Philosophy, culture, philosophy of culture, and other stuff as needed
Hark the herald angels sing,'Glory to the new-born DuckRabbit'.
Hark The Herald Angels Singfrom the Christmas Song Generator.
You could just have two aspects in one person, in which case you could leave the rest of the Trinity unaltered. That strikes me as the most economical way to work things out.Granted, I have no idea if going with the most economical way is tantamount to Nestorianism (or monothelism, or miaphysism, or monophysism, or apollonianism, or whatever). I rather suspect that there's no rule about this until you get a council to decide that certain formulations are orthodox, and certain are verbotten; I've not seen much in the way of compelling argument against some of the stanger post-Nestorian heresies except for the fact that they resemble Nestorianism more than Orthodox Christianity. Given events like Nestorius's insistence that the Council of Chalcedon (the one which came shortly after the Council of Ephesus, which is the council that condemned Nestorius) vindicated him rather than continuing the fight against "the Nestorian heresy" I'm pretty sure some of the counciliar decisions were made by finding a dude who everyone liked and then asking them which of the two positions (neither of which had a clear substance to them) struck his ear best.You were right, theology is hard. ;_;
I don't know why people mock Wikipedia; for some things it's da bomb (in the, um, non-explosive sense, that is, Mr. Gonzales, should he be watching). After some research into the matter, I, well, I still don't know what to say, except it's too bad Philosophical Investigations wasn't written in, say, 300 BCE (leave some time for it to sink in). You'd think Nicea would have cleared this business up, but noooo.Your solution is probably best (once we do get clear on "aspect" and "person"). But theology, like history, is written by the winners.
Post a Comment