tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post8108447450843219795..comments2024-03-21T10:33:24.876-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: Basil 'the Great': Letter XXXVIII - a clarification of termsDavid Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-58598453267638106402012-09-29T19:11:40.945-07:002012-09-29T19:11:40.945-07:00The Nicene Creed was composed by two consecutive s...The Nicene Creed was composed by two consecutive synods: Nicaea and Constantinople, both in the fourth century. [You linked to the first and incomplete version].The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09663692507774640889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-15054248222743844572012-09-29T12:50:50.096-07:002012-09-29T12:50:50.096-07:00Lvka,
That statement appears nowhere in the Nice...Lvka, <br /><br />That statement appears nowhere in the Nicene Creed<br /><br />http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.iii.html<br /><br />?<br /><br />You guys baffle me. Don't expect me to ever reply to anything you or Jnorm ever say again. Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-1786797320666566522012-09-29T04:13:31.896-07:002012-09-29T04:13:31.896-07:00"3.) Does your triadology allow you to worshi...<i>"3.) Does your triadology allow you to worship both Jesus and the Holy Spirit?"<br /><br />>>> Absolutely and ultimately, No. <br /><br />"I know you think you're following Nicea, but your not."<br /><br />>>> A statement you have failed to prove.</i><br /><br /><br /><br />Since Nicaean Creed makes it clear that <i>"the Holy Spirit [...] is worshipped and glorified together with the Father and the Son"</i>, I think you've proven it yourself that you're not in agreement with the Fathers on this, as JNorm said.The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09663692507774640889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-63482324169446962122012-09-24T19:13:25.294-07:002012-09-24T19:13:25.294-07:00Jnorm,
"1.) Can you call both Jesus and the...Jnorm, <br /><br />"1.) Can you call both Jesus and the Holy Spirit God at all? Yes or no"<br /><br />Define the term "God". <br /><br />"2.) Does your triadology allow you to pray to Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Yes or no"<br /><br />>>No. <br /><br />"3.) Does your triadology allow you to worship both Jesus and the Holy Spirit?"<br /><br />>>> Absolutely and ultimately, No. <br /><br />"4.) In adhering to Aristotle's and Origen's view of the inter-changeableness of Person and Nature"<br /><br />>>By interchangeable do you mean logically or ontologically pertaining to subject?<br /><br />"aren't you setting yourself up for either some kind of tri-theism or some form of new Arianism?"<br /><br />>>Aren't you needing to actually connect the dots there before you make that conclusion? Write out your syllogism and i will take it under consideration. <br /><br />"Also, wouldn't this change your Christology?"<br /><br />>>I don't have ESP Jnorm. Why don't you just untwist your tongue and say what you mean?<br /><br />"I know you think you're following Nicea, but your not."<br /><br />>>>A statement you have failed to prove. <br /><br />"However, I do know who you are following (probably unknowingly). But I will keep it to myself for now."<br /><br />>>>You are probably going to mention Curcellaeus. Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-25250872351393738392012-09-24T12:17:49.089-07:002012-09-24T12:17:49.089-07:00Drake said:
"Jnorm,
Your question is ambiguo...Drake said:<br /><b>"Jnorm,<br /><br />Your question is ambiguous as are most of your comments here. I have already stated my position in detail. I don't really care to discuss anything more with you."</b><br /><br /><br />My questions aren't ambiguous, and there are a number of things about your triadology that don't seem right and so I would like to ask some more questions if you don't mind.<br /><br /><b>1.)</b> Can you call both Jesus and the Holy Spirit God at all? Yes or no<br /><br /><b>2.)</b> Does your triadology allow you to pray to Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Yes or no<br /><br /><b>3.)</b> Does your triadology allow you to worship both Jesus and the Holy Spirit?<br /><br /><b>4.)</b> In adhering to Aristotle's and Origen's view of the inter-changeableness of Person and Nature, aren't you setting yourself up for either some kind of tri-theism or some form of new Arianism? Also, wouldn't this change your Christology?<br /><br /> <br /><br />I know you think you're following Nicea, but <b>your not.</b> However, I do know who you are following <b>(probably unknowingly)</b>. But I will keep it to myself for now.Jnormhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06749159886390240183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-82403554072905489522012-09-22T20:28:53.730-07:002012-09-22T20:28:53.730-07:00Oh, come on, guys! Don't tell me you still bel...Oh, come on, guys! Don't tell me you still believe in the Trinity! That's, like, <i>sooooo</i> fourth century! ;-)The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09663692507774640889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-86381810331853755482012-09-20T20:55:32.367-07:002012-09-20T20:55:32.367-07:00Jnorm,
Your question is ambiguous as are most of...Jnorm, <br /><br />Your question is ambiguous as are most of your comments here. I have already stated my position in detail. I don't really care to discuss anything more with you. <br /><br />Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-52370778630672563632012-09-20T20:10:38.720-07:002012-09-20T20:10:38.720-07:00Drake said:
"
