Author Topic: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?  (Read 9813 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #90 on: March 15, 2018, 03:58:14 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #91 on: March 15, 2018, 04:51:40 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another, they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #92 on: March 15, 2018, 05:01:08 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another, they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.

A very important truth to recognize.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #93 on: March 15, 2018, 05:19:19 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #94 on: March 15, 2018, 05:22:44 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

No, it is the nature of the human to be physical. The concept "human nature" is metaphysical. Big difference, old son.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,190
  • Pray for me St. Severus
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #95 on: March 15, 2018, 05:30:21 PM »
And human language is always incomplete.

[/endthread]
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.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #96 on: March 15, 2018, 05:36:51 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

No, it is the nature of the human to be physical. The concept "human nature" is metaphysical. Big difference, old son.
So you are denying that you have skin and blood?
« Last Edit: March 15, 2018, 05:37:45 PM by Tzimis »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,190
  • Pray for me St. Severus
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #97 on: March 15, 2018, 05:39:00 PM »
^^^This is a very good example of loss of translation and semantics, and it proves the point of the weakness of human language.
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.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #98 on: March 15, 2018, 05:44:25 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #99 on: March 15, 2018, 05:51:22 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #100 on: March 15, 2018, 05:59:40 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on
Just to clarify.  Human nature is something we all share. Our individualism comes from our personhood.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #101 on: March 15, 2018, 06:53:33 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on
Just to clarify.  Human nature is something we all share. Our individualism comes from our personhood.

We don't disagree. All humans have bodies, all humans have minds and souls. Your body is not my body, your soul is not my soul. That's the difference between us even though we both have the same nature.

That doesn't mean that "human nature is physical." Your nature is not something you "have," like your body. It's a description of what you are, what you participate in.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #102 on: March 15, 2018, 07:12:04 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on
Just to clarify.  Human nature is something we all share. Our individualism comes from our personhood.

We don't disagree. All humans have bodies, all humans have minds and souls. Your body is not my body, your soul is not my soul. That's the difference between us even though we both have the same nature.

That doesn't mean that "human nature is physical." Your nature is not something you "have," like your body. It's a description of what you are, what you participate in.
I disagree. The human person is abstract from their human nature. This is how the church see's it. The EO church that is. Its the same with christ. He took on human nature. He didn't take on two persons as Nestorius proclaims.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #103 on: March 15, 2018, 07:13:48 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on

You're certainly not making us Chalcedonians look good.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #104 on: March 15, 2018, 07:21:09 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on
Just to clarify.  Human nature is something we all share. Our individualism comes from our personhood.

We don't disagree. All humans have bodies, all humans have minds and souls. Your body is not my body, your soul is not my soul. That's the difference between us even though we both have the same nature.

That doesn't mean that "human nature is physical." Your nature is not something you "have," like your body. It's a description of what you are, what you participate in.
I disagree. The human person is abstract from their human nature. This is how the church see's it. The EO church that is. Its the same with christ. He took on human nature. He didn't take on two persons as Nestorius proclaims.

I didn't say He did. Each individual is an instance of the larger category that is "human nature." We are individuals that are all human. That still doesn't make our natures physical objects, though.

Christ took human nature into His Person, ie. He took on all the things that makes humans human. He became an Individual who is an instance of human nature.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #105 on: March 15, 2018, 07:27:25 PM »
You would need to explain what you mean when you say "incomplete", since I have been studying Christology for more than 25 years and don't see it that way at all.
Hi Father. I'm aware that your church differentiates between divine nature and human nature. When these two natures unit into Christ. Your Church doesn't have Christology terminology beyond that. Chooses to play it safe and calls it a single nature without explanative as to what this single nature consists of.

It consists of all the attributes of God and Man united inseparably. What more clarification is needed?

Natures are not physical objects that need to be stacked on top of one another,
they're just thought categories. And human language is always incomplete.
Human nature is physical.  How do you reconcile the two?

What Porter said. Human nature is the name we give to the amalgam of everything that makes a human a human as opposed to a sponge. Having a physical body is part of that, but so are all the non-physical things about us.

Christ is everything that we are and everything that God is. Any further clarifications as to "how" are going to be uncertain since human language is uncertain.
This is where your wrong. Person and human nature is where the distinction is. Lets move on
Just to clarify.  Human nature is something we all share. Our individualism comes from our personhood.

