The Foundations of Social Order? Contradictory Anathemas?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#1
Dear friends, Rousas John Rushdoony wrote a book "The Foundations of Social Order: A Study in the Creeds and Councils of the Early Church".
Rushdoony writes:

"The first known inclusion of the Filioque is at the Council of Toledo in Spain in A.D. 589, which sealed the triumph of orthodoxy over Arianism in Spain. The clause had not appeared in the earlier creeds because the question had not come up. There was more general assent earlier to the procession of the Holy [Spirit] (Rushdoony has "Ghost" (sic!)) than later, when Monophysite and Arian thinking had developed their implications more fully. In John 14:16-18, 26, 27, the Holy Ghost [sic], the Comforter, is seen as coming from both the Father and the Son, and v. 18 is taken by commentators in this sense. This was also true in the early church. The sophistication of doubt came later.
"The Second Council of Toledo of 447 adopted the canon: "The Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete not begotten but proceeding from the Father and the Son" (Badcock, History of the Creeds, 216.). ... [At the Council of Toledo of 589 AD] "A general confession with twenty-three anthematisms was formulated, and the Filioque
added to the creed. The confession declared:
1. If anyone still holds the doctrine and communion of the Arians, let him be anathema. ....
3. If anyone does not believe that the Holy Ghost [sic] proceedeth from the Father and the Son, and is coeternal with and like unto the Father and the Son, let him be anathema." (THE FOUNDATIONS OF SOCIAL ORDER; page 120.).

First of all, anyone, whether in ignorance, or with knowledge, who calls the Holy Spirit "Holy Ghost" is culpable of a faulty translation of the Greek word "pneuma" based on the King James Version. The Spirit is not the spirit of a "dead man", which is what a "ghost" (sic) is.
Also, this anathema of the 3rd Council of Toledo is contradicted by a a contradictory anathema of the Orthodox Church.
We read:
"TO those who undertake to dogmatize contrary to our Master Christ [cf. John 15:26] and who declare that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son .... ANATHEMA." (page 134, THE SYNODICON OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. In: Saint Photios. (1983). ON THE MYSTAGOGY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. Holy Transfiguration Monastery, translators. Boston, MA: Studion Publishers.).
WHAT IS THE TRUTH IS THIS MATTER REGARDING THE ETERNAL PROCESSION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?
"The Addition to the Creed
"A disagreement about the Holy Spirit ... began to develop in the Church. Does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father? Or, does He proceed from the Father and the SoN?
"In John 15:26, our Lord Jesus Christ asserted, "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send unto you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me" (NKJV). THis is the basic statement in all of the New Testament about the Holy Spirit "proceeding," and it is clear: He "proceeds from the Father." Period."
(pages 50-51: BECOMING ORTHODOX: A JOURNEY TO THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN FAITH. REVISED AND EXPANDED EDITION. Copyright 1992, Fr. Peter E. Gillquist. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.).
Rushdoony is right about one thing: "The sophistication of doubt came later". But he is wrong regarding what the doubt was about! The doubt was doubting that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father" alone! This is what John 15:26 means! The Church always held to Monopatrism! It was the philosophy of Augustine of Hippo that required a "dual procession" of the Father and the Son! Not the New Testament! See: Kung, Hans. The Catholic Church: A Brief History. New York: Modern Library, 2001.
God bless all of you in Christ Jesus. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS Also, John 14:18 says that Christ will come to His Church; it does not say that the Spirit proceeds from Christ.
 
Jul 25, 2011
164
2
0
#2
Have you prayed about this issue? I believe, and the scriptures seem to indicate, that the Holy Spirit is God's Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not a foreign entity, but is God, His Spirit.
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#3
Have you prayed about this issue? I believe, and the scriptures seem to indicate, that the Holy Spirit is God's Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not a foreign entity, but is God, His Spirit.
Dear foundthetruth:
Yes. God already told me what(how) to pray. He said, When you pray: "Our Father Who art in Heaven, Hallowed be Thy Name ..." and so on. And He already showed me what His Church is. And even where it is in my home town. It's wherever there are Orthodox Christians.
The Father is God.
The Son is God.
The Spirit is God.
But these are not three gods, but One God, in Three Persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19, 1 John 5:7).
We already believe this. I'm sure you do too.
God bless you.
Now, on the basis of the Bible, with the Help of the Holy Spirit (John 16:13)?
Which of the following statements is Biblical?
1. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.
2. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
Do you know where in John's Gospel, which chapter, and which verse, is the answer to number1, for number one is the only Biblical answer. Number 2 is a heresy called semi-Sabellianism.
In Erie Scott Harrington