mountainman

There may be a Greek version of Socrates Scholasticus, in which the following is preserved.
Unfortunately none of the 3 footnotes are relevant to your question.

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible
and invisible:--and in one [168] Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the
only-begotten of the Father, that is of the substance of the Father;
God of God and Light of light; true God of true God; begotten, not
made, consubstantial [169] with the Father: by whom all things were
made, both which are in heaven and on earth: who for the sake of us
men, and on account of our salvation, descended, became incarnate, and
was made man; suffered, arose again the third day, and ascended into
the heavens, and will come again to judge the living and the dead. [We]
also [believe] in the Holy Spirit.

But the holy Catholic and Apostolic
church anathematizes those who say "There was a time when he was not,"
and "He was not before he was begotten" and "He was made from that
which did not exist," and those who assert that he is of other
substance or essence than the Father, or that he was created, or is
susceptible of change.' [170]


[168] This is according to the reading of Valesius, Hussey, and Bright.
The reading, our Lord,' &c., of the English translations in Bagster and
Bohn's series is probably a typographical error, though strangely
perpetuated down to the reprint of 1888.

[169] omoousion , of the same essence'; the word has become a historic
landmark in theological debate, and one of the stock words of
theological terminology.

[170] This creed is found twelve times in eleven ancient sources, two
versions being given in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon. The
second version of the Council of Chalcedon contains certain additions
from the creed of Constantinople; all the rest substantially agree. Cf.
Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I. p. 24, and Vol. II. p. 60, 91;
Walch, Antiquitates Symbolic� (1772), p. 87 seq.; Hahn, Bibliothek der
Symbole, p. 40-107, and other literature referred to in Schaff's
Creeds, &c.

Doug Shaver

Robin Lane Fox does not hyphenate his name. Why do you?

DCHindley

because he himnself does so in his little bio at New College, University of Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/fellows/robin.lane-fox

Robin Lane Fox
MA Oxf
Tutor in Ancient History, Garden Fellow; Reader in Ancient History
Robin Lane-Fox has been Fellow and Tutor in Ancient History since 1977 and University Reader in Ancient History since 1990. His books and articles include major works on Alexander the Great and the relation between the pagan and early Christian religions of the Roman Empire. He has taught Greek and Latin literature, Greek and Roman history and early Islamic history in which he held an Oxford Research Fellowship.

DCH

Toto

Hyhens

Duvduv

Could we get back on track with this thread? Does anyone want to address the question of the use of the Greek language as expressed in the original Nicene Creed, especially concerning the words "incarnate" and "made man" etc.??

Iskander

Huon in #296 is the way to go

sotto voce

Is that not contradiction in terms?

Huon

I have already written that there were also some male grim theologians who could not accept that a woman, even Mary, could be the mother of god.

And there were two opposite factions disputing the ecclesiastical power about this question.

See Nestorius of Constantinople and Nestorianism. Council of Ephesus (431).

mountainman

These (present English translation) terms appear to oppose a belief that Jesus was fictional. The same cannot be said for the five aphorisms of Arius.

Doug Shaver

The hyphen issue is not entirely irrelevant. We're entitled to wonder how carefully someone has read an authority's work when they can't be bothered to notice how the authority spells his own name. It's like when fundamentalists try to win a scientific argument by quoting "Stephen Hawkings."