Trump is now starting a civil war between Protestants and Catholics for seemingly no other reason than to distract from the fact that he raped kids on Epstein Island.
Can I still talk to my Irish stepdad, or what level war are we at??
No, but they burned so-called "heretics" at the stake for trying to translate the Bible into English.

It’s more that various heretics over the years attempted to make unauthorized Biblical translations into common languages at the time. More recent examples of this - like Jehovah’s Witnesses “New World Translation” - are illustrative that the concern was and is basically valid. I‘m not even a papist and I can see what the real problem was.

>various heretics over the years attempted to make unauthorized Biblical translations

like the Johannine comma?

Of course it’s just as likely imo the “best early manuscripts” survived as long as they did because chunks of the originals got skipped - so they were buried in the architecture rather than manhandled. I cannot say for certain.

I don't understand what you are saying. Are you making excuses for the Johannine comma but judging, or frankly any earlier translation, while judging more modern ones (I think most translations are dogshit anyway)
I just don’t think I know enough about the state of the existing text-types that actually existed in the 3rd and 4th centuries, to make any sort of authoritative statement about it. St. Jerome received Latin texts which had it, that weren’t present in Greek manuscripts at the time. There’s a vast world of possibilities in that; and judging about “what seems most likely” centuries after the fact isn’t really something I take terribly seriously.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon
Some people might claim that the Ashkenazi Jews writing the Yiddish language in so called Hebrew letters is proof that Ashkenazi Jews ancestors were from ancient Israel

But the Ancient Hebrew language uses a different alphabet than the modern so called Hebrew alphabet

The language of Aramaic used in the liturgy of some middle eastern Christians is closer to ancient Hebrew than Yiddish is

Additionally Arabic is closer to Hebrew

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

Israel also known as Jacob was of Syrian or Aramean ancestry according to some translations of Genesis and Deuteroronomy

Syrian Palestinians have a higher percent ancestry from ancient Israel than Ashkenazi Jews

At least some of The liturgy in at least some Churches among the Church of the East is in Syriac

Part of a liturgy

Neither His Godhead is of the nature of the mother,
Nor His humanity of the nature of the Father;

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

Mar Babai Church of the East liturgy explaining what he thought of the trinity and the incarnation without using those words at link

word limit

web.archive.org/web/2017021008

Right; I’m not a Nestorean though - and therefore believe in the Hypostatic Union as affirmed at Chalcedon 🥂

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

I can understand the difference between the position of the Oriental Orthodox and some among the Church of the East

But I can not even understand what the rhird position of the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox that you call hypostatic Union is

But a Roman Catholic Pope wrote a statement of agreement with the Church of the East after the Roman Catholic Church so called infallibly dogmaticly declared them wrong in a council

The Hypostatic Union affirms Jesus Christ is fully God and fully Man; that is, two Natures - Human and Divine - united into a single Person.

What occasioned the discussion was the fallout / aftermath of the deposition of Abp. Nestorius, who infamously denied the use of the term “Theotokos” to the Virgin Mary - proposing instead the term “Christotokos“.

This was anathematized at the Third Ecumenical Council, largely due to the work of Abp. Cyril of Alexandria. One of his foundational texts affirmed a “single Nature” of Christ - but that teaching was clarified at Chalcedon with the more accurate term “Person”.

Monophysites are those that rejected the Chalcedonian “update” - insisting that Jesus Christ only has a single Nature; ostensibly on the grounds they think for sure that Abp. Cyril absolutely meant that, literally as stated - not that it was an outgrowth of the enormously complicated difficulties stemming from translating between vastly different languages.

To me, it’s quite obvious that Chalcedon is correct.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

This translation of liturgy by Mar Babai says

"Likewise the Sonship of the Son is in two natures, one person.
So the Holy Church has taught."

It mentions two natures and one person which seems to be the same thing Chalcedon said

So how is Chalcedon supposed to be different than what those members of the Church of the East who believe in that Liturgy believe?

Also does person mean

1 Individual

2 Persona

3 Human

Unclear

From what I see here, it looks basically Orthodox; it even says “Qnumas” is nearest-equivalent to the Greek “hypostasis” which is where that term Hypostatic Union comes in.

