Freethought & Rationalism Archive

judge · 03-20-2009, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I seem to remember that we had this discussion before. Projecting a modern denomination back into the pre-split era

Yes we have had this discussion before, and each time I have pointed that there was no split in 433 AD.
What is the basis for your claiming there was a split. Of what did this alleged split consist?
The Church of the Éast (or that community) had already decalred its independence from the west.
Note too, that they were persecuted by Rabbula. I can get a reference if you wish (let me know,,Im off on a trek to Machu Pichu tomorrow so I wont be back immediately

)

The theological or christological differences are a natural outgrowth of reading the NT in Aramaic. They saw one god and three qnome.

Roger Pearse · 03-21-2009, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I seem to remember that we had this discussion before. Projecting a modern denomination back into the pre-split era

Yes we have had this discussion before, and each time I have pointed that there was no split in 433 AD.
What is the basis for your claiming there was a split.

Why not read the literature for yourself? I'm afraid I don't feel the slightest need to force information on someone being obtuse.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 03-21-2009, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Are you sure about the date of 553? Didn't Justinian receive a bishop from the COE for one of his theological discussions? I've always understood the separation to become effective from Ephesus on, and be reinforced by the political boundary with Persia. By 553 Nestorian bishops could act as representatives of the Shah.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Hi Roger

The separation of the COE took place gradually.

In 410 the Persian church unilaterally declared itself autocephalous ie independent of the authority of Antioch. But this is a matter of jurisdiction and had nothing to do with doctrinal disagreement.

The controversy over Nestorius does not appear to have led at once to a long-term overt doctrinal split. The 433 "formula of concord" appears to have preserved at least outward unity.

There is an explicit doctrinal split under the Emperor Zeno involving Persian councils in 484 and 486 and the expulsion of 'Nestorians' from Edessa by Zeno in 489. The problem here is that Zeno, (who replaced Chalcedon by the Henoticon), was, (at least by later standards), heretical, and carried out his measures against the COE while out of communion with the Pope, who shared at least some of the COE's concerns with Zeno's theology.

With the restoration of Chalcedon by Justin and Justinian there were real prospects of resolving the theological differences with the COE and discussions were carried out to this end. The posthumous condemnation of Theodore, (utterly unacceptable to the COE), meant the end of these hopes. In 585 a Persian council indignantly proclaimed the excellence and authority of Theodore and his writings and in effect excommunicated any who disagreed.

Andrew Criddle

Interesting - thanks. That fits with what I know. I seem to remember reading that the Persian church only gradually took on a definitely Nestorian character.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

judge · 03-25-2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Yes we have had this discussion before, and each time I have pointed that there was no split in 433 AD.
What is the basis for your claiming there was a split.

Why not read the literature for yourself? I'm afraid I don't feel the slightest need to force information on someone being obtuse.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Perhaps you have realised that your claim is incorrect?
It seems that you have read somewhere there was a split and now are just repeating this claim?
And so rather than back up your assertion with evidence you want me to read "the literature". Whatever that means.

judge · 03-25-2009, 12:01 PM

If anyone is interested in the history of these relations and the persecution of the COE by Rabbula prior to Ephesus.

Han J. W. Drijvers in Journal of Early Christian Studies 4.2 (1996) pp 235-248 , Johns Hopkins University Press.

judge · 03-25-2009, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Yes we have had this discussion before, and each time I have pointed that there was no split in 433 AD.
What is the basis for your claiming there was a split.

Why not read the literature for yourself? I'm afraid I don't feel the slightest need to force information on someone being obtuse.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Again, it is strange that after several discussions you now introduce "the literature", and imply that by reading "the literature" one will easily see the truth of your claims.

Anyway for Roger others who may be interested they can read pages 19 to 21 here,The Church of the East By Wilhelm Baum, Dietmar W. Winkler.

I will state again what I have said on this previously. The supposed split is nonsense. They were never part of the Roman church.
The Roman church saw itself as some kind of "true church" descended from Peter.
They could not bear the idea of another "true church" (with perhaps better claims to apostolic roots and certainly better claims to any association with Peter), to be so independent. So they invented a myth that the Church of the East split from them.
This myth gets repeated and believed.
Some catholics and some protestants (who are the stepchildren of catholics) find this offensive as they believe there is some benefit in being part of their particular organisation.

Interested readers can also read chapter 5 of An Introduction to the History of the Assyrian Church By W. A. Wigram. also avaliable to read at google books.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-25-2009, 12:01 PM	#25
judge Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Bli Bli Posts: 3,135	If anyone is interested in the history of these relations and the persecution of the COE by Rabbula prior to Ephesus. Han J. W. Drijvers in Journal of Early Christian Studies 4.2 (1996) pp 235-248 , Johns Hopkins University Press.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.