Proof of Filioque

[Jeronimomoulia]

Imagine a father and his son, with a right relationship of love; the action of the father is different of the action of the son; their actions are unchangeable: the father blesses the son and the son obeyes the father. What is the common of both? It is the spirit of love of both; it is just one spirit for both.

The Holy Spirit is God; he has the nature of God: who gave him his nature? Not the father, nor the son. If the Father gave him his divine nature, the Holy Spirit will be the son of the Father, and brother of Christ, but there´s only one son. If the Son gave him his divine nature, then the Son will be also Father.

The action of generation is the action of the Father to the Son: gen-eration: "gen" means nature: the Father gives his divine nature to his Son: but, what about the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit proceeds through creation, then the Holy Spirit will not be God, but a creature.

Therefore, the Holy Spirit cant proceed only from the Father, as orthodox church teaches wrongly.

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the relationship of the Father with the Son; the Father blesses the Son and the Son obeys the Father, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of love which leads God, it is the mutual love of the Father with the Son.

The though of God engenders another person besides the Father. Does the mutual action of love engenders another person? No, but this mutual action of love is another person. The Holy Spirit is not the Son of any father, but He is the eternal strenght produced by the embrace of the two eternal waves equal in the one God: the Father and the Son.

If we have the Thought of God, it´s to say, Christ or the faith, we will think according to God. If we have the Spirit of God, we will obey God as sons. Christ is the faith, and the Holy Spirit is the love to God; for us it means obedience, our justification.

What´s the only difference between the Father and the Son? the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son: otherwise the Father and the Son are the one God. So, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, but otherwise He is the one God as the Father and the Son are the one God Almighty.

 

[barryrob]

Imagine a father and his son, with a right relationship of love; the action of the father is different of the action of the son; their actions are unchangeable: the father blesses the son and the son obeyes the father. What is the common of both? It is the spirit of love of both; it is just one spirit for both.

The Holy Spirit is God; he has the nature of God: who gave him his nature? Not the father, nor the son. If the Father gave him his divine nature, the Holy Spirit will be the son of the Father, and brother of Christ, but there´s only one son. If the Son gave him his divine nature, then the Son will be also Father.

The action of generation is the action of the Father to the Son: gen-eration: "gen" means nature: the Father gives his divine nature to his Son: but, what about the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit proceeds through creation, then the Holy Spirit will not be God, but a creature.

Therefore, the Holy Spirit cant proceed only from the Father, as orthodox church teaches wrongly.

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the relationship of the Father with the Son; the Father blesses the Son and the Son obeys the Father, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of love which leads God, it is the mutual love of the Father with the Son.

The though of God engenders another person besides the Father. Does the mutual action of love engenders another person? No, but this mutual action of love is another person. The Holy Spirit is not the Son of any father, but He is the eternal strenght produced by the embrace of the two eternal waves equal in the one God: the Father and the Son.

If we have the Thought of God, it´s to say, Christ or the faith, we will think according to God. If we have the Spirit of God, we will obey God as sons. Christ is the faith, and the Holy Spirit is the love to God; for us it means obedience, our justification.

What´s the only difference between the Father and the Son? the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son: otherwise the Father and the Son are the one God. So, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, but otherwise He is the one God as the Father and the Son are the one God Almighty.

If the son and the father are "one" God then according to John 17:22-23:-

Also, I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be ONE just as we are ONE. 23　I in union with them and you in union with me, in order that they may be perfected into ONE, that the world may have the knowledge that you sent me forth and that you loved them just as you loved me.

That makes about 14 (approx.) in the trinity??

 

[rickfleming]

Imagine a father and his son, with a right relationship of love; the action of the father is different of the action of the son; their actions are unchangeable: the father blesses the son and the son obeyes the father. What is the common of both? It is the spirit of love of both; it is just one spirit for both.

The Holy Spirit is God; he has the nature of God: who gave him his nature? Not the father, nor the son. If the Father gave him his divine nature, the Holy Spirit will be the son of the Father, and brother of Christ, but there´s only one son. If the Son gave him his divine nature, then the Son will be also Father.

The action of generation is the action of the Father to the Son: gen-eration: "gen" means nature: the Father gives his divine nature to his Son: but, what about the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit proceeds through creation, then the Holy Spirit will not be God, but a creature.

Therefore, the Holy Spirit cant proceed only from the Father, as orthodox church teaches wrongly.

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the relationship of the Father with the Son; the Father blesses the Son and the Son obeys the Father, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of love which leads God, it is the mutual love of the Father with the Son.

The though of God engenders another person besides the Father. Does the mutual action of love engenders another person? No, but this mutual action of love is another person. The Holy Spirit is not the Son of any father, but He is the eternal strenght produced by the embrace of the two eternal waves equal in the one God: the Father and the Son.

If we have the Thought of God, it´s to say, Christ or the faith, we will think according to God. If we have the Spirit of God, we will obey God as sons. Christ is the faith, and the Holy Spirit is the love to God; for us it means obedience, our justification.

