OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 19, 2014, 11:58:36 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Oriental Orthodoxy and the energies-essence distinction  (Read 1671 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,948



« on: October 04, 2011, 03:21:31 AM »

It came up in the other thread, but I do think it needs to be discussed separately.

What is/are the OO position(s) on the energy/essence distinction?

What is/are the OO position(s) on the Western alternative to that, the analogia entis?
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 03:22:37 AM by Gorazd » Logged
Elijah
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Tewahedo
Posts: 384


God is love; be faithful un to death.


« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2011, 11:00:17 AM »

Quote
It came up in the other thread, but I do think it needs to be discussed separately.
Which thread did it come up? Sorry I was not following the forum attentively. 
Logged

Holy Mary, You are the ladder of life. St. Yared
My sons/daughters, come and I will teach you the fear of God. Christ is light.
He watches everything high; He is the king  even over those in the water. Eyob 41:25
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2011, 02:34:05 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

It came up in the other thread, but I do think it needs to be discussed separately.

What is/are the OO position(s) on the energy/essence distinction?

What is/are the OO position(s) on the Western alternative to that, the analogia entis?

That is a great question, I have asked that here before.  It is practically non-existent in the Oriental Fathers and so it very difficult to assess the Oriental stance, though from my understanding and discussions with Oriental clergy, at least the Ethiopian Orthodox rejects this distinction for similar reasons that the Roman Catholic theologians argue against it, but I am not that familiar with the details of the RC doctrine. 

In the Oriental Orthodox, we do not feel the need to break it down as specifically as the later Palamas theology chooses to, so it really doesn't come up half as often as it does in the footnotes of my Byzantine tradition's "Orthodox Study Bible" Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,421


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2011, 02:39:35 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

It came up in the other thread, but I do think it needs to be discussed separately.

What is/are the OO position(s) on the energy/essence distinction?

What is/are the OO position(s) on the Western alternative to that, the analogia entis?

That is a great question, I have asked that here before.  It is practically non-existent in the Oriental Fathers and so it very difficult to assess the Oriental stance, though from my understanding and discussions with Oriental clergy, at least the Ethiopian Orthodox rejects this distinction for similar reasons that the Roman Catholic theologians argue against it, but I am not that familiar with the details of the RC doctrine.  

In the Oriental Orthodox, we do not feel the need to break it down as specifically as the later Palamas theology chooses to, so it really doesn't come up half as often as it does in the footnotes of my Byzantine tradition's "Orthodox Study Bible" Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie

But Palamite theology is nothing new under the sun.  It's based on Cyrillian and Cappadocian theology.

Coptic theology, as is understood through her hymns and later Church fathers have maintained a theology of theosis that necessitates this distinction and implies it.  Here are some examples:

Iris Habib el Masry

Bishop Bulus el Bushi
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 02:45:15 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,421


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2011, 03:02:55 PM »

And here are some posts that highlight St. Cyril's views and how it logically leads to an energies/essences distinction:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,33668.msg532494.html#msg532494
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,33668.msg532522.html#msg532522
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,33668.msg532509.html#msg532509
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,33668.msg532579.html#msg532579

We can see here St. Gregory Palamas in the EO's was right to make the distinction, as this is only done because he was protecting from what seemed to be the heretical opinions of Barlaam of Calabra.  His Grace Bishop Youssef, bishop of the Coptic diocese of the South writes about them here, even quoting from EO fathers:

http://www.suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=1246&catid=383
http://www.suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=649&catid=383

And as we uncover more medieval Copto-Arabic sources, we find that this distinction was also implied.  I'll try to find something from the Church hymns that emphasize this.

If the Ethiopian Church does the research, at least with St. Cyril, they should be in full agreement with Palamite theology, which is essentially Orthodox theology.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,421


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2011, 03:12:56 PM »

If anything, Roman Catholics presently is accepting theosis and slowly finds Palamism acceptable in their Church.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,645



WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2011, 03:37:28 PM »

I don't think there is any problem with the basic patristic distinction between the unknowable essence of God, and His self-revelation by means of His energy and activity.

