Modalistic side, and it is in Reformed / Protestant Western Christianity that we find such aberrations as ‘Oneness’ theology and the triple autotheos of John Calvin. (Page 341.)"



I recall saying something similar to Steve and them over at Triablog some years ago. But I never heard of Laurent Cleenewerck before, and now I'm interested in knowing more about him, and his works.








ICXC NIKA

Ft. Thomas Hopko, in his podcast Speaking the Truth in Love.


Talks about the greek terms of "Person, Nature, and Action".

As seen from the website:

"As an epilogue to his series on the language of God, Fr. Tom explains these technical, theological, terms used by the Church."

The MP3:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-24_pc.mp3










JNORM888

In the podcast "Speaking the Truth in Love" Ft. Thomas Hopko talks about how we speak about God.



Part 1:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-10_pc.mp3


Part 2:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-14_pc.mp3


Part 3:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-17_pc.mp3


Part 4:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-21_pc.mp3



JNORM888

In the podcast Speaking the truth in Love Ft. Thomas Hopko explains the two ways the Holy Trinity are depicted in icons.

He also talks about what happened latter in time in how it was westernized, and what the Orthodox did in responce. It's a bit complex, historically, the Father and Holy Spirit can not be depicted in icons because they never became "incarnate". So only the "Son" is dipicted, but according to this podcast. It seems a bit more complex than that.



The mp3:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-06_pc.mp3






JNORM888

As seen from the website "Speaking the Truth in Love"


"Fr. Thomas examines the Holy Trinity, which leads to the answer to Christ's question, "Who do you say I am?"


The mp3:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-07-03_pc.mp3






Jnorm888

This is takin from the podcast "speaking the Truth in Love" by Ft. Thomas Hopko. In this he talks about the "Holy Spirit". In eastern christianity, the next day after the day of Pentecost is the the Feast of the Holy Spirit.

As seen from the website:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko/the_sunday_of_all_the_saints

""The day after Pentecost is the Feast of the Holy Spirit in the Orthodox Church and Fr. Thomas uses it to examine more closely the "Sprit who proceeds from the Father.""

And this is the podcast:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/hopko/stt_2008-06-16_pc.mp3



JNORM888

Quote:
Originally Posted by the answer

IS YHWH God the father or the
trinity?


its cookies

It depends on the context. If we are talking about Essence then the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit would be called YHWH.

If we are talking about Personas then we would call the Father God, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Spirit.

(As seen from both scripture as well as from some of the writings of the Early Christians)




So it all depends on the context.




The Eastern Christian understanding of things is a bit different from the Western Protestant one. I can't speak for Rome for I don't have a clue what she believes (in modern times) about this issue.

I ussually know what she believes, but I must admit, in regards to this issue I am unsure.


But as far as the East goes.....I would say:

1.) The Father is the only unbegotten YHWH

2.) The Son is the Only begotten YHWH

3.) The Spirit is YHWH who proceeds from the only unbegotten YHWH


The Christian East believes that only the Father has "asiety". To us, the idea of each person having asiety means tri-theism or three eternal separate gods. To us, "Asiety" is linked to the ideas of "independance", "division", "autonomy".

Now with this said.....only some in the west believe that each person has asiety. Most in the west don't believe that.

The Eastern mind may think differently than the western mind, when it comes to unity. In the east, Union means that we have to be linked together. If the Son & Holy Spirit are always linked to the Father then it's easy to understand God being one and undivided. But I don't know what Rome believes so the West might believe just like the East in regards to "being linked".....so I'm trying not to generalize the west....for it may have more than one view. I know that it sometimes look as if it has modalistic/Sebellian tendencies, but I need to find out more about the modern western system/systems.

so with that said:

The Son is YHWH because He is eternally begotten from the Unbegotten YHWH. Before creation we view it as an Internal begetting within the bosom of the Unbegotten YHWH.

When the Son was sent by the Father to create all things, then we see it as an External begetting from the Father.

And this is why it is said that the Father created all things through the Son.


And the reason why the East believes in One God is because both the Son and Holy Spirit are literally(in a spiritual sense, because God is Spirit) undivided from the Father.

They are literaly(in a spiritual sense, because God is Spirit) connected to Him. And we see it as being that way in all eternity. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit always existed because the Son was always begotten from the Father, and the Holy Spirit was always proceeding from the Father.


That is how the East views it. So it all depends on the context



Also, I would like to add....