What´s the only difference between the Father and the Son? the Father is the Father and the Son is the Son: otherwise the Father and the Son are the one God. So, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, but otherwise He is the one God as the Father and the Son are the one God Almighty.

Hello, there are definitely several other Orthodox on the forums who could give you much better evidence about the filoque, however I will try.

It wasn't for several hundred years until certain priests in I think Spain started to add the filoque to the creed, so it would not be proper to try to say it was always "truth" and Orthodoxy distorted the creed. It was an addition to the creed which was not universally accepted by ecumenical council, as the original creed was by being accepted by the Church body as a whole. Therefore the Orthodox aren't in the position to have to prove not including it in the creed, rather those who do include it in the creed have the burden of having to prove why they add it when it was never affirmed by the Church body.

The issue is the origin of the uncreated energy of God. To say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son warps the monotheistic properties of God. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, the Son is begotten from the Father, and the Father is unchanging and does not proceed from anything and was never begotten. Although they are all one God, and have the uncreated energies of God, the Father alone is the singular source of the uncreated energy of God. If the workings of the uncreated energies do not originate from the Father alone, then there are multiple sources of the uncreated energy.

The Holy Spirit proceeding from the uncreated energies of the Father through the Son is a single source for the uncreated energy... the Father. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one/equal in all other respects. This maintains monotheism. Receiving the Holy Spirit through the Son allows us to share in the Holy Spirit and to be Sons (adopted) of the Father as Jesus is the Son (begotten) of the Father. The difference in that is that Jesus is both begotten of the Father and of Man through Mary and therefore inherits the natures of God and Humanity, while we need to concentrate on using the help given to us to heal the sickness (sin) within our human nature. What Jesus described in his teachings, for us to love God more than anything else and to love everyone else just as the Father loves.

The allowing of the uncreated energies to be sourced in both the Father and the Son could distort monotheism by having multiple sources of the uncreated energies, as well as disturb the balance of the Trinity. I should point out, I don't think Orthodox in general refer to non-Orthodox as polytheists, but I think the filoque could make it logically occur...

Please forgive me if I misspeak of Orthodoxy, as I am Orthodox laity and newly Orthodox at that! In answering is also an attempt to continue learning.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

If the Holy Spirit proceeds from the relationship of the Father and the Son, if makes potential provision for God to be an ever-expanding pleroma of God-persons.

If the mutual love relationship between the Father and the Son spirated the Holy Spirit, then the mutual love relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Father would spirate a fourth God-person as a Quadrinity; and the mutual love relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Son would spirate a fifth God-person as a Quintinity.

Then those five God-persons would all have a mutual love relationship that would each spirate four more God-persons as twenty God-persons. And those twenty would spirate more God-persons by each individual relationship if mutual love. As would all those God-persons. As would those God-persons. ...ad infinitum...

An infinitely-expanding pleroma of God-persons by mutual love relationships.

AND... Depending on how those proceeding extended God-persons were referred to (Sons, Daughters, Family, etc.??), God could be characterized in any number of ways; such as incestuous, homosexual, etc.

Filioque is gross error that makes provision for heinous heresy.

 

[bbbbbbb]

If the Holy Spirit proceeds from the relationship of the Father and the Son, if makes potential provision for God to be an ever-expanding pleroma of God-persons.

If the mutual love relationship between the Father and the Son spirated the Holy Spirit, then the mutual love relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Father would spirate a fourth God-person as a Quadrinity; and the mutual love relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Son would spirate a fifth God-person as a Quintinity.

Then those five God-persons would all have a mutual love relationship that would each spirate four more God-persons as twenty God-persons. And those twenty would spirate more God-persons by each individual relationship if mutual love. As would all those God-persons. As would those God-persons. ...ad infinitum...

An infinitely-expanding pleroma of God-persons by mutual love relationships.

AND... Depending on how those proceeding extended God-persons were referred to (Sons, Daughters, Family, etc.??), God could be characterized in any number of ways; such as incestuous, homosexual, etc.

Filioque is gross error that makes provision for heinous heresy.

Although I hardly support the Filoque, I do question your assertion that it makes provision for heinous heresy. If so, then the Western Church assuredly has had more than enough opportunity to depart from trinitarianism. This has not been the case at all with either the Catholic or the Protestant churches.

If you wish to attack the Filoque, you must use better arguments for doing so.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Although I hardly support the Filoque, I do question your assertion that it makes provision for heinous heresy. If so, then the Western Church assuredly has had more than enough opportunity to depart from trinitarianism. This has not been the case at all with either the Catholic or the Protestant churches.

If you wish to attack the Filoque, you must use better arguments for doing so.

No, I mustn't do anything. I'm not attacking the Filioque; I'm declaring it fallacious and providing an example of how absurd it is. It's not substantial enough to attack.