Textkit Logo

Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Philosophers and rhetoricians, Welcome!

Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Isaac Newton » Sun Apr 22, 2018 6:48 am

Here's Christian Dogmatics, Carl E. Braaten, Robert W. Jenson, Gerhard O. Forde, p.506 :

"Christological controversy did not end at Chalcedon. The pressures from the right and left wings continued for more than a millennium. At the fifth ecumenical council in Constantinople (A.D. 553) an inference from Chalcedon was drawn, proposed by Leontius of Byzantium, affirming the 'impersonal' humanity of Christ. This is known as the doctrine of the anhypostasia and enhypostasia. Today it sounds strange to learn that orthodox christology entails the denial that Jesus was an individual human person. Docetism seems to have been thrown out by one council only to reappear in the next. The council of Constantinople denied that Jesus had a human hypostasis, something that belongs to every other human being. Did this not conflict with the confession of Chalcedon that Jesus was :'homoousious with us as to his manhood; in all things like unto us'? Did not the doctrine of the anhypostatic nature of Christ rob him of something essential to every person: human personality and self-consciousness? This is the common view. Some critics have angrily dismissed this doctrine as the 'beheading' of Christ ; others have alleged that it represents the victory of monophysitism. Consider the sharp attack by Paul Althaus: "One cannot separate the natutre from the person. Human personality is an essential constituent of human nature. Hence 'anhypostasia' abolishes the true humanity of Jesus, his believing and praying human ego, the truth of his being tempted."
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Mindy » Sun Apr 22, 2018 8:27 am

I believe Trinity. It is a basic Christian doctrine. Without it Christianity doesn't exist.
Mindy
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:05 pm

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Ursinus » Sun Apr 22, 2018 6:25 pm

St. John of Damascus says that the root of nature and persons is the root of all heresies. John couldn't have anticipated that not only would people many years done the land confuse person and nature, but also the concepts of person and nature as such. Must modern trinitarianism is straight heresy, usually some form of tritheism. Moderns tend to import Freudian, psychological conceptions of persons into the doctrine of the Trinity. But the word hypostasis doesn't have that meaning at all.

Such a conception of personhood, i.e., the modern psychologist version, plagues Jensen's treatment here. God by joining human nature with himself renews and saves universal human nature, in doing so uniting all persons who participated in humanity. Jensen would destroy the hypostatic union. On his account, there is no union, strictly speaking. All unions must have some principle of their unity. The principle of the unity of the hypostatic union is the divine hypostasis of the Logos, which assumed to itself human nature. Jensen's treatment implies a species of Nestorianism, which destroys the unity of Christ.

Jensen's comments about Christ not having genuine humanity on the orthodox view of the hypostatic union are somewhat ridiculous. It is through his human nature that Christ suffers, is tempted, etc. But it is the one Christ, the single divine hypostasis that undergoes all these things. He is the subject of all the activities proper to each nature. Jensen would rend the one Christ in two. The divine person doing activities proper to the divine nature. The human person doing the activities proper to the human nature. This is straight Nestorianism.

Moderns almost across the board are very bad on the incarnation and the doctrine of the Trinity. Stick to the holy fathers.
In hoc enim fallimur, quod mortem prospicimus" -- Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Vestibulum: Revised and Expanded

Gratia et Pax,

Joannes Ursinus
User avatar
Ursinus
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:06 am

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Isaac Newton » Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:14 pm

Mindy wrote:I believe Trinity. It is a basic Christian doctrine. Without it Christianity doesn't exist.


More accurately, without it Trinitarianism doesn't exist. True Christianity (the Christianity of the apostles) did not see the Almighty as a Triunity of persons IMHO.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Mindy » Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:03 am

May we be given the spirit of discernment so that we won't make mistakes. I am afraid I can't and will not accept any opinions posted on the forums, which are against the Scriptures.
Mindy
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:05 pm

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Markos » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:54 pm

Mindy wrote:I am afraid I can't and will not accept any opinions posted on the forums, which are against the Scriptures.

Hi, Mindy:

Does this sentence make sense to you?

καλὰ μὲν τὰ κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, κακὰ δὲ τὰ κατὰ τῶν γραφῶν.
οὐ μανθάνω γράφειν, ἀλλὰ γράφω τοῦ μαθεῖν.
Markos
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2934
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado

None

Postby Mindy » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:09 pm

deleted
Last edited by Mindy on Wed Apr 25, 2018 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mindy
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:05 pm

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Markos » Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:04 pm

Mindy wrote:I am only interested in Greek, not in any controversial issues.

Me too.
Markos wrote:
Mindy wrote:I am afraid I can't and will not accept any opinions posted on the forums, which are against the Scriptures.

Hi, Mindy:

Does this sentence make sense to you?

καλὰ μὲν τὰ κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, κακὰ δὲ τὰ κατὰ τῶν γραφῶν.

Mindy wrote:Hi Markos:

I am sorry for not understanding it.

That's okay. Do you understand this?

ὁ μὲν ἀγαθὸς ἄνθρωπος κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς λέγει, ὁ δὲ κακὸς κατὰ τῶν γραφῶν.
οὐ μανθάνω γράφειν, ἀλλὰ γράφω τοῦ μαθεῖν.
Markos
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2934
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Mindy » Tue Apr 24, 2018 8:43 pm

Hi Markos:

I am sorry for not understanding it, either.

If it is not good, it is better not to know it.

Most of the Chinese teachers of Hebrew on the internet don't believe Trinity. Even though I was grateful for their teaching of Hebrew, finally I had to leave their forums.

I am a bit surprised to read anti-Trinity posts here. My compromise is to only focus on Greek. But unkindness may lead to the end of further communication.
Mindy
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:05 pm

Re: Anhypostasis -- Docetism through the back door .

Postby Ursinus » Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:58 pm

I hope I am not being implicated in the anti-Trinitarianism. I was in fact defending it.
In hoc enim fallimur, quod mortem prospicimus" -- Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Vestibulum: Revised and Expanded

Gratia et Pax,

Joannes Ursinus
User avatar
Ursinus
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:06 am


Return to The Academy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests