Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

49 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 4/5/2009 5:21 PM (GMT -6)

"The mystery of Christ: life in death" by John Behr - 2006

I'M READING THE FIRST CHAPTER -- "Through the Cross"

http://books.google.com/books?id=MiRd9CqySfcC&pg=PA98&lpg=PA98&dq=behr+mystery+in+christ&source=bl&ots=Q-rVLH0fl8&sig=NqJvAcZCXq6ZFXTbqh39VAFV7l8&hl=en&ei=ty3ZSZqYM4_MM_Ph5YcP&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#PPA21,M1

(o)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 7:12 AM (GMT -6)

I've gotta get this book. Read the back.

He (Behr) further explains how Christ is born in those who are born again in the Church, their "Virgin Mother," so that they become truly human, after the stature of Christ, and continue the incarnation of the Word by glorifying God in their bodies.

This whole "continuing the Incarnation" idea is in Kallistos Ware's stuff too...

Just as the Spirit sends the Son at the Annunciation, the Baptism, and the Transfiguration, and just as the Son in his turn sends the Spirit at Pentecost, so after Pentecost it is the Spirit's task to bear witness to Christ, rendering the risen Lord ever present among us. If the aim of the Incarnation is the sending of the Spirit at Pentecost, [then] the aim of Pentecost is the continuing of Christ's Incarnation within the life of the Church. This is precisely what the Spirit does at the epiclesis in the Eucharistic consecration; and this consecratory epiclesis serves as a model and paradigm for what is happening throughout our whole life in Christ.

I think this has something to do with the epiclesis and orans, panagia, and theotokos realities.

Human "souls" being the birthplace of the Eternal Son as the Father "births" the Son in the human being by the overshadowing power of the Holy Spirit. The Son is eternally born of the Father in the Spirit's Power. When the human soul is totally open to God's Word by God's Eternal Grace via human faith (which was ALL Mary was), a human person can be a God-bearer, being a temporal "nexus" for this eternal "bearing" activity in the Trinity. Humanity is DESIGNED with this potential, which can only be actualized by God's Holy Spirit and Mary demonstrates this. (Hail, Mary!)

Maybe we should all constantly be "giving birth" to Christ's Presence every moment through our bodies being "living sacrifices" or "living Eucharists", ACTUALLY being filled with the very Life, Love, and Power of Christ's Spirit. Christ's Presense via the Holy Spirit not just living in our souls but also enlivening our mortal bodies. I'm thinkin' so.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

"God in Christ by His Spirit empowers, enables, energizes and enacts all Christian behavior and ministry as the dynamic expression of the life of Jesus Christ. Christianity is Christ. Christian living is the life and character of Jesus Christ lived out through the Christian." -James Fowler

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/6/2009 7:59:14 AM (GMT-5)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 7:17 AM (GMT -6)

Eckhart had this...from wiki...

For God is ever ready to work in the soul, provided he is not hindered and the soul is susceptible to his influence. The inner separation from everything casual, sensual, earthly and the yielding to the work of God in the heart, that is the seclusion or tranquility of which Eckhart speaks again and again. For him this is the basis of all piety. (OL's note: Think about the reaped fruit of HESYCHASM, EPICLESIS/EUCHARIST and JESUS PRAYER) But what is it that God accomplishes in the soul? The birth of the Son. As the soul is an image of the Deity, if it is to fulfill its destiny, then that process by which the deity develops into the three persons must take place in it. In the soul, the Father procreates the Son. This takes place during the life of the soul in time; and, too, not merely at a particular moment, but rather continuously and repeatedly. This is not merely a copy or analogon of that inner divine process, but is in truth that very process itself, by which it becomes, through grace, what the Son of God is by nature. From this view of Eckhart's follow a number of the most striking statements in which the soul is made to share in the attributes and works of God, including the creation. However, according to Eckhart, a complete fusion of the soul with the Deity never takes place. (Ontological distinctions maintained)

Kallistos Ware confirmed his idea.

"As Meister Eckhart teaches, "He who abides always in a present now, in him does God (the Father) beget his Son without ceasing."

Continuing Incarnation of Christ's Presence. Hayell, yeah.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/6/2009 7:26:18 AM (GMT-5)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 7:32 AM (GMT -6)

Hmmmm...a thought...

American evangelical memorialism just can't participate in this reality...it seems to me. Maybe I'll say it this way. I USED to be a Baptistic memorialist so I know what I was thinking about Communion before I really learned about epiklesis and the Divine Liturgy. I grew up in my Granddaddy's Baptist Church that we did the Lord's Supper to "Do this in Rememberance of Me" (this was always on the Communion table in church). I had NO IDEA about epicletic reality. In other words, I had no idea that Christ's VERY LIFE could be communicated to me through the Grace of the Lord's Supper. It wasn't taught to us. There's no way I could have known that in my church context. Not me or any of those good people in that church. The fact of the matter is this: to the extent that we DIDN'T participate in the epicletic possibility because of our beliefs, the worse off we actually were...but didn't know it.

At this point, for me, the idea of Christ's Real Presence in the Table gives me a a more wonderous view of EASTER. Christ is Risen and Lives on eternality...and as I "take him in", I know that I shall never die.* You just don't get that with memorialism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zwinglian Reformed

Main article: Memorialism
Some Protestant groups regard the Eucharist (also called the Lord's Supper or the Lord's Table) as a symbolic meal, a memorial of the Last Supper and the Passion in which nothing miraculous occurs. This view is known as the Zwinglian view, after Huldrych Zwingli, a Church leader in Zurich, Switzerland during the Reformation. It is commonly associated with the United Church of Christ, Baptists, the Disciples of Christ and the Mennonites. As with the Reformed view, elements left over from the service may be discarded without any formal ceremony, or if feasible may be retained for use in future services.

Some of the Reformed hold that Calvin actually held this view, and not the "spiritual feeding" idea more commonly attributed to him; or that the two views are really the same.

The successor of Zwingli in Zurich, Heinrich Bullinger, came to an agreement theologically with John Calvin. The Consensus Tigurinus lays out an explanation of the doctrine of the Sacraments in general, and specifically, that of Holy Communion, as the view embraced by John Calvin and leaders of the Church of Zurich who followed Zwingli. It demonstrates that at least the successors of Zwingli held to the real spiritual presence view most commonly attributed to Calvin and Reformed Protestantism.

Some Christian denominations that hold this view include the United Church of Christ, the Baptist Church, the Disciples of Christ, and the Mennonites. The Plymouth Brethren hold the Lord's Supper, or the Breaking of Bread, instituted in the upper room on Christ's betrayal night, to be the weekly remembrance feast enjoyed on all true Christians. They celebrate the supper in utmost simplicity. Among "closed" Brethren assemblies usually any one of the brothers gives thanks for the loaf and the cup. In conservative "open" Brethren assemblies usually two different brothers give thanks, one for the loaf and the other for the cup. In liberal "open" Brethren assemblies (or churches/community chapels, etc.) sisters also participate with audible prayer.

The "Real Spiritual Presence" position makes more sense to me for Protestants who want to do the Evangelical thing...I'm on that straight up "objective reality" tip myself. I wonder can I move Greg closer to this position. I figure he's memorialist right now. Hmmm...

"Real Spiritual presence", also called "pneumatic presence", holds that not only the Spirit of Christ, but also the true body and blood of Jesus Christ (hence "real"), are received by the sovereign, mysterious, and miraculous power of the Holy Spirit (hence "spiritual"), but only by those partakers who have faith. This view approaches the "pious silence" view in its unwillingness to specify how the Holy Spirit makes Christ present, but positively excludes not just symbolism but also trans- and con-substantiation. It is also known as the "mystical presence" view, and is held by most Reformed Christians, such as Presbyterians, as well as some Methodists and some Anglicans, particularly Low Church Reformed Anglicans. See Westminster Confession of Faith, ch. 29. This understanding is often called "receptionism". Some argue that this view can be seen as being suggested — though not by any means clearly — by the "invocation" of the Anglican Rite as found in the American Book of Common Prayer, 1928 and earlier and in Rite I of the American BCP of 1979 as well as in other Anglican formularies:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us, and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and sanctify, with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine; that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Savior Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood.

_____________________________________________________________________

*Christ himself was treated as “the New Man” and the last Adam. The divine plan of salvation was consummated, the kingdom of God inaugurated through Christ, but the ultimate things were yet to come in fullness and glory. The king had come, but the kingdom was still to come. The promise of the kingdom was granted to the church by the Holy Spirit. The church has lived since then in two dimensions: in sight of ongoing secular history and world events in the time of decay and oblivion, but also in the time of the heavenly kingdom inaugurated by the risen savior (in which the church has lived epicletically in the expectation of the kingdom.)