We don't disagree. All humans have bodies, all humans have minds and souls. Your body is not my body, your soul is not my soul. That's the difference between us even though we both have the same nature.

That doesn't mean that "human nature is physical." Your nature is not something you "have," like your body. It's a description of what you are, what you participate in.
I disagree. The human person is abstract from their human nature. This is how the church see's it. The EO church that is. Its the same with christ. He took on human nature. He didn't take on two persons as Nestorius proclaims.

I didn't say He did. Each individual is an instance of the larger category that is "human nature." We are individuals that are all human. That still doesn't make our natures physical objects, though.


Christ took human nature into His Person, ie. He took on all the things that makes humans human. He became an Individual who is an instance of human nature.
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2018, 07:31:22 PM by Tzimis »

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #106 on: March 15, 2018, 07:36:56 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2018, 07:43:34 PM by Volnutt »
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #107 on: March 15, 2018, 07:48:53 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #108 on: March 15, 2018, 08:15:51 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #109 on: March 15, 2018, 08:27:22 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #110 on: March 15, 2018, 10:08:54 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Pretty sure spirit is considered part of our nature, too.

Also, body and soul are part of our person. Otherwise why should there be a bodily resurrection? We should all just become spheres.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #111 on: March 15, 2018, 11:08:08 PM »
We should all just become spheres.

Nice one. :)
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,190
  • Pray for me St. Severus
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #112 on: March 15, 2018, 11:53:59 PM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

St. Cyril would disagree with you.
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.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #113 on: March 16, 2018, 05:07:23 AM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Pretty sure spirit is considered part of our nature, too.

Also, body and soul are part of our person. Otherwise why should there be a bodily resurrection? We should all just become spheres.
Well yes. The spirit is individual to us. Our nature on the other hand was given to us by our parents. Something all humanity shares. Human nature and human individual are not the same thing. Otherwise Christ could not have saved us by taking on our nature. One aspect of our salvation, but a big one. If he took on the individual as well. Than all are saved. No? If everybody is a nature we should all rejoys? We know that isnt true though.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #114 on: March 16, 2018, 05:09:05 AM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Pretty sure spirit is considered part of our nature, too.

Also, body and soul are part of our person. Otherwise why should there be a bodily resurrection? We should all just become spheres.
Well yes. The spirit is individual to us. Our nature on the other hand was given to us by our parents. Something all humanity shares. Human nature and human individual are not the same thing. Otherwise Christ could not have saved us by taking on our nature. One aspect of our salvation, but a big one. If he took on the individual as well. Than all are saved. No? If everybody is a nature we should all rejoys? We know that isnt true though.

Christ is definitely a human individual.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #115 on: March 16, 2018, 05:29:46 AM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Pretty sure spirit is considered part of our nature, too.

Also, body and soul are part of our person. Otherwise why should there be a bodily resurrection? We should all just become spheres.
Well yes. The spirit is individual to us. Our nature on the other hand was given to us by our parents. Something all humanity shares. Human nature and human individual are not the same thing. Otherwise Christ could not have saved us by taking on our nature. One aspect of our salvation, but a big one. If he took on the individual as well. Than all are saved. No? If everybody is a nature we should all rejoys? We know that isnt true though.

All are saved, in a sense. The physical world in which we all participate is being redeemed as Christ has trampled down death by His death. All go into the loving presence of God at death (though the unrighteous feel it as fire because they hate Him). But in order to enjoy this (and thus truly be saved), we need to be reconciled to God individually.

Fr. Georges Florovsky had a really good piece on this, especially sections four and five. [Emphasis mine]

Quote
The reality of death is not yet abolished, but its powerlessness has been revealed. "It is true, we still die as before," says St. John Chrysostom, "but we do not remain in death, and this is not to die. The power and very reality of death is just this, that a dead man has no possibility of returning to life; but if after death he is to be quickened and moreover to be given a better life, then this is no longer death, but a falling sleep" (In Hebr., hom. 17, 2; u thanatos tuto estin, alla kimisis). Or in the phrase of St. Athanasius, "like seed cast on the earth, we do not perish when we die, but having been sown, we rise" (De inc., 21). This was a healing and renewal of human "nature," and therefore all will rise, all will be raised and restored to the fullness of their natural being, yet transformed. From henceforth every disembodiment is but temporary. The dark vale of Hades is abolished by the power of the life-giving Cross. In the first Adam the inherent potentiality of death by disobedience was disclosed and actualized. In the second Adam the potentiality of immortality by purity and obedience was sublimated and actualized into the impossibility of death. This parallel was drawn already by St. Irenaeus. Apart from the hope of the General Resurrection, belief in Christ would be vain and to no purpose. "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruit of them that slept" (1 Cor. 15:20). The Resurrection of Christ is a new beginning. It is a "new creation," i keni krisis. One may say even, an eschatological beginning, an ultimate step in the history of Salvation.

