Yes, the Filioque is important.

Al Masihi said:

Nothing here refutes what I originally said, Being a cause of the Holy Spirit doesn’t mean being its originator. The council’s statements don’t deny the authority over the Holy Spirit was something given to the Son by the Father. The Son received the authority to send the spirit from the Father and proceeds from him and through him. Technically if the spirit proceeded through the Son it would also make him a cause either way.

Click to expand...

think that sorta makes sense

but in Genesis 1, God speaks Words, which then create the material universe

God SAYS, "let there be light"... And there WAS light

so God's spoken Word is His creative power

everything ever made was made by the Word of God

so... If you say that the Breezy Breath ("Spirit" so called) of God comes from the the creative Word...

you are almost borderline verging on saying that the the "Spirit" is a CREATED entity...

which created material mundane entities, being made, are not eternal or divine...

so you just about wind up claiming, that a member of the godhead is not divine but mundane, not eternal but made

i really can't imagine why Christendom has made this issue such a stumbling block

it makes more intuitive sense to say, everything eternal is of God the father, whilst everything made is from His Word...

which has been granted authority over everything in Heaven and earth, but authority to wield is not the same as "retroactively" getting credit for having created something

by terrestrial analogy, Joseph was given authority over all of Egypt by the pharaoh... He then had authority to DIRECT all of Egypt 's resources...

but nobody started saying that Joseph CREATED Pharaoh or Egypt

-----

moreover, the Filioque implies that the council of Nicea overlooked and missed an allegedly important point...

the Church "Council of VICTORY (Nike)" was INCOMPLETE, for 700 years?

that's a serious claim... How does one fall into heresy by limiting the ORIGIN of the breezy breathy "Spirit" of God the father, to the father alone - it's HIS breath - even though God now rests all authority in His spoken Word?

i don't understand how on earth this became an issue, but it's obviously Powerfully motivated

Erik Nelson said:

did I say it does??

i hear you Accusing me of reading the Filioque into Scripture, then turning around and reading into my post

(very clever, but eventually people may start noticing)

that verse is relevant because it deals with both of these disputed aspects of the godhead, much like Psalms 33:16

Click to expand...

forgive me then if you didn't, but it was an odd verse to just throw out there without context or why you posted it. if that's not what you mean, I apologize for assuming.

ArmyMatt said:

forgive me then if you didn't, but it was an odd verse to just throw out there without context or why you posted it. if that's not what you mean, I apologize for assuming.

Click to expand...

me too

technically, i agree with your exact words, that that verse doesn't suggest a Filioque esque interpretation... was tossing out Scriptural food for thought right before crashing for the night here

try as I might i cannot yet perceive the Filioque in any of the scriptures I'm familiar with... Again it almost implies that the so called HS is a created creature resulting from the action of the Word... Which would MAKE part of the godhead of a CREATED mundane material nature

ArmyMatt said:

please, show me where cause and originator mean different things from the actual time of the Council.

Click to expand...

The meaning of cause is that the Son has the authority to send the Spirit. And the meaning of originator is that the Spirit in origin proceeds from the Son.

ArmyMatt said:

it was your explanation, without showing any evidence from the time that your explanation is correct.

Click to expand...

I don’t need to, considering Jesus said that all authority in heaven and in Earth has been given to me.

Al Masihi said:

The meaning of cause is that the Son has the authority to send the Spirit. And the meaning of originator is that the Spirit in origin proceeds from the Son.

Click to expand...

Your response is lacking any references from sources at the time, which is what was requested. Your personal opinion has already been noted.

Al Masihi said:

The meaning of cause is that the Son has the authority to send the Spirit. And the meaning of originator is that the Spirit in origin proceeds from the Son.

Click to expand...

again, this is your understanding. show that this is how Rome has always defined it from Rome's history.

Al Masihi said:

I don’t need to, considering Jesus said that all authority in heaven and in Earth has been given to me.

Click to expand...

again, you need to show that this is the understanding Rome has always had.

ArmyMatt said:

again, this is your understanding. show that this is how Rome has always defined it from Rome's history.

Click to expand...

They already did by not defining the Son as an originator of the Spirit.

Erik Nelson said:

me too

technically, i agree with your exact words, that that verse doesn't suggest a Filioque esque interpretation... was tossing out Scriptural food for thought right before crashing for the night here

try as I might i cannot yet perceive the Filioque in any of the scriptures I'm familiar with... Again it almost implies that the so called HS is a created creature resulting from the action of the Word... Which would MAKE part of the godhead of a CREATED mundane material nature

Click to expand...

agreed.

Al Masihi said:

They already did by not defining the Son as an originator of the Spirit.

Click to expand...

previous Councils of theirs say otherwise.

and again, that's your explanation. what you need to do is actually reference something official from Rome which makes the distinction you are making.

The spirit is life. John 6:63, Romans 8:2.

Jesus is the way the truth and the life. John 14:6.

So there is some deep identification of Jesus, the son, the Word Incarnate. With the spirit. Which enlivens and gives life?

From a purely Christian perspective. There is NO ENLIVENING SPIRIT OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH as the body of Christ.

So if the spirit originates from and proceeds FROM the father. Even still It apparently. proceeds WITH or AMIDST or IN THE MIDST OF. The word the son. Christ. The church?

Perhaps the Filioque is an attempt to clarify that position. That there is no dispensing of enlivening spirit outside of the confines of the church?

ArmyMatt said:

agreed.

Click to expand...

If the Nicene Creed. Was incomplete? Then, perhaps so also. Was the Canon? Defined at about the same time. Perhaps we need to include the book of Jasher, The Gospel of Thomas. And other such works??

Erik Nelson said:

If the Nicene Creed. Was incomplete? Then, perhaps so also. Was the Canon? Defined at about the same time. Perhaps we need to include the book of Jasher, The Gospel of Thomas. And other such works??

Click to expand...

according to Ephesus and Chalcedon, the Creed was complete. and the canon is fine as well, because one of the things that makes the canon, the canon, is the canon's use in the Church.

ArmyMatt said:

that's the problem. love is between persons, not a person itself. this also does not make sense since the Spirit is also a Person of the Trinity, so is the Holy Spirit the love between the Spirit and the Father? and is the Spirit the love between the Spirit and the Son?

Click to expand...

Didn't St Gregory Palamas refer to the Holy Spirit as the "Eros" between the Father and the Son?

David Cabrera said:

Didn't St Gregory Palamas refer to the Holy Spirit as the "Eros" between the Father and the Son?

Click to expand...

yes, in that He unites Father and Son in His own Person, but the other Two Persons do that as well.

it depends on what you mean.

GregConstantine said:

So, if a Roman Catholic truly believes what her church teaches about the papacy, why would they ignore or brush aside what Pope Leo did and said regarding the Filioque and the Creed?

Click to expand...

The doctrine of abrogation?