Modern Interpretations of Nestorius
Nestorius continues to be a problem for modern historians of doctrine. The Problem arose in the fifth century when the church acting at the Council of Ephesus (431 A.D.) anathematized Nestorius, the Bishop of Constantinople, and pronounced Nestorianism a christological heresy. The decisions of the C...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
[1963]
|
| In: |
Church history
Year: 1963, Volume: 32, Issue: 3, Pages: 251-267 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1647160006 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20160620122748.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 160503s1963 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.2307/3162772 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1647160006 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-576)469246820 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ469246820 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)115200096 |0 (DE-627)511270836 |0 (DE-576)164722211 |4 aut |a Braaten, Carl E. |d 1929- | |
| 109 | |a Braaten, Carl E. 1929- |a Braaten, Carl 1929- |a Braaten, C. E. 1929- |a Braaten, Carl Edward 1929- | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Modern Interpretations of Nestorius |c Carl E. Braaten |
| 264 | 1 | |c [1963] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Nestorius continues to be a problem for modern historians of doctrine. The Problem arose in the fifth century when the church acting at the Council of Ephesus (431 A.D.) anathematized Nestorius, the Bishop of Constantinople, and pronounced Nestorianism a christological heresy. The decisions of the Council of Ephesus were accepted and re-affirmed at the Fourth (451 A.D.) and Fifth (553 A.D.) Ecumenical Councils. It must be said that “Nestorianism” as a special kind of doctrine could have been condemned as heretical could be called “dyoprosopatism.” But such was not the case. Nestorius was condemned and exiled as a heretic, and he was judged on the basis of certain doctrines which he was accused of holding. From the moment of his excommunication until the present time there have been many expressions of uncertainty as to whether he really taught and believed what was defined and condemned as Nestorianism. Somewhat epigrammatically historians have been asking whether Nestorius himself was a Nestorian. | ||
| 601 | |a Interpretation | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Church history |d Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1932 |g 32(1963), 3, Seite 251-267 |w (DE-627)129068306 |w (DE-600)1533-7 |w (DE-576)014399822 |x 0009-6407 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:32 |g year:1963 |g number:3 |g pages:251-267 |
| 776 | |i Erscheint auch als |n elektronische Ausgabe |w (DE-627)1779554303 |k Electronic | ||
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.2307/3162772 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 |b 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3321817047 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1647160006 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20160503093735 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 160503||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzo | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||