Talk:Theopaschism
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Theopaschism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
[Untitled] edit
From the article "a split in the Church between those that accepted theopaschism (the Church) and those that didn't ("non-Chalcedonian", monophysite oriental orthodox churches)."
This looks POV - calling the Chalcedonians "the Church". But I wonder if it is correct - how could monophysites doubt it?--Henrygb 16:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Clearly POV, but also incorrect. This is an issue with Nestorianism, not Monophysitism. Changing. Lxx 04:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Classical Augustinian theology? edit
The article in part reads: "Classicial Augustinian theology, on the contrary, maintains that the man Jesus suffered to a much greater extent, in order to avoid to charges of modalism and patripassionism."
Maintains that "the Man Jesus" suffered more than who? The Word? Aren't the Word and the Man Jesus supposed to be the same? This quote sounds Nestorian to me. Can we get a citation on this? Deusveritasest (talk) 03:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)