And yet, we have to make a dear distinction between the healing of nature and the healing of the will. "Nature" is healed and restored with a certain compulsion, by the mighty power of God's omnipotent and invincible grace. The wholeness is as it were, "forced" upon human nature. For in Christ all human nature (the "seed of Adam") is fully and completely cured from unwholeness and mortality. This restoration will be actualized and revealed to its full extent in due time, in the General Resurrection, in the resurrection of all, both of the righteous and the wicked. And no one, so far as nature is concerned, can escape Christ's kingly rule, or alienate himself from the invincible power of the resurrection. But the will of man cannot be cured in the same invincible manner. The will of man must turn itself to God. There must be a free and spontaneous response of love and adoration, a "free conversion." The will of man can be cured only in the "mystery of freedom." Only by this free effort does man enter into that new and eternal life which is revealed in Christ Jesus.

A spiritual regeneration can be wrought only in perfect freedom, in an obedience of love, by a self-consecration and self-dedication to God, in Christ. This distinction was made with great insistence by Nicolas Cabasilas in his remarkable treatise on The Life in Christ. Resurrection is a "rectification of nature" (i anastasis physeos estin epanorthosis) and this God grants freely. But the Kingdom of Heaven, and the beatific vision, and union with Christ, presuppose the desire (trofi estin tis theliseos), and therefore are available only for those who have longed for them, and loved, and desired. And immortality will be given to all, just as all can enjoy Divine providence. It does not depend upon our will whether we shall rise after death or not, just as it is not by our will that we are born. The death and resurrection of Christ bring immortality and incorruption to all in the same manner, because all have the same nature as the Man Christ Jesus. But nobody can be compelled to desire. Thus Resurrection is a gift common to all, but the blessedness will be given only to some (De vita in Christo II, 86-96). And again, the path of life is the path of renunciation, of mortification, of self-sacrifice and self-oblation. One has to die to oneself in order to live in Christ. Each one must personally and freely associate himself with Christ, the Lord, the Savior, and the Redeemer, in the confession of faith, in the choice of love, in the mystical oath of allegiance. He who does not die with Christ cannot live with Him. "Unless of our own free choice we accept to die unto His passion, His life is not in us" (St. Ignatius, Magnes, 5; the phraseology is Pauline).

This is no mere ascetical or moral rule, no mere discipline. This is the ontological law of spiritual existence, even the law of life itself. For only in communion with God and through life in Christ does the restoration of human wholeness gain meaning. To those in total darkness, who have deliberately confined themselves "outside God," the Resurrection itself must seem rather unnecessary and unmotivated. But it will come, as a "resurrection to judgment" (John 5:29 (anastasis tis kriseos). And in this will be completed the tragedy of human freedom. Here indeed we are on the threshold of the inconceivable and incomprehensible. The apokatastasis of nature does not abolish free will, and the will must be moved from within by love.

St. Gregory of Nyssa had not a clear understanding of this. He anticipated a kind of universal conversion of souls in the after-life, when the Truth of God will be revealed and manifested with some ultimate and compelling evidence. Just at this point the limitations of the Hellenistic mind are obvious. Evidence seemed to it to be the decisive reason or motive for the will, as if "sin" were merely "ignorance." The Hellenistic mind had to pass through its long and hard experience of asceticism, of ascetical self-examination and self-control, in order to free itself from this intellectualistic naiveté and illusion, and discover a dark abyss in the fallen soul. Only in St. Maximus, after some centuries of ascetic preparation, do we find a new, remodeled and deepened interpretation of the apokatastasis.

St. Maximus did not believe in the inevitable conversion of obstinate souls. He taught an apokatastasis of nature, i.e., a restitution of all beings to an integrity of nature, of a universal manifestation of the Divine Life, which will be evident to every one. But those who have deliberately spent their lives on earth in fleshly desires, "against nature," will be unable to enjoy this eternal bliss. The Light is the Word, that illuminates the natural minds of the faithful; but as a burning fire of the judgment (ti kavsi tis kriseos), He punishes those who, through love of the flesh, cling to the nocturnal darkness of this life. The distinction is between an epignosis, and a methesis. "Acknowledgment" is not the same as "Participation." God will be in all indeed, but only in the Saints will He be present "with grace" (dia tin harin) ; in the reprobate He will be present "without grace" (para tin harin). And the wicked will be estranged from God by their lack of a resolute purpose of good." We have here the same duality of nature and will. In the resurrection the whole of creation will be restored, i.e., brought to perfection and ultimate stability. But sin and evil are rooted in the will. The Hellenistic mind concluded therefrom that evil is unstable and by itself must disappear inevitably. For nothing can be perpetual, unless it be rooted in a Divine decree.

The Christian inference is exactly the opposite. There is the inertia and obstinacy of the will, and this obstinacy may remain uncured even in the "universal Restoration." God never does any violence to man, and communion with God cannot be forced upon the obstinate. In the phrase of St. Maximus, "the Spirit does not produce an undesired resolve but it transforms a chosen purpose into theosis" (Quaest. ad Thalass., 6). We live in a changed world: it has been changed by Christ's redeeming Resurrection. Life has been given, and it will prevail. The Incarnate Lord is in very truth the Second Adam and in Him the new humanity has been inaugurated. Not only an ultimate "survival" is assured, but also the fulfillment of God's creative purpose. Man is made "immortal." He cannot commit an ultimate "metaphysical suicide" and strike himself out of existence. Yet even the victory of Christ does not force "Eternal Life" upon the "closed" beings. As St. Augustine says, for the creature "being is not the same thing as living" (De Genesi ad litt. I, 5).
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #116 on: March 16, 2018, 06:35:33 AM »
I cant believe none of you sleep.

Offline Ainnir

  • Section Moderator
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,974
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #117 on: March 16, 2018, 08:09:38 AM »
I cant believe none of you sleep.

You and I are in the same time zone.  Some here are 3 or 4 hours behind us, some several hours ahead.  Makes it interesting.   ;D
Is any of the above Orthodox?  I have no clue, so there's that.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #118 on: March 16, 2018, 08:10:01 AM »
What's your point? I don't see a contradiction between those two statements in bold. Human nature is just a term describing the qualities that we all share in common. You have a physical body, but that doesn't make the statement "Tzimis has a body" a physical object. It's a thought category like numbers are.

We're talking metaphysics here.

ETA. I didn't see your text before:
Quote
Not true. Human nature as i said is shared. Some may go as far as saying its shered with the rest of creation.  I personally dont disagree.

It is shared, yes. It's a shared list of attributes.

-Christ has a body
-Christ has a human will
-Christ has a human soul

But the list is not itself a physical object. See the difference? At most it's a Platonic Universal, which isn't physical either. But I tend towards Nominalism personally, as far as I understand it.

I disagree. The term human nature doesn't encompass the personhood. Human nature is purely pysical existence.  Like the steak one puts on the grill.

So you don't believe in any sort of immaterial soul? I'm kind of skeptical of accounts of the soul/mind that get too spooky, but even I don't go that far. I'm not sure that such a radical position works in Christianity.

But in any case, you're still a person with a body. That fact, that descriptor, is not itself a physical object. In taking on a body, Christ the One Person took on the fact known as human nature.
The soul is part of human nature. The spirit is not. In genesis god blew the spirit into adam. The spirit is the person of man.Not his nature.
The prosopon, hypostasis or logos of christ took on human nature.

Pretty sure spirit is considered part of our nature, too.

Also, body and soul are part of our person. Otherwise why should there be a bodily resurrection? We should all just become spheres.
Well yes. The spirit is individual to us. Our nature on the other hand was given to us by our parents. Something all humanity shares. Human nature and human individual are not the same thing. Otherwise Christ could not have saved us by taking on our nature. One aspect of our salvation, but a big one. If he took on the individual as well. Than all are saved. No? If everybody is a nature we should all rejoys? We know that isnt true though.

