The Argument of Severus of Antioch on the Absurdity of Confessing Two Common Natures in Christ, the Reciprocal Argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and the Monophysite-Chalcedonite Christological Debates of the VI

The Argument of Severus of Antioch on the Absurdity of Confessing Two Common Natures in Christ, the Reciprocal Argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and the Monophysite-Chalcedonite Christological Debates of the VI–VII Centuries. Part 1Библия и христианская древностьSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference PortalThe National Endowment for the HumanitiesThe International Balzan Prize FoundationDavid A. Michelsoncbsc_adminRecord added to Zotero bycbsc_adminSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portalhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/86SKMI49/tei

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

2024-08-15-04:00

Born digital.

CREATED: This bibl record was autogenerated from a Zotero record.Oleg N.NogovitsinThe Argument of Severus of Antioch on the Absurdity of Confessing Two Common Natures in Christ, the Reciprocal Argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and the Monophysite-Chalcedonite Christological Debates of the VI–VII Centuries. Part 1http://syriaca.org/cbss/86SKMI49https://www.zotero.org/groups/a_comprehensive_bibliography_on_syriac_studies/items/86SKMI49https://www.zotero.org/groups/4861694/items/86SKMI49Библия и христианская древность4 [12]202166-91The article considers the controversy over the famous argument of Severus of Antioch, compliant to the general formula of which the confession of two natures in Christ taken as common natures of deity and humanity necessarily entails agreeing with that the incarnation of Christ signifies the incarnation of the whole Trinity in the whole humankind, namely, the incarnation of each of the hypostases of the Trinity in each human being. This argument was responded by Johannes of Caesarea in his “Apology for the Counsil of Chalcedon”. The focus of the article is a detailed analysis of the given argument, the reciprocal argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and Severus’ reply to his objections in chapters 17-19 of the book II of the treatise “Against impious Grammaticus”. Besides, the topical area of the research includes studying the issue of conceptual frames of Monophysite and Chalcedonite theology wherein this Severus’ argument receives its theological and polemical significance, discussion over the historical context of its appearance and the reaction on it in the Chalcedonite camp, as well as some issues of its reception in the consequent tradition of Monophysite disputations. Nogovitsin, Oleg N. “The Argument of Severus of Antioch on the Absurdity of Confessing Two Common Natures in Christ, the Reciprocal Argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and the Monophysite-Chalcedonite Christological Debates of the VI–VII Centuries. Part 1.” Библия и христианская древность 4 [12] (2021): 66–91. Oleg N. Nogovitsin, The Argument of Severus of Antioch on the Absurdity of Confessing Two Common Natures in Christ, the Reciprocal Argumentation of Johannes of Caesarea and the Monophysite-Chalcedonite Christological Debates of the VI–VII Centuries. Part 1, Библия и христианская древность 4 [12] (2021): 66–91.ChristologyIV-VII CEIncarnationMonophysitismSeverus of AntiochVI CEVII CEanti-Chalcedonianpolemic