The coming of Christ and the resurrection changed completely the human situation, for in fallen existence, the time form of the world is characterized by law (nomos); this implies that humans were involved in an irreversible chain of decay and corruption, which led them to mortality with no hope of undoing the things they had done. Everything that had been done became ontologically necessary, so that there was no way to overcome this necessity, which is indicated by the word “law”. The coming of Christ and the resurrection relieved us from this law; we are still living in the world or “fallen” temporal order, but we are relieved from the necessity of the law; that is, we have a chance of renewal and of entering the kingdom [of God], cleansing ourselves through constant participation in the resurrection of the Lord.

Alexei V. Nesteruk, Light from the East: Theology, Science, and the Eastern Orthodox Tradition, p.246

Easter's almost here... biggrin

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/6/2009 7:56:41 AM (GMT-5)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 11:15 AM (GMT -6)

Well, we’ve been around this one too. Dang.

I would never say we “continue THE incarnation.” To begin with it’s not a biblical expression, so we’re under no compulsion to express ourselves in this way. And Hebrews says it: “He appeared once….” Not twice, not a thousand, not several million, not as many as there are perfected saints. Once. And (anticipating the response) to pretend that there’s still just one incarnation because we are just an extension (continuation, nor repetition) of the one incarnation is as objectionable. Whatever we are, we are not incarnations of the Person of the Son, not even a continuation of THAT incarnation, not if we are personally distinct from the Son. It’s just that simple. You can’t instantiate a continuation of the incarnation of one divine person in two natures (that’s the incarnation) if you’re not one divine person in two natures. And you’re not one divine person in two natures, nor will you ever be.

I didn’t think there could be a phrase more objectionable on account of being so open to misunderstanding and abuse than theotokos, but this might be it. I can agree that there’s a correct but very guarded and qualified sense in which Mary is the God-bearer. I can think of no sense in which the persons we become “continue THE incarnation.”

We can replicate and reflect the divine life in us, certainly. And we do this in our embodied selves. So we incarnate the life of God in the manner of our interpersonal living and loving as non-divine persons. But the persons we become are not the person of the Son, so we’re not continuation of the incarnation of THAT persons as person. And all it takes to falsify the claim that we are a continuation of the incarnation of the person of the Son is for us to be personally distinct from the Person of the Son. The words “the Incarnation” are reserved for the embodiment of that one divine person, not the manner in which we are personalized (become non-divine persons by relating in love to the Son) by the indwelling Spirit.

D: However, according to Eckhart, a complete fusion of the soul with the Deity never takes place. (Ontological distinctions maintained).

Tom: Heh. Like Maximus too, eh? Moore baby. Moore.

D: American evangelical memorialism just can't participate in this reality...it seems to me. Maybe I'll say it this way. I USED to be a Baptistic memorialist so I know what I was thinking about Communion before I really learned about epiklesis and the Divine Liturgy. I grew up in my Granddaddy's Baptist Church that we did the Lord's Supper to "Do this in Rememberance of Me" (this was always on the Communion table in church). I had NO IDEA about epicletic reality. In other words, I had no idea that Christ's VERY LIFE could be communicated to me through the Grace of the Lord's Supper.

Tom: You’re kiddin’ right? As a memorialist I have no access to the very life of Christ in participating in Communion? What are you smokin’? Ha. I absolutely believe the very life and presence of Jesus is accessible to me (yes, to my mortal body) in the celebration by faith of the Table. I just don’t NEED the “elements” to become anything other than bread and wine so that they (the elements) mediate the life of Christ. The real presence of Christ is mediated directly to the faithful who by means of contemplating the Cross are brought into an experience of the risen Lord.

Dude, why aren’t you EO? I mean, how do you celebrate the Lord’s table on what you feel is this unique level at WHC? No priest. No shared community to embrace the table in like manner, etc. Why haven’t you moved on to convert? I don’t get it. Because God has you at WHC? Why would God require you to severe yourself from the true Church, the true table, the true and very life of Christ? To be a kind of missionary for the EO among Evangelicals? What? I’m not hating, Bro, I’m seriously asking. I mean, would any EO priest say the very life of Christ that’s available to us in the elements is available to you in the elements as blessed and sanctified in an Evangelical church? I’m thinking not. So what good does your agreeing with the EO on this point if by attending a non-EO church you’re as cut off from the very life of Christ as I am as a memorialist? OR do you (conveniently) disagree with the EO that this presence of Christ available in the elements is only available in the elements DUELY blessed in EO fashion by a priest? Dude, that’s gotta suck.