I’m not entirely sure but, that if they‘re claiming to be “the Nestorean Church”, that might be part of the “problem“ as Nestorius was deposed and Nestoreanism was anathametized. If they’re arguing it’s wrong to call Mary the “Theotokos”, there‘s the answer. But this brief doesn’t specify that.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

Book of Marginatha part 3 chapter 6

nestorian.org/body_book_of_mar

Hypostasis is translated as person in Hebrews Chapter 1 the exoress image of his person if I remember correctly & I might not

But person is a very problematic word choice in modern English

If one God is three persons is that one God three individuals, three persona, three hypostasis, three legal entities

This all has different meanings using the word person

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

Hypostasis is translated as person one time in Hebrew 1:3 in the king james and is not translated as person any other time in King James according to this link for it's strong concordance number

I would suggest that it is possible linguitically that the original references to the father, son and Holy spirit were referring to hypostasis but not referring to people in the modern sense of the word at all

blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g5

Yeah there’s the answer; they trip out over “Begetter of God”, which is their rendering of “Theotokos”. This was the entire subject matter of the Third Ecumenical Council; and the Fourth Ecumenical Council proved necessary to prevent an extreme reaction.

I’m probably not the guy to ask for help about the meaning of the word “person”; the default Greek term is ”prosopon” which heavily carries the connotation of “Face”. When discussing the Holy Trinity, “hypostases” is used like that. I don’t precisely know why they switched from “prosopon” to “hypostases” when talking about Divine Persons; might have something to do with the Divine Prosopon already being tied to that which “Man cannot look upon and live” - but that’s admittedly a stab in the dark so don’t quote me on that; my point though is that these normal everyday sorts of words tend to already be used in very concrete senses that can be misleading in such lofty philosophy.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

My understanding is that Greek Hypostasis which did not mean the same thing as Persona in all context became etruscan Persona which is not the same as Person in modern English in all context

"One person" when you talk to a normal English speaker who is not a lawyer means One Individual Human Being

If it is not a human it is not a person

Are they claiming there is one God composed of three individuals who are 3 human beings?

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

The word Individual is different than the word Persona

One individual can play multiple personas in a play

Multiple individuals can also play one persona in a play

They distinctly chose the word Person instead of Human, or Individual or Hypostasis or Persona

A person is a very poor word choice when speaking to modern English speakers

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon
If God is three human beings who are each different than each other

Then the properties of the Son must be different than the Father which must be different than the Holy Spirit

But if you take a look at the descriptions of each of them mainstream theologians I heard list exactly the same properties except who proceeds from who

But there is no where for a Omnipresent being to travel or proceed to because they are already there

Sure sure; but we already know that Divine Nature is what unites the Persons of the Trinity. The Son of God shares Divine Nature with the Holy Trinity; and Human Nature with Man - both in all fullness 100%
Greek Myth is packed with non-human persons; such as Cyclops, Medusa, Nymphs and Sirens etc etc.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

As far as I know that is incorrect and ancient Greek would not have called them Person because there is no Greek word that transliterates into Person

They might have been called Persons in later translations into other languages

"Greek Myth is packed with non-human persons; such as Cyclops, Medusa, Nymphs and Sirens etc etc."

They were characters in a play; the fact they could meaningfully be cast as characters played by actors is usually sufficient proof of their Personhood - independently of the precise terminology used. Ancient Greeks *did* have the word Prosopon, which is usually rendered “face” but conveys the same basic sense of Personhood. “Hypostasis” is an uncommon choice for the idea, but these Ancient Greeks apparently thought it was necessary to switch terms when applied to Divine Persons.

I don’t claim to understand why these facts are as they are; but I get the basic gist.

Divine Personhood must necessarily have many things distinguishing it from Human Personhood. Nevertheless, in the Gospel, at the Baptism of Christ, God the Father has a speaking role - as the Voice from Heaven claiming Jesus is ”His beloved Son in Whom I am well-pleased”. Among a few others.

The Personhood of the Holy Spirit is manifest as He Who spake by The Prophets.

And also, in the NT, as the Paraclete - Who was sent into the world as tongues of fire descending upon the Apostles, and rendering all these different languages mutually intelligible. At the Baptism of Christ He descended as a Dove alighting upon Lord Jesus. That specifically isn’t proof of Personhood on its own - but it’s made clear in the broader Biblical context that’s Who He is.

Follow

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

Can you please Name one property other than procession that the Holy Spirit has that the Father does not have or that the Father has that the Holy Spirit does not have

If there is not at least one property that is different then they can not be different persons

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 0

Can I name one other property of the Holy Spirit aside from procession-from The Father ? Is that the question ? I don’t have the least idea how I would even begin to answer that confidently.

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible; 

and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father; by Whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation, came down from the heavens and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man; and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate and suffered and was buried; and arose again on the third day according to the Scriptures; and ascended into the heavens heavens and sitteth at the right hand of the Father; and shall come again, with glory, to judge both the living and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end; 

and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life; Who proceedeth from the Father; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spake by the prophets;

and in One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. 

I confess one baptism for the remission of sins. 

I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the age to come. 

Amen.

Creedpoasting; I believe the Holy Spirit is a distinct Person from either the Father or the Son - not because I can list distinct properties they each possess; but because it’s clearly been the consensus of the Holy Fathers as far back as I care to look 🥂

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

But how can you believe something if you do not know what the something you believe in means in order to understand what you are believing in

How is saying you believe in the Consensus of the "holy fathers" any different than saying you believe in the Consensus of "scientists"

How do you know without a consensus which group of "holy fathers" to get your consensus from?

There are multiple groups claiming infallibke consensus

I believe the Consensus of the Holy Fathers because of their extreme holiness and sanctity - as exhibited in the Lives of the Saints.

Things like the distinct properties of the individual Persons of the Holy Trinity are transcendant of what human beings are even capable of knowing. See; Essence/Energies Distinction, articulated by St. Gregory Palamas.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

You can not know the "holy fathers" were moral without a moral standard and if you get your moral standard from the "holy fathers" then that is circular reasoning

That’s where the Gospel comes in; and the Holy Tradition of the Church. What characterizes holiness and sanctity is a life radically transformed in accordance to the Gospel. Holy Saints are taken up into Divine Energies, and made participants in the Life of Jesus Christ - which is Eternal Life - and The Church recognizes and Glorifies the lives of these people in response. God is Glorious in His Saints.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica @caekislove @GoyGirl @JeffGrimesArt @Xenophon

There are at least four different Roman Catholic Church types

Ultrajectine or Ultramontane
Sedevacantist or not Sedevacantist

Additionally there are

Church of the East
Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox

Each of these claims consensus by a grpup vote but disagrees about who gets to vote

How do you know which is

"The Only Correct" group of voters

Without appealing to group votes because each voted for themselves

Thata very good, solid, Ecclesiological question. While it does not have an immediate and obvious answer these days, it is nevertheless a critically important question, that one must take seriously.

Who is, and who is not, The Church, the literal Body of Christ ?

The True Orthodox answer to that question, is those who adhere to the Orthodox Faith. Who, among all living people, truly believe as the First Century Christians and all other centuries’ that follow ? As such we regard the Communion of Faith as the preeminent Ecclesiological qualification.

Other Communions may believe in the same qualification; and yet believe and teach different doctrine. As such, we consider them as outside - because the literal Body of Christ isn’t going to disagree on any point of doctrine.

Other Communions may believe in different qualifications; ie that the literal Body of Christ is all of those that share the Chalice with the Pope of Rome, say, or some particular other Bishop. We True Orthodox consider them as outside, as well; because The Faith is what’s most critical.

In other words, unanimity about the Deposit of Faith, is what we hold to. While I harbor no animosity toward other Communions, I do not consider them to be The Church. This, we believe, is the Traditional Ecclesiology.

"It's impossible to know what morality & good behavior are, so A) no point in trying, or B) make it up yourself..."

No. Just no. These things weren't decided arbitrarily for no reason by nobodies. We've had thousands of years to test them, too. Maybe I'm a simpleton, & that's ironically more in tune with life's complexities than assuming I'll outsmart them.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Merovingian Club

A club for red-pilled exiles.