Leontius of Byzantium and his Defence of the Council of Chalcedon
The contribution to christology made by Leontius of Byzantium (fl. 520–543 A.D.) lies in his doctrine that the manhood of Christ is ‘enhypostatic’ (ἐνυπόστατος)—the doctrine of Enhypostasia or Inexistence. The Council of Chalcedon (451) defined the person or hypostasis of Christ as consisting in the...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
1931
|
| In: |
Harvard theological review
Year: 1931, Volume: 24, Issue: 2, Pages: 111-119 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1784639583 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220105043111.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220105s1931 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1017/S0017816000000195 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1784639583 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1784639583 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Rees, Silas |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Leontius of Byzantium and his Defence of the Council of Chalcedon |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1931 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The contribution to christology made by Leontius of Byzantium (fl. 520–543 A.D.) lies in his doctrine that the manhood of Christ is ‘enhypostatic’ (ἐνυπόστατος)—the doctrine of Enhypostasia or Inexistence. The Council of Chalcedon (451) defined the person or hypostasis of Christ as consisting in the union of two perfect natures, the nature of God and the nature of man, without division or confusion. On the principle laid down by Aristotle and accepted by all disputants, that there can be no such thing as a nature or substance without hypostasis (ϕύσις, οὐσία ἀνυπόστατος), the question arises of how it possible to avoid the conclusion of two hypostases, corresponding to the two perfect natures, in Christ. Such was the problem set by the definition of Chalcedon and the logic of Aristotle. | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Harvard theological review |d Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1908 |g 24(1931), 2, Seite 111-119 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)331504553 |w (DE-600)2051494-3 |w (DE-576)094533326 |x 1475-4517 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:1931 |g number:2 |g pages:111-119 |
| 856 | |3 Volltext |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/1507708 |x JSTOR | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816000000195 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/leontius-of-byzantium-and-his-defence-of-the-council-of-chalcedon/151BD292263C3416CC208CB7041FA40D |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4029943926 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1784639583 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220105043111 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220105||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-28#1284FE208A6AFF215DE2E60AF58AF0C19EB9F30E | ||
| 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 | |0 866 |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/1507708 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||