- 29 Jul 2014 00:34
#14444529
Abu_Rashid wrote;
Actually I'd say that Arianism is not Monotheism but a complete concession to certain notions lifted wholesale from pagan Greek philosophy.
And from time to time, the Roman Orthodox had to ally with Moslems, as during the Third Crusade with Salah-eh-Din.
Cartesianism was the coup-de-grace against any further sensible western thought for the most part, and led directly to the atheism of the modern age.
Here on this thread, agreed.
Again, agreed, although i'd like to point out here that i'm ok with that as long as it's understood that for any serious Orthodox Trinitarian Christian, you must know that we are happy to let God be Three in Persons and One in Being, not in spite of but because of the very reasons we share with Islam; the fact that there is no analogy between God in His Being and Man in his at all... At present.
Thank you, and I appreciate your measured and intelligent responses as well.
I'd see the great schism as more of a final last ditch effort of Eastern Christianity to hold onto their faith in the face of encroaching idolatry of the Roman Church, but not the turning point. IMHO the turning point was the council of Nicea and the subsequent persecution of Arianism that was the turning point. From this time onwards the staunchly monotheistic vein of Christianity was suppressed, and the doctrine of the Trinity rose to supremacy.
Actually I'd say that Arianism is not Monotheism but a complete concession to certain notions lifted wholesale from pagan Greek philosophy.
Yes in all of our texts when it refers to Rome, it means the Byzantine Greeks, and the Faranji (Franks) were what we used to refer to all other Christians (mostly Latin Christians), especially the Crusaders, who even sacked Constantinople itself.
And from time to time, the Roman Orthodox had to ally with Moslems, as during the Third Crusade with Salah-eh-Din.
Spot on!
Cartesianism was the coup-de-grace against any further sensible western thought for the most part, and led directly to the atheism of the modern age.
I agree we should not take it off on that tangent.
Here on this thread, agreed.
Since you know the word shirk, I'll take that as a sign you're indeed well versed on this topic, and therefore it's probably not much point in us discussing that topic. I'm sure we'll find many other issues to discuss though.
Again, agreed, although i'd like to point out here that i'm ok with that as long as it's understood that for any serious Orthodox Trinitarian Christian, you must know that we are happy to let God be Three in Persons and One in Being, not in spite of but because of the very reasons we share with Islam; the fact that there is no analogy between God in His Being and Man in his at all... At present.
I appreciate your measured and intelligent responses regarding our differences, certainly an inspiration.
Thank you, and I appreciate your measured and intelligent responses as well.