D: Easter's almost here.

Tom: It IS here. It's here every day. Has been for 2,000+ years. icon_brows2

Post Edited (Tom) : 4/6/2009 11:19:24 AM (GMT-5)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 12:56 PM (GMT -6)

Tom:
Dude, why aren’t you EO? I mean, how do you celebrate the Lord’s table on what you feel is this unique level at WHC? No priest. No shared community to embrace the table in like manner, etc. Why haven’t you moved on to convert? I don’t get it. Because God has you at WHC? Why would God require you to severe yourself from the true Church, the true table, the true and very life of Christ? To be a kind of missionary for the EO among Evangelicals? What?

God knows, dawg. Only God knows.

Tom:
I’m not hating, Bro, I’m seriously asking. I mean, would any EO priest say the very life of Christ that’s available to us in the elements is available to you in the elements as blessed and sanctified in an Evangelical church? I’m thinking not.

::shrugs::

********************************

Tom:
So what good does your agreeing with the EO on this point if by attending a non-EO church you’re as cut off from the very life of Christ as I am as a memorialist? OR do you (conveniently) disagree with the EO that this presence of Christ available in the elements is only available in the elements DUELY blessed in EO fashion by a priest? Dude, that’s gotta suck.

Reposting...

-----------------------------------------

Posted By : One Love - 10/23/2007 9:15 PM
Ok.

Giving an update...interesting stuff...

I had a very, very pleasant phone conversation with Father Jonathon Proctor from Holy Trinity Orthodox Church nearby. He seemed to be a very encouaging, gracious guy who really knew his stuff (obviously). I hope to meet him in person sometime soon. Anyway...long story short...I asked him my question concerning epiklesis. Basically, I just asked him:

Given what we know about theosis, the Theotokos, and epiklesis, and all that, isn't it possible that the "living sacrifices" (meaning the believers themselves) can be mystically transformed into Christ's Real Presence by the power of the Spirit...just like the bread and the wine?

I told him that I wasn't merely trying to say that the bread and the wine were some form of "middle man". Not at all. What I was trying to address was the incarnational power of the epicletic encounter with God (like what happened with the Theotokos!). It just seemed to me that if we were indeed to be "living sacrifices" and "gifts" to be giving sacrificially to God everyday...that we could have the Spirit of Christ "change" our members into His. Epicletic living.

What he said was pretty interesting.

He said that what I proposed was "directly in line" with the saints, the prophets, the Fathers, and the Tradition...but for pastoral reasons, that may not be the most effective thing to talk about. As I understand him, he said that there would be some dissonance between the reality of whole thing and the continuing struggle of the Christian life that may make things to prone to misunderstanding or abuse. But, yes, epicletic living is a potential Christian reality.

He said I was quite the informed and intuitive Christian.

But guess what...

He also just politely, nicely let me know...

If I go to Divine Liturgy...

I could watch everything..

but I can't partake in the "Real Presence" of Christ in the Eucharist there...

...because I'm not an Orthodox Church participant.

Of course, I understand...but dang...

Hmmm...

Like I said...

Interesting.

------------------

Posted By : One Love - 10/24/2007 8:55 AM

POW:
You may not partkcipate because you are not a prepared Orthodox Christian -- two things. Roman Catholics, even if prepared, may not participate due to their part of the church not being in full communion with the Orthodox. Were you to be chrismated Orthodox you could participate.

I'm not telling you anything you don't know -- I know.

But I'm just directing our attention to the fact that you can't participate WITH THEM AND THEY WITH YOU (com-munion). Its not just a "limitation on you" but on them also -- an honest and necessary one.

I understand all that. That's what I told him too. I know that it's nothing personal. I just think it's funny that, from Fr. Proctor's perspective, I had an especially good grasp about what the Divine Litugy was all about and the incredible reality that it represents...but, as I see it, none of that ultimately matters. I can't participate because of my non-chrismatic state. It's just funny to me.

Remember the radio show with Fr. Hopko that you posted, B? He was quite open about the Church's stance where a person being baptized did NOT automatically mean that they would not experience hellish "tollbooth" experience...while it was also possible for unbaptized, unchrismated people to be saved by God. In other words, lack of chrismation or baptism doesn't exclude one from having God's Spirit working in their members into salvation-unto-theosis. He seemed very clear on that.