All are saved, in a sense. The physical world in which we all participate is being redeemed as Christ has trampled down death by His death. All go into the loving presence of God at death (though the unrighteous feel it as fire because they hate Him). But in order to enjoy this (and thus truly be saved), we need to be reconciled to God individually.

Fr. Georges Florovsky had a really good piece on this, especially sections four and five. [Emphasis mine]

Quote
The reality of death is not yet abolished, but its powerlessness has been revealed. "It is true, we still die as before," says St. John Chrysostom, "but we do not remain in death, and this is not to die. The power and very reality of death is just this, that a dead man has no possibility of returning to life; but if after death he is to be quickened and moreover to be given a better life, then this is no longer death, but a falling sleep" (In Hebr., hom. 17, 2; u thanatos tuto estin, alla kimisis). Or in the phrase of St. Athanasius, "like seed cast on the earth, we do not perish when we die, but having been sown, we rise" (De inc., 21). This was a healing and renewal of human "nature," and therefore all will rise, all will be raised and restored to the fullness of their natural being, yet transformed. From henceforth every disembodiment is but temporary. The dark vale of Hades is abolished by the power of the life-giving Cross. In the first Adam the inherent potentiality of death by disobedience was disclosed and actualized. In the second Adam the potentiality of immortality by purity and obedience was sublimated and actualized into the impossibility of death. This parallel was drawn already by St. Irenaeus. Apart from the hope of the General Resurrection, belief in Christ would be vain and to no purpose. "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruit of them that slept" (1 Cor. 15:20). The Resurrection of Christ is a new beginning. It is a "new creation," i keni krisis. One may say even, an eschatological beginning, an ultimate step in the history of Salvation.

And yet, we have to make a dear distinction between the healing of nature and the healing of the will. "Nature" is healed and restored with a certain compulsion, by the mighty power of God's omnipotent and invincible grace. The wholeness is as it were, "forced" upon human nature. For in Christ all human nature (the "seed of Adam") is fully and completely cured from unwholeness and mortality. This restoration will be actualized and revealed to its full extent in due time, in the General Resurrection, in the resurrection of all, both of the righteous and the wicked. And no one, so far as nature is concerned, can escape Christ's kingly rule, or alienate himself from the invincible power of the resurrection. But the will of man cannot be cured in the same invincible manner. The will of man must turn itself to God. There must be a free and spontaneous response of love and adoration, a "free conversion." The will of man can be cured only in the "mystery of freedom." Only by this free effort does man enter into that new and eternal life which is revealed in Christ Jesus.

A spiritual regeneration can be wrought only in perfect freedom, in an obedience of love, by a self-consecration and self-dedication to God, in Christ. This distinction was made with great insistence by Nicolas Cabasilas in his remarkable treatise on The Life in Christ. Resurrection is a "rectification of nature" (i anastasis physeos estin epanorthosis) and this God grants freely. But the Kingdom of Heaven, and the beatific vision, and union with Christ, presuppose the desire (trofi estin tis theliseos), and therefore are available only for those who have longed for them, and loved, and desired. And immortality will be given to all, just as all can enjoy Divine providence. It does not depend upon our will whether we shall rise after death or not, just as it is not by our will that we are born. The death and resurrection of Christ bring immortality and incorruption to all in the same manner, because all have the same nature as the Man Christ Jesus. But nobody can be compelled to desire. Thus Resurrection is a gift common to all, but the blessedness will be given only to some (De vita in Christo II, 86-96). And again, the path of life is the path of renunciation, of mortification, of self-sacrifice and self-oblation. One has to die to oneself in order to live in Christ. Each one must personally and freely associate himself with Christ, the Lord, the Savior, and the Redeemer, in the confession of faith, in the choice of love, in the mystical oath of allegiance. He who does not die with Christ cannot live with Him. "Unless of our own free choice we accept to die unto His passion, His life is not in us" (St. Ignatius, Magnes, 5; the phraseology is Pauline).

This is no mere ascetical or moral rule, no mere discipline. This is the ontological law of spiritual existence, even the law of life itself. For only in communion with God and through life in Christ does the restoration of human wholeness gain meaning. To those in total darkness, who have deliberately confined themselves "outside God," the Resurrection itself must seem rather unnecessary and unmotivated. But it will come, as a "resurrection to judgment" (John 5:29 (anastasis tis kriseos). And in this will be completed the tragedy of human freedom. Here indeed we are on the threshold of the inconceivable and incomprehensible. The apokatastasis of nature does not abolish free will, and the will must be moved from within by love.

St. Gregory of Nyssa had not a clear understanding of this. He anticipated a kind of universal conversion of souls in the after-life, when the Truth of God will be revealed and manifested with some ultimate and compelling evidence. Just at this point the limitations of the Hellenistic mind are obvious. Evidence seemed to it to be the decisive reason or motive for the will, as if "sin" were merely "ignorance." The Hellenistic mind had to pass through its long and hard experience of asceticism, of ascetical self-examination and self-control, in order to free itself from this intellectualistic naiveté and illusion, and discover a dark abyss in the fallen soul. Only in St. Maximus, after some centuries of ascetic preparation, do we find a new, remodeled and deepened interpretation of the apokatastasis.

St. Maximus did not believe in the inevitable conversion of obstinate souls. He taught an apokatastasis of nature, i.e., a restitution of all beings to an integrity of nature, of a universal manifestation of the Divine Life, which will be evident to every one. But those who have deliberately spent their lives on earth in fleshly desires, "against nature," will be unable to enjoy this eternal bliss. The Light is the Word, that illuminates the natural minds of the faithful; but as a burning fire of the judgment (ti kavsi tis kriseos), He punishes those who, through love of the flesh, cling to the nocturnal darkness of this life. The distinction is between an epignosis, and a methesis. "Acknowledgment" is not the same as "Participation." God will be in all indeed, but only in the Saints will He be present "with grace" (dia tin harin) ; in the reprobate He will be present "without grace" (para tin harin). And the wicked will be estranged from God by their lack of a resolute purpose of good." We have here the same duality of nature and will. In the resurrection the whole of creation will be restored, i.e., brought to perfection and ultimate stability. But sin and evil are rooted in the will. The Hellenistic mind concluded therefrom that evil is unstable and by itself must disappear inevitably. For nothing can be perpetual, unless it be rooted in a Divine decree.

The Christian inference is exactly the opposite. There is the inertia and obstinacy of the will, and this obstinacy may remain uncured even in the "universal Restoration." God never does any violence to man, and communion with God cannot be forced upon the obstinate. In the phrase of St. Maximus, "the Spirit does not produce an undesired resolve but it transforms a chosen purpose into theosis" (Quaest. ad Thalass., 6). We live in a changed world: it has been changed by Christ's redeeming Resurrection. Life has been given, and it will prevail. The Incarnate Lord is in very truth the Second Adam and in Him the new humanity has been inaugurated. Not only an ultimate "survival" is assured, but also the fulfillment of God's creative purpose. Man is made "immortal." He cannot commit an ultimate "metaphysical suicide" and strike himself out of existence. Yet even the victory of Christ does not force "Eternal Life" upon the "closed" beings. As St. Augustine says, for the creature "being is not the same thing as living" (De Genesi ad litt. I, 5).
Sounds a bit circular to me. Fr. Georges Florovsky is a talented writer, but his works are not dogmatic.

Offline Father Peter

  • Moderator
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
    • Coptic Orthodox Church - Patriarchal Diocese
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchal Diocese
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #119 on: March 16, 2018, 07:08:29 PM »
We don't believe or teach "one nature", and the "one incarnate nature of the Word" refers to his hypostasis, not ousia. We don't teach "one ousia".

If any part of man is not of his human nature then it seems to me we are getting close to an Apollinarian Christ where the Word provides some necessary aspect of a man himself. The breath of life is the Holy Spirit, but the spirit of a man is the higher soul, as some Fathers use the words in a Bi-Partite manner as opposed to the lower soul, or is the spirit, as opposed to soul and body, where the Fathers use a Tri-Partite explanation. But it is all human.
My ministry and blog - http://www.stgeorgeministry.com

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #120 on: March 16, 2018, 07:54:42 PM »
We don't believe or teach "one nature", and the "one incarnate nature of the Word" refers to his hypostasis, not ousia. We don't teach "one ousia".