The issue I do have is with some modern EO with whom I have corresponded who seem to treat the energies of God as if they were separate from God and not God at all. They seem to be thinking that when we say we know God by means of His energies we don't actually experience God, but some intermediary.

While rejecting this view, I think I would insist that when we experience God we are truly experiencing God Himself who is not separated from His essence, but is not known in His essence but by means of His energies which are no less God but could be considered God as He is known and makes Himself known, and not God in Himself.

As Mina says, the basic distinction is found in St Cyril and the other Fathers.

I am not sure that the Palamite controversy has a great deal of meaning in the OO Tradition.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria, Lebanon & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,039


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Christians

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 04, 2011, 06:28:50 PM »

--Subscribed--
Logged

On hiatus from posting. Forgive me if my posts have lacked humility or tact. Note that some of my older posts -especially those prior to late 2012- may not reflect my current views. In the meantime, please pray for my sinful self as I am in a critical and unsure juncture in my life. Thank you.
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2011, 02:11:26 AM »

The issue I do have is with some modern EO with whom I have corresponded who seem to treat the energies of God as if they were separate from God and not God at all. They seem to be thinking that when we say we know God by means of His energies we don't actually experience God, but some intermediary.

While rejecting this view, I think I would insist that when we experience God we are truly experiencing God Himself who is not separated from His essence, but is not known in His essence but by means of His energies which are no less God but could be considered God as He is known and makes Himself known, and not God in Himself.

Odd, the first paragraph is basically the position St. Gregory was arguing against. And the second is the basic Alexandrian (it's as much Athanasian and even Irenean as it is Cyrillean) and Cappadocian theology that St. Gregory was expounding upon to refute it.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,645



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2011, 03:45:09 AM »

Can you unpack what you mean by odd?

The position of the OO is essentially the patristic view of essence/energies. That is why my view is the basic view that St Gregory also adopted.

Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2011, 03:58:59 AM »

Can you unpack what you mean by odd?

The position of the OO is essentially the patristic view of essence/energies. That is why my view is the basic view that St Gregory also adopted.



It's your correspondents that I find odd, since as I say they are apparently espousing the very position that EO explicitly rejected via its recognition of St. Gregory as a champion of Orthodoxy.

I don't find it odd that you are rejecting this view in basically the same terms as St. Gregory did since I agree that 'Palamite' theology, is essentially Patristic theology--just explicated/expounded in response to an actual heresy.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,645



WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2011, 04:17:23 AM »

I have corresponded with a wide range of EO!  Smiley

Some (not very many of course) have definitely espoused a Nestorian separation of humanity and divinity because they have wished to insist so much on the humanity of the humanity of Christ that they have neglected the reality of the hypostatic union. They have often also wished to insist that they do not believe what I believe as a non-Chacedonian and so have taken a more and more extreme position just to avoid agreeing with me!
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2011, 03:45:47 PM »

I don't think there is any problem with the basic patristic distinction between the unknowable essence of God, and His self-revelation by means of His energy and activity.

The issue I do have is with some modern EO with whom I have corresponded who seem to treat the energies of God as if they were separate from God and not God at all. They seem to be thinking that when we say we know God by means of His energies we don't actually experience God, but some intermediary.

While rejecting this view, I think I would insist that when we experience God we are truly experiencing God Himself who is not separated from His essence, but is not known in His essence but by means of His energies which are no less God but could be considered God as He is known and makes Himself known, and not God in Himself.

As Mina says, the basic distinction is found in St Cyril and the other Fathers.

I am not sure that the Palamite controversy has a great deal of meaning in the OO Tradition.

I have corresponded with a wide range of EO!  Smiley

Some (not very many of course) have definitely espoused a Nestorian separation of humanity and divinity because they have wished to insist so much on the humanity of the humanity of Christ that they have neglected the reality of the hypostatic union. They have often also wished to insist that they do not believe what I believe as a non-Chacedonian and so have taken a more and more extreme position just to avoid agreeing with me!


