Applause is appropriate because it sounds like rainfall.

Arius refused to believe in an unbegotten Son. God was unbegotten, sons were not It’s hard to fault him for this, since “unbegotten” means “without father”.

The unbegotten son born from the Virgin, and so without Father.

As the one Begotten though the Virgin was equal to the very God who begot with her, so too the one begotten though the father is equal to the God who begets him.

Nyssa makes God’s ousia beyond all naming. But then either the Trinity is not God’s ousia, or it is not revealed.

If “mystery” = “stuff you shouldn’t think about”, then “revealed mystery” is a mistake. If it means “Stuff you can’t think about” then a revealed mystery is impossible.

mystery is the act of the (eschatologically) potential as potential.

The truth of (the intrinsically false) “don’t try to figure out mysteries” is “be prepared to wait”.

To wait in frustration is contrary to hope.

From A Christological Catechism “How Much, In Fact, can we claim to know about the historical Jesus?”

Translation: To what extent can we assimilate the Gospels to a larger textual field where a miracle is considered beyond the minimum necessary to believe?

What sort of discourse values the least that can be believed? How important is the difference between the fundamental and the least necessary? There seems to be a likeness here to the difference between the axiomatic (which all explanations strive to be based on) and the “brute fact” (which no one ever bases explanations on, but only invokes to ward off cosmological arguments).

%d bloggers like this: