Extreme Love

@Eoppa The major different between the Thomist and Palamite is in their understanding of the Trinity. The filioque has caused a major disagreement between East and West . You are missing something though, Palamas saw Hypostatic union as one, the essence and energies of God were not distributed amongst the Trinity, according to Palamas, though many Hesychasts did say that. Do be mindful that East and West have had their share of heretics, so that isn't at the heart of this issue.

@Maksim I don't personally have an opinion but I did hear once that Paul somehow changed the gospel because he taught in some different way that was "incorrect". Personally I've never understood it as method of Love and sometimes cruel truths was similar to Christ's. Don't know if that's what you were looking for but it's all I got. I'm mostly here to learn.

In both cases, God is not seen as "the God of the dead, but the living". However, with the Spirit proceeding from Father and Son, the matter of understanding God from his attributes is from the movement of the Spirit, predominantly. Not to deny that the West thinks God works in and through History, but that how he works is changed in popular thought. By comparison, the East has a sense of this movement in terms of phases, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, working together as if they were reaping the same harvest. It leads to this idea further down where they each ordinate and subordinate one another as needed.

That is, the Divine Communion is one of movements in the West and phases in the East.

@Valkindir The Father is the source of all life, being and everything, and the son proceeds through him. The Holy spirit proceeds from both as the essence no?

I've always considered that the EO just didn't understand the filioque and thought we meant that the Son did not eminate from the Father, or that the Father was not the source of it all.

No, the EO understand the Spirit as Proceeding from the Father, as the Son proceeds from the Father, as if it were the same ratio, for lack of a better word. That is, they are hypostatically equal. And, the EO think that the RC demoted the importance of the Trinity and "made it composite" in an ontological sense by saying so, which is why there was so much more schismaticism about this in History than all the infighting about other points. Wonder why? Notice, that in saying that the Spirit proceeds from Father and Son, the Spirit sort of took a much more mysterious role in RC than it did in EO. Such that, much of the remnants of Roman Catholics (Lutherans/Anglicans) rarely address the work of the Spirit as the do the Condescension of the Son or the Creation of the Father. An interesting aside was that many Gnostics thought the Spirit proceeded from Father and Son too.

This is all too complicated to care about

The truth is and has always been simple

Alright, I'll stop

Epic

https://twitter.com/elenaatt/status/1224419311508500480/photo/1 Daily reminder

I think the Trinity is just metaphorical so while this discussion is interesting of the differences in the 2 churches perspectives on the concept, I could only ask questions as I have no dog in the fight.

> Trinity is just metaphorical

😬

L. M. A. O.

Yeah, not a great opinion but it's my conclusion.

We'll continue this another time, but I disagree RC don't have a proper role for the Spirit just because he spirates rather than generates

Then again I don't understand the Trinity concept very well so that may be the reasoning.

https://youtu.be/FoU2o1iRN0U

Wow there's actual diehard christians here ok, how do you justify freewill with the whole romans 8 thing

Tbh the whole prospect of Christianity just seems like god forgot to write the other half of the book where human beings are good people

Why are priests a channel of god until they molest some kid? You guys sure worshiped him before! It just doesn’t make sense.

I go with the logical answer where religion was invented to stop people from being total wack jobs, but human impulse won’t ever but stomped out.

what the hell does that part about priests mean

who did we worship before?

who worships priests

Literally @moira

@moira is right tbf

@Sentient23 I’m not calling myself intellectually superior. In fact I think I’m pretty retarded. I just don’t see how people can call religion a success when people are getting fucked everyday. My sister died in a car crash when she was 9 years old, but lemme guess that was gods plan right? I was a Christian at the time so why did that happen? It’s just to me personally all bullshit. Like why did god not write the bible himself?

well the bible is just a compilation of historical documents

made by his followers

except it's been proven several documents were cut or edited by the church, and that several other events, while supposedly true, are just fairy tales from the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQd-fdpq9mk

@moira just watch this^^^

>except it's been proven several documents were cut or edited by the church,

bull fucking shit

heard it dozens of times, never proven

>and that several other events, while supposedly true, are just fairy tales from the time.