Mainstream clergy with non-mainstream or non-Nicene theology

[hedrick]

Note that in my response I took the Nicene Creed in its original context. That is, I did not take it to include Chalcedon, nor the later formulations of the Trinity. As I noted, mainline theology includes both the Incarnation and the Trinity, but not necessarily the ontological form in which those doctrines were worked out in Church history. This is part of our skepticism of the Greekification of theology. But that's mostly post-Nicea.

Even concerns over omnipotence are part of the skepticism about Greekification. We see the Bible as assuring us that God in in control, and what he intends will happen. But the way in which he pursued this, including coming as a human and dying, are not consistent with the unmoved mover as commonly described.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

.....This is part of our skepticism of the Greekification of theology. But that's mostly post-Nicea.
Even concerns over omnipotence are part of the skepticism about Greekification..

Could you explain that because 'Greekification' is Hellenization and that took place during the time of the early church. By the first century Hellenization was in full swing.
'Greekification' to me would be more of an analogy approach to scripture with Origen as an example. Paul seemed to be more Hellenistic in his approach also.

 

[redleghunter]

Could you explain that because 'Greekification' is Hellenization and that took place during the time of the early church. By the first century Hellenization was in full swing.

Hellenization goes back in the Levant before Christianity and before Rome conquered Palestine. There was already heavy influence in the Diaspora. However resistance in Judea.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Hellenization goes back in the Levant before Christianity and before Rome conquered Palestine. There was already heavy influence in the Diaspora. However resistance in Judea.

Yes I was wondering how that related to Hendrics post.