Difference between Eastern and Western Orthodox

[James A]

it doesn't say that about the Spirit though, so by that logic the Spirit isn't consubstantial with the Father and the Son.

plus, again, the Creed says He became Incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.

Yes, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of same nature, per the doctrine of Ontological Trinity.

Let me make this clear for the second time, incarnate Son is 100% human and 100%God. Let us call this "mytery" rather than twisting the Creed.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yes, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of same nature, per the doctrine of Ontological Trinity.

Let me maker this clear for the second time, incarnate Son is 100% human and 100%God. Let us call this "mytery" rather than twisting the Creed.

except, according to your history as well, I am not twisting the Creed (unless you think you know theology more than St Cyril of Alexandria or St Cyril of Jerusalem).

 

[James A]

except, according to your history as well, I am not twisting the Creed (unless you think you know theology more than St Cyril of Alexandria or St Cyril of Jerusalem).

It is not "me" and "you" here..I thought we are presenting our own understanding of some of the early doctrines pf Christianity.

 

[prodromos]

It is not "me" and "you" here..I thought we are presenting our own understanding of some of the early doctrines pf Christianity.

You are suggesting our understanding is a twisting of the creed though.

 

[ArmyMatt]

It is not "me" and "you" here..I thought we are presenting our own understanding of some of the early doctrines pf Christianity.

I am. you are reducing it to something that neither of our traditions recognize.

 

[James A]

You are suggesting our understanding is a twisting of the creed though.

I regret using the term "twisting". I did not mean to be disrespectful.

I do understand we are using our limited wisdom to understand the infinite wisdom which, by definition, is beyond us.

Hope we can continue a productive discussion here in this thread.

 

[James A]

I am. you are reducing it to something that neither of our traditions recognize.

Neither of our traditions ? - this I what Wikipedia(Miaphysitism) says

Rather than using the wording established at the Council of Chalcedon (451) that Jesus is one "person" (in Greek ὑπόστασις hypostasis) in two "natures" (in Greek φύσεις physeis), a divine nature and a human nature, they hold that Jesus, the "Incarnate Word, is fully divine and fully human, in one physis."[1]

 

[ArmyMatt]

Neither of our traditions ? - this I what Wikipedia(Miaphysitism) says

Rather than using the wording established at the Council of Chalcedon (451) that Jesus is one "person" (in Greek ὑπόστασις hypostasis) in two "natures" (in Greek φύσεις physeis), a divine nature and a human nature, they hold that Jesus, the "Incarnate Word, is fully divine and fully human, in one physis."[1]

....we have a common history even after Chalcedon....there's more to it than a Wikipedia article...