A Theomathological Approach to the Filioque Controversy

Francis Jickhong Yun
{"title":"A Theomathological Approach to the Filioque Controversy","authors":"Francis Jickhong Yun","doi":"10.26590/MADANG..25.201606.77","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I have created a new field of study, which I named, “The theomathology” which is the field of Theological Mathematics. The dispute over Filioque and its attendant Trinitarian questions have been continuing almost 2,000 years of history, but no one has ever satisfactorily resolved them. Apparently, when theologians or scholars attempt to provide a conclusive resolution to questions involving the Trinity or the Filioque Controversy, expect any satisfactory result no matter how much invested. First of all, in order to understand both the ‘Filioque Controversy and the doctrine of the Trinity, which share the same root, we should take care not to seperate the explanation. We have to seriously observe the historical context back to the Toledo Synod (AD 589), when the word “Filioque” was forcefully adopted into the Creed, although no one understood it or was able to explain it so17). Thus I strongly believe that the word inserted by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.","PeriodicalId":130336,"journal":{"name":"Madang: Journal of Contextual Theology","volume":"46 44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Madang: Journal of Contextual Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26590/MADANG..25.201606.77","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I have created a new field of study, which I named, “The theomathology” which is the field of Theological Mathematics. The dispute over Filioque and its attendant Trinitarian questions have been continuing almost 2,000 years of history, but no one has ever satisfactorily resolved them. Apparently, when theologians or scholars attempt to provide a conclusive resolution to questions involving the Trinity or the Filioque Controversy, expect any satisfactory result no matter how much invested. First of all, in order to understand both the ‘Filioque Controversy and the doctrine of the Trinity, which share the same root, we should take care not to seperate the explanation. We have to seriously observe the historical context back to the Toledo Synod (AD 589), when the word “Filioque” was forcefully adopted into the Creed, although no one understood it or was able to explain it so17). Thus I strongly believe that the word inserted by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
菲利奥克之争的神学方法
我创建了一个新的研究领域,我将其命名为“theomathology”,即神学数学领域。关于菲利奥克的争论和随之而来的三位一体问题已经持续了近2000年的历史,但没有人能令人满意地解决这些问题。显然,当神学家或学者试图为涉及三位一体或菲利奥克争议的问题提供一个结论性的解决方案时,无论投入多少,都期待任何令人满意的结果。首先,为了理解菲利奥克之争和三位一体的教义,它们有着相同的根源,我们应该注意不要把解释分开。我们必须认真观察托莱多会议(公元589年)的历史背景,当时“菲利奥克”一词被强行纳入信条,尽管没有人理解它,也没有人能够如此解释它。因此我坚信这句话是由圣灵默示插入的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Communism and Capitalism, and Conservatism and Consumerism: Some Contexts and Contents of Korean Protestantism A pursuit of concept of “sin/guilt” in history – on a revolutionary theology of Israel Marginalized Korean Female sex worker in the context of Korean Minjung and Feminist Theology Post Human Feminists’ View on ‘Women and Nature’ in comparison with Ecstatic Naturalism Death and Immortality: Biological and East Asian Religious Reflections on Transhumanism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1