I guess I will; ask it this way...Drake said:<br /><b>"<br />I guess I will; ask it this way: Do you believe that the Godhead has three minds or one?"</b><br /><br /><br />Do you believe the Godhead to be Indivisible and Undivided? Yes or no<br /><br /><br />One problem I see isn't really your 3 minds view. It's your 3 minds view of separateness. Which makes me think you might believe in 3 independent ghost/human spirit gods.<br /><br />Jnormhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06749159886390240183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-41160167088441557462012-09-20T19:10:09.142-07:002012-09-20T19:10:09.142-07:00Good. Good. Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-59703294105178328402012-09-20T17:58:46.491-07:002012-09-20T17:58:46.491-07:00Hi Drake,
Three distinct "minds", for s...Hi Drake,<br /><br />Three distinct "minds", for sure; and yet, they are 'one', just as we (believers) are to be 'one'.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-55782932228165222962012-09-20T16:45:12.041-07:002012-09-20T16:45:12.041-07:00David,
I guess I will; ask it this way: Do you b...David, <br /><br />I guess I will; ask it this way: Do you believe that the Godhead has three minds or one? And by mind I do not mean one agenda or perception. I mean intellectual faculty. Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-39178530046007878842012-09-18T10:57:18.221-07:002012-09-18T10:57:18.221-07:00Hi Max,
Earlier today, you posted:
==Off topic q...Hi Max,<br /><br />Earlier today, you posted:<br /><br />==Off topic question: Where exactly was he inaccurate? Was the reason for it a theological bias?==<br /><br />I have some written notes from an older reading of Jackson's translation wherein I encountered some somewhat 'odd' renderings; for instance, he would sometimes translate θεότης as "God". But, most recently, I was troubled by his omission of anathemas from the original Nicene Creed (though, to his credit, he at least informs his readers that he had done so).<br /><br />==I heard many translators of the NPNF were biased towards Anglicanism... do you think so?==<br /><br />I think that is a 'fair' assessment; but, with that said, both 'high' and 'low' church Anglicans contributed to the series, some as editors, some as translators, some as both.<br /><br />Oh, and there is the issue of the American edition; I am pretty sure that there were some important changes in the notes of the American edition (at least, that is what I remember, but I am getting old [grin]).<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-44581103381003619132012-09-18T08:07:01.935-07:002012-09-18T08:07:01.935-07:00"Having found Jackson to be less than accurat..."Having found Jackson to be less than accurate in a number of his translations..."<br /><br />Off topic question: Where exactly was he inaccurate? Was the reason for it a theological bias? <br /><br />I heard many translators of the NPNF were biased towards Anglicanism... do you think so? Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13363145901392951723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-86732057277873454392012-09-17T11:33:24.490-07:002012-09-17T11:33:24.490-07:00Hello Max,
Thanks much for taking the time to com...Hello Max,<br /><br />Thanks much for taking the time to comment; you wrote:<br /><br />==Also see Basil's letter 236 for more vindication of the Monarchy doctrine through commentary on Mark 13:32.==<br /><br />I only have Jackson's translation of #236 in NPNF 8.276-279. Having found Jackson to be less than accurate in a number of his translations, coupled with the fact that do not own Deferrari's translation (3rd vol.) to compare it with, I have refrained for mentioning this letter. Migne's online PG editions are not that clean, making it difficult to work with the Greek, so until I obtain the <i>Loeb</i> edition, I am going to reserve judgment. <br /><br /><b>[BTW if anyone reading this has Deferrari's 3rd vol., please let me know; the copyright it up, and you can share the entire volume with the world.]</b><br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-53003206450523450292012-09-17T11:21:38.132-07:002012-09-17T11:21:38.132-07:00Hi Drake,
Last Saturday, you posted:
==The first...Hi Drake,<br /><br />Last Saturday, you posted:<br /><br />==The first quotation is clear and I agree with it. The second seems too ambiguous to make a judgment on.==<br /><br />Interesting...would you my clarifying what you find to be "ambiguous" ?<br /><br />Thanks much.<br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-65653451857192815542012-09-15T19:55:23.376-07:002012-09-15T19:55:23.376-07:00Also see Basil's letter 236 for more vindicati...Also see Basil's letter 236 for more vindication of the Monarchy doctrine through commentary on Mark 13:32. Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13363145901392951723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-88329822888568028582012-09-15T14:09:19.398-07:002012-09-15T14:09:19.398-07:00David,
The first quotation is clear and I agree ...David, <br /><br />The first quotation is clear and I agree with it. The second seems too ambiguous to make a judgment on. Drake Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05925446446813424725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-32416618795226178152012-09-14T14:22:27.438-07:002012-09-14T14:22:27.438-07:00Hi Jnorm,
You wrote:
==Thanks for posting this D...Hi Jnorm,<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br />==Thanks for posting this David! This was excellent!==<br /><br />My pleasure! And thank you for your continued interest, and especially for the charity you extend to others in your posts. From my side, you are a dear brother in Christ.<br /><br />God bless,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-91903129580322863622012-09-14T13:34:50.195-07:002012-09-14T13:34:50.195-07:00Thanks for posting this David! This was excellent!...Thanks for posting this David! This was excellent!Jnormhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06749159886390240183noreply@blogger.com