What you describe in your second message is most unfortunate, Father. I'm sure there are both those in our tradition which tend Nestorian for this reason, as there are most likely those who tend Eutychean for the same purpose. I pray one day that our churches heal our schism, as we have already pronounced our oneness in matters of faith.

As for your first post, I agree. We must remember that the energies of God are the divine nature, as much so as the essence. Without this clear understanding, as was mentioned above, we fall into the heresy of Barlaam.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,645



WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2011, 03:56:23 PM »

Unfortunately there are people in every tradition who get things very wrong.

I have not actually corresponded with anyone who thinks that the humanity and divinity in Christ are mixed or confused, though there may well be such of course. Eutychianism (a bit of a misnomer IMHO) has always been dealt with very severely from the beginning. Synousiasm is probably a better term. St Cyril had to deal with Synousiasts, as did St Timothy Aelurus.

St Severus corresponded with a Sergius who tended to synousiasm through thinking a little too highly of his abilities.

I would say that the closest that non-Chalcedonians get to this false Christology is when some might mistakenly and naively consider that 'one incarnate nature' refers to ousia and/or a simple unitary state of being.

Any OO who knows St Cyril and St Severus could not fall into such an error.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2011, 03:56:34 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

I don't think there is any problem with the basic patristic distinction between the unknowable essence of God, and His self-revelation by means of His energy and activity.

The issue I do have is with some modern EO with whom I have corresponded who seem to treat the energies of God as if they were separate from God and not God at all. They seem to be thinking that when we say we know God by means of His energies we don't actually experience God, but some intermediary.


This is what I mean by the Ethiopian Fathers not accepting the distinction.  Yes, the Cappadocian fathers discuss things similar to Palamas theology, but I think they are apples and oranges.  When you actually put together the Cyrillian and others like Saint Basil, or Athanasius, or Saint Gregory the Theologian who do in fact discuss the energies, they are not as strictly distinct as the fullness of Palamas theology.  I have read Palamas, and find a lot of things which disagree with the Fathers, and further, as Father Peter has mentioned, the EO today seem to OVEREMPHASIZE this distinction to the point of separation, as if the Energies were a kind of mediator.
You have to get almost scientifically specific to understand how Palamas theology is different from the early Fathers discussions of energies.  Saint  Cyril clearly did not imply the same degree of separation which Palamas elucidates in his lengthy discussions, the energies which these fathers mention are not quite as elaborately distinct as the Palamas theologians suggest.  I think that Saint Cyril would have many qualms with some of the later theological implications of Palamas' writings, particularly as mentioned by Father Peter in regards to the over-emphasis of the distinction in contemporary popular EO theology.  Realistically, the EO has gotten a bit too OT in regards to the separation of the Divine Nature, as if God couldn't interact within His Creation and in this process inadverantly place limits on the Omnipotent God who is by definition Unlimited.

stay blessed,
habte selassioe
« Last Edit: October 05, 2011, 04:01:08 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,948



« Reply #15 on: October 05, 2011, 05:34:31 PM »

I am quite sure that Palamas did not intend a separation. He spoke of one God, as he is in himself (essence) and as he interacts with his creation (energies). This is why he insists on the energies being uncreated.

Now if anyone claims the energies to be not God himself but something separate from him, I think he has very much misunderstood the whole thing.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,421


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 05, 2011, 05:56:25 PM »

Habte, perhaps, for a better discussion of these things, you should share with us some of the passages St. Gregory Palamas wrote that you find disconcerting.