If any part of man is not of his human nature then it seems to me we are getting close to an Apollinarian Christ where the Word provides some necessary aspect of a man himself. The breath of life is the Holy Spirit, but the spirit of a man is the higher soul, as some Fathers use the words in a Bi-Partite manner as opposed to the lower soul, or is the spirit, as opposed to soul and body, where the Fathers use a Tri-Partite explanation. But it is all human.

Yeah, that's the way I always understood the Orthodox teaching.
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #121 on: March 16, 2018, 08:47:36 PM »
So I see numerous defenses and clarifications of non-Chalcedonian doctrine (and, yes, I realize which subforum I'm in and how that is appropriate), but, in the spirit of union which most posters on the non-Chalcedian side here seem to favor, I'd certainly be interested in hearing how a non-Chalcedonian might be able to defend and reconcile Chalcedonian doctrine. I might learn something new about my own church in the process.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #122 on: March 16, 2018, 09:19:20 PM »
We don't believe or teach "one nature", and the "one incarnate nature of the Word" refers to his hypostasis, not ousia. We don't teach "one ousia".

If any part of man is not of his human nature then it seems to me we are getting close to an Apollinarian Christ where the Word provides some necessary aspect of a man himself. The breath of life is the Holy Spirit, but the spirit of a man is the higher soul, as some Fathers use the words in a Bi-Partite manner as opposed to the lower soul, or is the spirit, as opposed to soul and body, where the Fathers use a Tri-Partite explanation. But it is all human.
Thank you Father.  I would have to know the meaning of one incarnate nature before I can pass judgement. Trying to get more depth is where the problem is.

I agree with some of the second paragraph. I will leave that for another time though as its best to tackle one item at a time.

Offline Father Peter

  • Moderator
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
    • Coptic Orthodox Church - Patriarchal Diocese
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchal Diocese
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #123 on: March 19, 2018, 07:36:06 AM »
One incarnate nature of the Word means this...

http://www.stgeorgeministry.com/one-incarnate-nature-word/
My ministry and blog - http://www.stgeorgeministry.com

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington

Offline Čtec

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #124 on: March 19, 2018, 08:41:03 AM »
xD
"On Mount Konjuh the wind blows, sings. The leafs chant sad songs. Maples and frasers! Pines and birches are swinging together.
The night has put all forest in to black. Mount Konjuh roars, rocks are breaking!
Dead comrade, Pustinja's miner,  being buried by the company of proleters"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyzGJMbHg0E

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #125 on: March 19, 2018, 09:02:01 AM »
One incarnate nature of the Word means this...

http://www.stgeorgeministry.com/one-incarnate-nature-word/

I see some inconsistency in the use of essence by the author. Its probably his own ability to differentiate. Overall he is close to a proper understanding.

Offline Ainnir

  • Section Moderator
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,974
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #126 on: March 19, 2018, 09:08:13 AM »
One incarnate nature of the Word means this...

http://www.stgeorgeministry.com/one-incarnate-nature-word/

Thank you so much for this, Father.  :)
Is any of the above Orthodox?  I have no clue, so there's that.

Offline Father Peter

  • Moderator
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
    • Coptic Orthodox Church - Patriarchal Diocese
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchal Diocese
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #127 on: March 19, 2018, 10:15:26 AM »
Since I am the author perhaps you would like to explain my inadequate understanding?
My ministry and blog - http://www.stgeorgeministry.com

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #128 on: March 19, 2018, 11:07:01 AM »
Since I am the author perhaps you would like to explain my inadequate understanding?

Your using the word essence in place of nature. While its safe to say the divine essence exists in Christs. Its not safe to say that the essence of a human person exists in human nature. Now this goes back to the other question I said I will address later.
If we state that Human nature has a person incorporated into his nature we fall into the Nestorius heresy. There only is one person in christ. Not two
That is why I stated. That human nature isn't personified. The personhood is in the spirit of the human man and not in there nature.
If we persist is saying so. We fall into the Nestorius heresy which stated Christ had two persons one human and one divine.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,367
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #129 on: March 19, 2018, 11:16:57 AM »
That's silly. If you actually follow the history of these Christological debates you know that these terms- nature, person, essence, etc.- do not have one agreed-upon meaning, even among likeminded theologians. These discussions will always break down if you treat Christology as an algebraic equation rather than the attempts to express the mystery of the incarnation with limited human language.
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Offline Tzimis

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,085
  • If you die before you die, then you will not die
  • Jurisdiction: GOA
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #130 on: March 19, 2018, 11:32:25 AM »
That's silly. If you actually follow the history of these Christological debates you know that these terms- nature, person, essence, etc.- do not have one agreed-upon meaning, even among likeminded theologians. These discussions will always break down if you treat Christology as an algebraic equation rather than the attempts to express the mystery of the incarnation with limited human language.
The terms are pretty well established. I simplifed the term essence and human spirit. But its much more complex than this. To get into it would require a full essay. I dont have the time for it right now. So the terminology im using is slightly flawed. but, the premise is there.

Offline peacenprayer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 201
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #131 on: March 19, 2018, 12:00:25 PM »
I've thought about it. Theres a Coptic Monastery in Perth, Ontario. I've got no debt, no obligations, I'm healthy, enjoy working, and I've always wanted to be a monk. I've seriously considered making my way there and asking to stay (with proper introductions and the like). St Anthony left all, so why not? There are so few monasterys in Canada and last I checked no ones taking anyone... I digress.
TL;DR not me, but maybe.
Ran away to wear a black night gown and a funny hat. Pray for me!

Offline Remnkemi

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 403
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #132 on: March 19, 2018, 01:20:35 PM »
Since I am the author perhaps you would like to explain my inadequate understanding?

Your using the word essence in place of nature. While its safe to say the divine essence exists in Christs. Its not safe to say that the essence of a human person exists in human nature. Now this goes back to the other question I said I will address later.
If we state that Human nature has a person incorporated into his nature we fall into the Nestorius heresy. There only is one person in christ. Not two
That is why I stated. That human nature isn't personified. The personhood is in the spirit of the human man and not in there nature.
If we persist is saying so. We fall into the Nestorius heresy which stated Christ had two persons one human and one divine.
Any "inconsistency in the use of essence" is a reflection on your semantic understanding of essence, not Fr Peter's or the Oriental Orthodox's. This goes back to what everyone was trying to tell you: all human language is incomplete. To conclude someone else's words, or blog or theological understanding is inconsistent or incomplete, assumes you have attained a total, perfect, absolute and inerrant understanding of the subject matter and that human language is sufficient to achieve such an understanding. As Iconoclude implied, history shows us that no two people who are like minded agree on semantic understanding and terminology.

If you're planning to show how Oriental Orthodoxy is inherently errant, you're going to have do better than misrepresenting what Oriental Orthodoxy actually teaches and what Orientals, like Fr Peter, actually said.
 

Offline Remnkemi

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 403
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #133 on: March 19, 2018, 01:23:12 PM »
That's silly. If you actually follow the history of these Christological debates you know that these terms- nature, person, essence, etc.- do not have one agreed-upon meaning, even among likeminded theologians. These discussions will always break down if you treat Christology as an algebraic equation rather than the attempts to express the mystery of the incarnation with limited human language.
The terms are pretty well established. I simplifed the term essence and human spirit. But its much more complex than this. To get into it would require a full essay. I dont have the time for it right now. So the terminology im using is slightly flawed. but, the premise is there.
So you're allowed to use terminology that you self-proclaimed is flawed, but any terminology Oriental Orthodox use is plainly wrong?

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,980
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Any Eastern Orthodox convert to Oriental Orthodoxy?
« Reply #134 on: March 19, 2018, 09:55:39 PM »
Since I am the author perhaps you would like to explain my inadequate understanding?

Your using the word essence in place of nature. While its safe to say the divine essence exists in Christs. Its not safe to say that the essence of a human person exists in human nature. Now this goes back to the other question I said I will address later.
If we state that Human nature has a person incorporated into his nature we fall into the Nestorius heresy. There only is one person in christ. Not two
That is why I stated. That human nature isn't personified. The personhood is in the spirit of the human man and not in there nature.
If we persist is saying so. We fall into the Nestorius heresy which stated Christ had two persons one human and one divine.

And do you have any official sources for your claim that spirit=personhood and is not part of our natures? I've certainly never heard something like that. It sounds garbled to me.

It is in the nature of a human to be personal, obviously. But that doesn't mean that our nature is itself a person. That would almost lead to saying that we have two people inside of us, wouldn't it?
On an extended hiatus from this site. Please pray for me and my family.

I'm sorry to any that my posts might offend.