Since every doctrine is related to another....or is influenced by another doctrine. I would like to talk about Panentheism, and some of the Attributes of God in regards to the Trinity.


When the Father sent the Son to create all things visible and invisible (creation), all things exist within the Son. And since the Son is of the Father's Being, one could say that "all things" exist within the Father. And since the Holy Spirit is also of the Father's Being, one could say that "all things" exist within the Holy Spirit.

And this is how we understand Panentheism. Everything that exist......exists in God's Presence.


And since both the Son and Holy Spirit share the Father's Being, it is ok to call them both YHWH.



And in regards to the Attributes of God, one can see a small glimpse of how it is possible for God to know all things, be everywhere, and power everything.........when everything exist in His Presence/Being.


This is why I look at the differences in one's walk with God as a matter of "degree". Everything to me is pretty much looked at that way.

The deeper one goes in the Ocean, the greater the water pressure.....likewise, the deeper one's walk is with God, the greater His Presence pressure is. And if His Presence is greater in you than so is His power, intimate knowledge, and Love.....as well as any other Attributes that I missed.


My views of free will, Predestination, God's Providence, and almost everything else I believe in......can be derived from God's Omni-Presence......OMNI-BEING

If everything exist in God's Presence, then God ordains everything. However, the way I understand that is different from both King Neb & SEAL. (two friends who are Strong Monergistic high Calvinists)


Since I am a pure Synergist, I believe certain parts of our make up....as Moral Agents allow us to constantly wrestle with God. While Other parts of our make up is automatic.....and thus, we have no control over those parts...They are irresistible, but some parts of our make up allows us to ressist.

And it is this part of our make up which allows us to wrestle with our Creator from our conception in the womb to the grave in our caskets.






JNORM888

"This is a responce to a new christian who bought a book about the Trinity. He didn't know that the author was Reformed. So he asked what was Reformed Theology and if it was ok to read books about the Trinity from Reformed Protestants. He also wanted to know if the Reformed view was opposed to the Orthodox view"






Some segments of Reformed theology oppose the Eastern Orthodox understanding of the Trinity.

There is an argument right now in the Reformed World about "Aseity". One side believes that each person of the Trinity has "Aseity".

This is real close to Tri-Theism or Three gods instead of One God.

I may be wrong but I think the ORthodox view is that the Father Alone has Aseity because the Son is eternaly begotten from the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.


Those in the Reformed camp that advocate this view reject the Nicene Creed in favor of the Athanisian Creed. They don't like the idea of the Son being derived from the Father.

The Reformed View in general...in all it's forms is anti-subordinationist.

The formers of the Nicene Council were closer to what I would call "Subordinate Triniterians". The Reformed camp rejects that idea. And this is why in general they tend to be modalistic.....except for that one group.


There are other differences as well. Like the Filique clause and the modalistic tendencies of the West. I know this sounds wierd since I just mentioned a segment of the Reformed that believe that each Person of the Trinity has "Aseity". But in General the west is bent in the direction of modalism.


But to give a brief discription of Reformed theology I would say:


Reformed Theology starts with Zwingly and culminates with John Calvin. It is the second wave of the Protestant Reformation that is mostly based on Calvins institutes of the Christian religion, his commentaries, the "three forms of unity" of the Dutch Reformed Church and the Westminister Confession of Faith of Prespyterian Churches. I may be wrong but I think John Calvin rewrote or edited the Anglican 39 articles of Faith.

The essentual core of Reformed Theology are

Total inability

Unconditional election

Limited Atonement

Irresistible Grace

Perseverence of the Saints

Infant Baptism

The 5 Solas (Grace alone, Faith Alone, Scripture Alone, Christ ALone, to God the Glory Alone)

Communion as symbolic (Zwingly camp)

Communion as spiritual (John Calvin's compromise to the Zwinglians....This is what alot of the Reformed believe)

Most of the Reformed reject Baptismal regeneration. There is a reformed group called "federal vision" and another one called "new perspective on Paul" that may lean toward Baptismal regeneration but in general they are against it.

They believe in two sacraments........and even in that ....how they understand grace in regards to these sacraments are different than how we understand it.

and

Church ruled by elders (priests and deacons only)







The Reformed Faith has been influenced by the hard deterministic teachings of Augustine(in his later years)

The Renaissance, and the Enlightenment................ not to mention other movements since then.




Over all it would be best to read Orthodox sources about the Trinity first, so that you will be well grounded in the original understanding of the Doctrine. After that it would be easier to discern the differences and similarities in the later western mutations.




JNORM888