By the way, what is "analogia entis"?
« Last Edit: October 05, 2011, 06:13:45 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #17 on: October 05, 2011, 07:08:52 PM »

selam lekulekemu

as far as I can understand him St.Gregory Palamas's view on theosis is entirely Orthodox, the elaborate explanation was because of what he was dealing with at that time required that he went in detail as far as it was possible in this matter to present an 'air tight' argument. the angelic hosts and us man kind can hope to achieve theosis a far as it is possible for created beings. we understand the never ending journey of it as the psalmist have said Psalm 84:7'They go from strength to strength, every one of them in Zion appears before God. '  we say for the saints 'amalikt zebe tsega'/ gods through grace/ is our understanding of theosis and palamas explains both what is meant by the 'gods' and what is meant by 'grace 'as it refers to theosis.  for the angels :'adrobachew yeminor qidusan melaekt/ the holy angels whom God dwells in,' what palamas defended is that theology.the fact that we must know the difference between becoming God Himself,that is :equal in essence and through grace( through his love) that is energies. one is unknowable unapproachable to created beings, the other is part of them. St. Athanasius has said He is both outside of Nature and inside of it. this is Orthodox Theology and St.Gregory Palamas defends it well. I saw no separation that will end up making like there is another that is God and another that animates and sustains creation.
 now these kinds of theological talks I rather not get into because i know very little but if I am mistaken in this please correct me so i can learn.Thank you.

selam hunu.
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,421


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 05, 2011, 07:46:33 PM »

From the Coptic Psalmody on terms of theosis and partaking of the divine nature:

Quote from: Monday Psali
God is Emmanuel
The True Food
The Immortal Tree
Of Life

Here we start with the idea that the Tree of Life is God, who is our sustenance.  Only God is immortal, and by partaking of immortality, it is an uncreated energy of God.

Quote from: Tuesday Psali
Come to us today
O Christ our Master
Shine upon us
With Your exalted divinity

Send to us
This great grace
of Your Holy Spirit
the Comforter

Here, we ask God to give us the light of His divinity, and we call this "This great grace of Your Holy Spirit."  Therefore, grace is the uncreated energy of God, and His light is an uncreated energy, which comes from from His divinity.

Quote from: Tuesday Theotokia
You are the bush
which Moses saw
Flaming with fire
And was not consumed.

That is the Son of God
Who dwelt in your womb
The fire of the Divinity
Did not consume your body.

This idea about the "fire of His divinity" was repeated in most other Theotokias of the week.  Here, we see the Divinity burns, as is popular among some contemporary EO's in their eschatology.  Nevertheless, we understand that this burning is not a burning of destruction, but of glorification.  This fire does not consume, but deifies.  Therefore, we hail the Theotokos:

Quote from: The Second Hails of the Vatos Lobsh of the Saturday Theotokia
Hail to the incorrupt vessel
Of the divinity
Which heals everyone
Who drinks from it

Notice the fire of the Divinity IS the Divinity.  Her womb held the fire of divinity, and now she is called the "vessel of the divinity."  The fire being divinity is uncreated.  This distinction is implied and necessary.  It agrees with Palamism.  While the hymns are quite strong in their language, nevertheless, the Church teaches we are not partaking of the essence of the divinity.  It is implied in this, whatever we partake of from the divine nature is  necessarily distinct into whatever one wants to call it, grace, energy, glory, love, power, all from God, and all uncreated.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria, Lebanon & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,039


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Christians

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 05, 2011, 07:58:46 PM »

Mina thank you very much for gathering all this information. This thread has been most edifying.

Logged

On hiatus from posting. Forgive me if my posts have lacked humility or tact. Note that some of my older posts -especially those prior to late 2012- may not reflect my current views. In the meantime, please pray for my sinful self as I am in a critical and unsure juncture in my life. Thank you.
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2011, 01:50:11 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

What exactly did the Cappadocian fathers imply with the word distinction?

Did they use diastole or heteron? Either way, could folks elaborate for me, I am lately diving deeper into fully understanding this from all sides.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 01:51:27 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2011, 02:09:15 PM »

ya, the word distinction has to be used very carefully here, not implying that they are different or isolated, but the same.

I like the sun and the rays of the sun analogy. We feel the rays of the sun as warmth, but if we touched the sun we would burn up.
Logged
Tags: energies  essence 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 48 queries.