Well, if that's truly the case...AND if it IS possible that the self-offering faith of the faithful can indeed lead to "epicletic living" without formal presentation and participation in the bread and wine "elements" (this was my understanding from Fr. Proctor) ...it seems a bit confusing that I can supposedly experience the deep reality of this form of life in community with OTHER non-Orthodox saints of God, but not with the Orthodox themselves...based on me not being baptized into the Orthodox formally.

I can participate in the reality...just not WITH them.

Just interesting.

----------------------------------------

Posted By : PotOnWheel - 10/24/2007 6:13 PM

Btw, your other observations are good. But of course we aren't aiming to get by with as little formal church as possible, just to prove the point of those observations. ;-p

-------------------------------------------

Posted By : One Love - 10/24/2007 6:17 PM
I don't know about y'all. But it seems to me that there are SIGNIFICANT implications about all this.

The idea of REALLY having Christ live his hypostatically-unified life in you in mind (Mind of Christ), body (Body and Blood of Christ), and spirit (Holy Spirit of Christ) through a being a "walking epiclesis" or "living sacrifice" is too deep for words.

Wouldn't this change...like...everything about how American Evangelical Christianity views it's ecclesiology?

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 4/6/2009 12:58 PM (GMT -6)

Death on the Cross and victory make Jesus Lord.

"Continuing" for us would have to be becoming conquerers in Christ by the Spirit.

Get the book, D. Don't guess.

T. "Mother off God" can denot the Church.

(o)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:01 PM (GMT -6)

Bruce:
"Continuing" for us would have to be becoming conquerers in Christ by the Spirit.

Yes. Christ's Work continues through OUR (faithful believers' ) hands and feet as we are empowered and guided by the Holy Spirit of Jesus. He has overcome the world and we live daily in that victory as His Body.

And I am gettin' the book. Don't worry about that! biggrin

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:02 PM (GMT -6)

D: Easter's almost here.

Tom: It IS here. It's here every day. Has been for 2,000+ years.

True, true.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:07 PM (GMT -6)

Tom:
You can’t instantiate a continuation of the incarnation of one divine person in two natures (that’s the incarnation) if you’re not one divine person in two natures. And you’re not one divine person in two natures, nor will you ever be.

Let's say this:

There cannot be multiple Incarnations of the Divine Person, God the Son, because there is only ONE Son who has enhypostasized an individual human being. One God, One Image, One Incarnation. No non-incarnate human can be God the Son. Not trying to be redundant, just making the point...ONLY Jesus of Nazereth is God the Son in human being, the God-Man.

At the same time...

The "one hypostasis/two natures" can apply as follows: one hypostasis instantiating a human being in whom the Holy Spirit is in constant perichoretic bi-polar assymetrical relational union with it's human spirit, where the "marginal control" rests with the Holy Spirit. This happened NATURALLY in the Incarnate Word because of the ONE DIVINE PERSON being God the Son...but it can happen in non-incarnate humans BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH. This is part of what I believe theosis entails.

Jesus "gave" us his Spirit...so we can exist in the world, just like HE did!

(These are part of Loder's implications. That man was a friggin genius.)

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/6/2009 1:10:33 PM (GMT-5)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:10 PM (GMT -6)

Father Proctor: ...but for pastoral reasons, that may not be the most effective thing to talk about.

Tom: This is the part that's different then. Having just finished McGuckin's book on Cyril (and read a bunch of Cyril's stuff), it's definitely the case that it was straight up pastor concerns (practical, commonly experienced, spitituality) that grounded Cyril's whole articulation and defense of orthodox teaching.

The EO has come a long way when pastoral concerns motivate NOT bringing the true faith to the forefront. Strange.

T

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:11 PM (GMT -6)

Well, all I know, dawg...is that it's real. Super duper real.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:13 PM (GMT -6)

Actually...

I'd like to explore Nestorius' concept of "synapheia" as a model of sorts for how theosis may be. It doesn't work at ALL for the Incarnation...but it DOES seem to work for the union of a human person to God the Logos.

What'd you say, Tom? "Not everything a heretic says is heretical." or something like that? icon_brows2

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:14 PM (GMT -6)

D: There cannot be multiple Incarnations of the Divine Person, God the Son, because there is only ONE Son who has enhypostasized an individual human being.

Tom: Whew. Thank you. I was getting ready to call a synod to dispose of you!

D: At the same time... The "one hypostasis/two natures" can apply as follows: one hypostasis instantiating a human being in whom...

Tom: WHO is the "one hypostasis" in our case?

