Zanzy
From Kristos Vocabulary Booster
From "Zanzibar" mocking "Wonderbar" from German.
adjective
- Slang, excellent, wonderful, in U.S.
- Slang, sexy, attractive in U.S.
In article <094.13.09.05.852037000@srcbs.org>, basicallyblues says...
>
>
>
>The Testimony of Origen
I see, once more you are quoting without attribution, without naming your
sources for all your nonsense. As long as you insist on this dishonesty, you
have no right to expect a courteous reply.
>Origen was perhaps the greatest shining light of the Alexandrian school
>of the early church, the pupil of Clement, and was noted for his
>brilliant scholarship. He put together the Hexapla, a combination of
>six early translations of the Scriptures, including our modem copy of
>the Septuagint.
Where _do_ you get this nonsense? "Modem copy"? Even if I do you the charity of
correcting your typo and reading it as "modern copy", this is wrong in many
ways!
It is not _possible_ for Origen to have done "our modern copy", since the last
manuscript to leave his pen did so many centuries before the printing press. And
in the meantime, his Hexapla has suffered so much corruption, that it takes a
great deal of scholarly detective work to preserve anything from it at all. For
the Moslems destroyed his original manuscript when they burned Cesarea, and the
copyists did not understand his text-critical marks, so that the copies are
hopelessly garbled.
So Origen's influence on our "modern copies" is indirect and garbled.
> At one point in his career, Origen was demoted and
>stripped of all ministerial authority by the bishop of Alexandria, out
>of jealousy and a vengeful spirit, but he was still admired and
>accepted by the Asian churches.
This too, paints a very prejudicial picture of a complicated situation. Origen,
though a great scholar, fell to the temptation of many great minds -- into
heresy. But despite that, he made many great contributions to the Church --
unlike most other heretics since.
> He moved to Caesarea, and completed his
>life's work there. Origen lived from A.D. 185 to 254, we are told.
>Origen said that "the Father and Son are two substances . . . two
>things as to their essence," and that "compared with the Father,
>[the Son] is a very small light."
What _are_ you quoting? And are you aware of the textual and linguistic issues
behind this biased citation?
>This CLEARLY contradicts the Nicene Trinity.
It _also_ clearly contradicts what Origen himself says about the Trinity
elsewhere, even in the SAME BOOK! So you have proved nothing at all.
In fact, I doubt your translation is even correct. For as I said, elsewhere in
the very same work, Origen says:
QRHSKEYOMEN OYN TON PATERA THS ALHQEIAS KAI TON YION THN ALHQEIAN, ONTA
DUO THI YPOSTASEI PRAGMATA, hEN DE THi hOMONOIAi KAI THI SYMFONIAi
KAI TH TAYTOTHTI TOY BOYLHMATOS; hWS TON hEVRAKOTA TON YION ONTA
"APAYGASMA THS DOJES KAI XARAKTHRA THS hYPOSTASEWS" TOY QEOU
hEWRAKENAI EN AYTW ONTI EIKONI TOY QEOU TON QEON.
[Contra Celsum 8.12]
Or:
We adore the Father of the Truth and the Son the Truth, being
two things with respect to hyposatasies, but one in same-mindedness and
identity of counsel (will), so that he who sees the Son, who is
" the radiance of His glory and the exact image of his substance",
in Him who is the image of God, sees God.
So no, your biased snippets from Contra Celsum do NOT prove that Origen "clearly
contradicts the Nicene Trinity. Not at all. What it shows is that he believed in
Trinity. Not only that, but a 'Trinity' pretty close to the "Nicene Trinity".
>Although Origen did call
>Jesus "God" it is clear he was not talking about a co-equal trinity.
Actually, that is not so clear. When Origenism was condemned as heresy, it was
NOT for its Trinitarian aspect.
>". . . so, according to our view, it was the Logos God, and Son of
>the God of all things, who spake in Jesus these words, 'I am the way,
>the truth, and the life'; and these, 'I am the door'; and these, 'I am
>the living bread that came down from heaven'; and other expressions
>similar to these. We therefore charge the Jews with not acknowledging
>Him to be God,
And he would make the same charge against you.
> to whom testimony was borne in many passages by the
>prophets, to the effect that He was a mighty power, and a God next to
>the God and Father of all things.
Right. But when _Origen_ says "God next to the God and Father of all things", he
does NOT mean what YOU mean. Even your capitalization here reveals this!
For your 'a' is a tendentious translation again. It really should be as I
printed it here, "God next to the God and Father of all things". What Origen is
talking about here is the _distinction_ between the Persons of the Trinity,
Father and Son.
>For we assert that it was to Him the
>Father gave the command, when in the Mosaic account of the creation He
>uttered the words, 'Let there be light,' and 'Let there be a
>firmament,' and gave the injunctions with regard to those other
>creative acts which were performed; and that to Him also were addressed
>the words, 'Let Us make man in Our own image and likeness'; and that
>the Logos, when commanded, obeyed all the Father's will" ("Origen
>Against Celsus," book 2, chap.9, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol.4, page 433).
None of this contradicts Trinity, although it is also open to a subordinationist
interpretation.
>Notice that the Logos is plainly shown to be subordinate to the Father
>-under His control and direction
But wait a minute! You have missed the whole point of the Trinitarian doctrine
when you _equate_ 'subordinate' with 'under His control and direction'! For the
whole point of the Trinitarian doctrine is that the Persons of the Trinity do
NOT claim anything for themselves, but share all with each other, like an
extreme of what we try to teach children when we teach them to share.
The difference is, of course, that they share far more than mere property, they
share their own being. But of course, you who deny Trinity will never understand
how great a thing this is, nor how we are called to do likewise.
[snip]
--
---------------------------
Subudcat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))
