The Essence is more than just what we cannot know of God, It is a way that God is defined.
If that's true, then that makes even less sense, and I have no idea how it could possibly work in a coherent way. If the essence is not one, then do you believe it is many? I know the essence is beyond all things, so you could say it is beyond even numbers, but then wouldn't it still be one in the sense of a singular concrete identity, since the Essence of God isn't also the Not-Essence of God? That would be a contradiction and/or monism. In looking up quotes of Saints on this topic, I found that St Basil of Caesarea says "The distinction between ousia and hypostases is the same as that between the general and the particular; as, for instance, between the animal and the particular man. Wherefore, in the case of the Godhead, we confess one essence or substance so as not to give variant definition of existence, but we confess a particular hypostasis, in order that our conception of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit may be without confusion and clear."
How can you say that Gods essence is not one, or that it is not the general way in which God is defined?
Dr. Christopher Veniamin had an interesting way of putting it: "The energies are God Himself, but the essence is God WITHIN Himself."To my understanding, "essence" is what we cannot know of God; this is what is outside of the limitations of our human experience.
His uncreated "energies" are part of how he is revealed to us. It is what are able to see, know, and experience of Him in everyday existence. Grace is an energy. Without God's energies we would not have sacraments or theosis.
concepts are created things. since God’s essence is uncreated and known only to God, anything you use to conceptualize His essence is wrong. His essence is neither one nor many.
you can say His nature is one, since that includes His energies which is how we know of His oneness.
because every nature has energies which are natural to it. so the divine nature naturally has divine energies.
I think I misunderstood you earlier, I agree that gods oneness is an energy. But I think you've misunderstood me as well. If you cannot energetically speak of the essence as being one, and being the way that God is defined, as Saint Basil says "so as not to give variant definition of existence" then you end up with variant definition of existence, that God and not-God are the same, and you have monism. The essence seems to have to be how God is defined, or how is it even monotheism?
Were you saying that there is something called the "divine nature" which is composed of both essence and energy, and that that is how the energies are still divine, by being part of this composite "divine nature"?
Is that also your explanation for how God is defined, and is one? That there is an overarching "divine nature" containing the energy of God that is 'oneness'? Or is this divine nature one?
yes, if the essence of God is beyond any concept, then it is both not God and God, and it’s neither of those either, and also fully contains both. as soon as you affirm anything about God’s essence, you are wrong. God’s essence is only known to the Persons of the Trinity.
sort of, although I would not say composite. the one divine nature is both fully essence (forever unknown), and fully energy (fully known).
the divine nature is one because God being one is an energy which is natural to God.
So, could it be described (energetically) in some sense as containing every category and all of reality within it? Is there not any non-existing thing, outside of God, or does God encapsulate nothingness as well as somethingness?
What is it besides composite? Is there a philosophical term for this? I'm struggling to understand the boundary between God and reality.
I think I'm starting to understand this... If the essence is like the inner mind, God only as he is known to God, and the energies are outer actions and attributes known to us... would it be like saying that the composite-like "nature" of essence and energy is one, similar to saying that a human "nature" is one because our body is only one? But our mind cannot be said to be singular, since it is made up of different things like imagination, reason, nous, and is more fluid? Does that analogy of body and mind work?
This seems to make sense to me, but then I bring in the idea of personhood and It all seems to fall apart, since there are three personhoods in God.
there is no boundary for God, since He is boundless.
how so?
But isn't the Essence Energy distinction different from Catholics because there is a real distinction?
Why does that not entail composition or separation and boundaries?
Isn't the hypostasis of Christ composite?
What is the difference?
Why can a hypostasis be composite but not the nature of God?
If personhood is above the energies and essence, then wouldn't it also be above numbers and not able to be described as a trinity, just as you say essence cannot be described as one?
You said the body-mind analogy works, so where is personhood in that analogy?
If the three aspects of the human soul are analogous to the three persons of God, what is the human personhood analogous to?
because boundaries mean space, and God’s beyond space.
Christ has two natures united in His Person.
because the Divine nature didn’t take on flesh, the Person of the Son did.
why does the human person have to be analogous to anything in this conversation?
Why do boundaries necessitate space?
What about something like the sorietes heap paradox? There is a boundary between what is and isn't a heap of sand that isn't physical.
If nature is something united under personhood, doesn't that show that personhood is above nature in the same way that essence is above energies or mind is above body?
But both the person of the son and the Divine nature are a twofold union. Does this mean that the union of the human nature of Christ with the Divine nature of christ is not as complete of a union as the union of essence and energy? Doesn't that make it lesser in some way?
We were made in the image of God, and the analogy seems to work for our body and mind.
because they show where something is and is not.
no, and essence isn’t above energies,
no, He isn’t united to His Divine nature. He fully possesses it. just like how He fully possesses His human nature in a true union of natures
but what do you want humanity to be analogous to?
I'm not sure you're meaning the same thing with the word "above" as i am. I'm not trying to say that the energies are lesser than the essence in any way, but that the essence encompasses the energies completely. You seem to have said as much when you said that the essence encompasses all categories, both real and non-real. You also said that the Personhood of christ encompasses his "two natures united in His Person", which seems to imply that just as essence encompasses all categories and energies, personhood encompasses all of the Divine nature (or human nature for christ).
I don't understand what this means at all... what is the difference between a union of possession and a union being united.
no, the essence is just that which is forever beyond us, the energies are that which is communicable. the essence doesn’t encompass the energies.
there was never a time when Christ wasn’t divine. there was a time when He was not man.
Are they equal?
Are they encompassed together in the Divine nature?
What is the exact relationship between the personhood and Divine nature?
You called it possession and said the Personhood is not united to the Divine nature. Is it a real distinction without boundary as with the Divine nature?
But you also say the Personhood doesn't encompass the Divine nature, and isn't equal to it, so I don't see where else to put it.
Here's from a paper I wrote in seminary:But isn't the Essence Energy distinction different from Catholics because there is a real distinction? Why does that not entail composition or separation and boundaries?
I don’t think I ever said anything about personhood being equal or not to nature.
Equal in the sense of, is it on the same level of reality?
How does it relate to me in my personhood? What is possessing a nature?
yes.
you are a specific human person, who possesses the fullness of the human nature (human essence and energies).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?