T

Post Edited (Tom) : 4/6/2009 1:19:10 PM (GMT-5)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:17 PM (GMT -6)

D: At the same time... The "one hypostasis/two natures" can apply as follows: one hypostasis instantiating a human being in whom...

Tom: WHO is the "one hypostasis" in our case?

The created hypostasis who receives the Spirit from Christ, becoming a true "person" and not merely an "individual." Christ's divine hypostasis "has" the Spirit naturally, we receive the Spirit by faith through Grace.

Happy?

Both the Incarnate Word AND the deified human will exercise the same capacity: perfect synergia between the Holy Spirit and human spirit such that divine life is reproduced in and through human existence, fulfilling it.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/6/2009 1:25:05 PM (GMT-5)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:20 PM (GMT -6)

D: I'd like to explore Nestorius' concept of "synapheia" as a model of sorts for how theosis may be. It doesn't work at ALL for the Incarnation...but it DOES seem to work for the union of a human person to God the Logos.

T: I think so. Cyril makes this VERY point in one of his letters. Just read it. Can't remember which letter.

T

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:22 PM (GMT -6)

D: The created hypostasis who receives the Spirit from Christ, becoming a true "person" and not merely an "individual." Christ's divine hypostasis "has" the Spirit naturally, we receive the Spirit by faith through Grace.

Happy?

Tom: Happier, yes.

T

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:22 PM (GMT -6)

It would make sense to talk about "two sons" in synapheia model. The Uncreated Eternal Son and the created "son-in-the-Son"

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:24 PM (GMT -6)

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:25 PM (GMT -6)

Well, Cyril didn't word it like THAT. But I'll try to find the passage. Synapheia was Nestorisus' CHRISTOLOGY, and THAT'S his big mistake. But it can work as a model for us. And this has always been my BIG point--divine-human relationality as instantiated by Christ isn't simply repeated carbon-copy style in us. The structure is different. I still might emphasis the differences way more than you. But I'll hold off on the synod for now. ;o)

T

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:27 PM (GMT -6)

Tom: WHO is the "one hypostasis" in our case?

D: The created hypostasis...

Tom: Much happier.

T

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 4/6/2009 1:29 PM (GMT -6)

Tom:
Well, Cyril didn't word it like THAT. But I'll try to find the passage. Synapheia was Nestorisus' CHRISTOLOGY, and THAT'S his big mistake. But it can work as a model for us. And this has always been my BIG point--divine-human relationality as instantiated by Christ isn't simply repeated carbon-copy style in us. The structure is different. I still might emphasis the differences way more than you. But I'll hold off on the synod for now. ;o)

I think this is has been our main contention for much of this discussion. You were trying to emphasize the SINGULARITY of the divine-human relationality in Christ (One Divine Person enfleshed) whereas I was trying to emphasize the UNIVERSALITY of the divine-human relationality that Christ's coming opened up for human experience (Perfect synergeia between Holy Spirit and human spirit, expressing divine reality in human experience.)

THIS is what I was trying to say when I said that the Incarnate Word was the MODEL for Christian existence. We REPRODUCE Christ's life as Christ's Holy Spirit empowers us as it lead Jesus himself, while HE was on the earth.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

"I love, therefore I am in I Am. God is my life."

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:30 PM (GMT -6)

Hey D, if you can pull up pages 312 and 313 in McGuckin's book, it's a portion of Cyril's Scholia on the Incarnation. Point #18 Cyril entitles:

"That God dwelt in Emmanuel in a different way than he dwells in us."

The point is not just that the SAME THING that happens naturally in Christ happens in us BY GRACE. The point is that SOMETHING DIFFERENT is happening. If we become non-divine persons, that's a someTHING different.

T

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 4/6/2009 1:31 PM (GMT -6)

That first chapter was really good. "Through the Cross."

I can easily follow straying down the bunny paths he warns against!

I pause long to consider what he suggest the true Gospel to be: not the half-way substitues.

(o)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2009 1:34 PM (GMT -6)

D: I was trying to emphasize the UNIVERSALITY of the divine-human relationality that Christ's coming opened up for human experience (Perfect synergeia between Holy Spirit and human spirit, expressing divine reality in human experience.)

Tom: Yes.

D: THIS is what I was trying to say when I said that the Incarnate Word was the MODEL for Christian existence. We REPRODUCE Christ's life as Christ's Holy Spirit empowers us as it lead Jesus himself, while HE was on the earth.

Tom: Absolutely. I've always been saying THIS. What were YOU saying?!

Oh brother.

T

49 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:14 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual