English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

1. G.C. Stead and the Accusation of Tritheism Made against the Trinitarian Theology of Gregory of Nyssa. A scholar as George Christopher Stead was capable of reinserting the theme of the philosophical sources of the Fathers into the much broader problem that the Fathers had to contend with for at least four centuries, namely, the fact of having to understand the new conception of God that was ushered in by the experience of Christ. With this event, a kind of “metaphysical revolution” occurs for believers, which would bring an entire civilization from the conception of a unique and transcendent divinity shared by Greek philosophy and Judaism, toward the assimilation of the ontological consequences that come from faith in the immanent communion between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Consequently also anthropology had to change and there had to be a movement from the deification of man – “insofar as is possible” – according to the necessary and dialectical mode of ascension proposed from within a dualistic and graduated conception of being proper to the Platonic ontologies of the late antiquity, toward a conception of a gratuitous deification and gift of divine filiation proper to the logic of creation through Love and of salvation in the Logos incarnate. Therefore, in his article The Significance of the Homoousios, published in “Studia Patristica” in 1961, Stead emphasizes how it would not make sense to seek to understand the Athanasius’ meaning of divine oÙs...a and ÐmooÚsioj, starting from the definitions of the logic of the Academy. This Father never had the knowledge or the pretense to enter into the debates of the commentators concerning Aristotle’s Categories, but rather he wanted to explain, through metaphors and parallelisms, the novelty of the knowledge of the divine being revealed by Jesus of Nazareth and kept by the apostolic tradition. Stead therefore writes:

Σχεσισ and ομοουσιοσ in Gregory of Nyssa’s Contra Eunomium: metaphysical contest and gains to trinitarian thought