INTRODUCTION:= A number of friends of has asked about the natural development of the Dogma(s) Of Ante NICAEAN Fathers [ANF].

So the mentioned above Professor was compelled to work out about the natural evolution of the mansion above dogma(s). According to PF Athanasian Trinity and Arian Unity are two oblique evolutions of the Dogma(s) of ANF. The Natural\Straight evolution of dogma(s) of Ante Necaean Fathers shall be discussed in this article. It is hoped that this article shall open a portal for a new approach for understanding ANF and consequently the Athanisian Trinity and Arian Unity dispute , and to prob in the minds of ANF. Basic Postulate of Ante Nicean Fathers::== 1] Logos/Son came into Existence\Beingness In Ousia Of Supreme Being. 2] It did not come in Beingness Out side THE SUPREME BEING. 3] It is NOT Eternal. 4] It did not come in Beingness from NOTHINGNESS\ NON-BEINGNESS. 5] It did come in Beingness\Existence From Ousia Of Supreme Being In The Ousia Of Supreme Being. Note Ancient Fathers attempted to differentiate b/w this type of thing from made things, and they used the words BEGETTING ,BEARING or even Concieving\Conception Concepton In The Ousia [Analogous to the conception of an Idea In Mind]. Note . MIND-NESS OR MENTALITY OF OUSIA IS SUPPOSED TO OVERLAP OUSIA AND VICE VERSA. SO OUSIA IS A MIND OF ITSELF AND VICE VERSA. So the mind of the supreme being is the Ousia Of The Supreme Being.

DOINGS / ACTS OF SUPREME BEING:There are several verses in Hebraic TANACH and its Translation Greek SEPTUAGINT which mensions different DOINGS/ACTS Of Supreme Being namely IHVH/IAHUVAH and immediate consiquences of some [transitive] Acts/ Doings [ MAY BE RETERMED AS GRAMMATICAL OBJECTS OF DOINGS OF TRANSATIVE ACTS/DOINGS OF SUPREME BEING Namely IHVH]. Hebraic Tanach does mention a number of Divine Doings/Acts, AND THE ACT/DOING OF MAKING IS ONE OF the several Acts\Doings of the SUPREME BEING mentioned in the Hebraic Tanach. In contents below one shall discuss all the necessary topics related to GOD. FIRST PLIMINARY:The OUSIA [Essence\Substance\Form\Nature] Of Supreme Being namely IHVH is ETERNAL and NOT made. From the Trinitical point of View ALL THE HYPOSTATIC PERSONS IN THE OUSIA OF GOD THE TRINITY are ETERNAL and Not MADE as well as the Ousia Of GOD THE TRINITY AND THE GOD THE TRINITY as well. SECOND PRILIMINARY:The Qualities\Attributes Of Supreme Being are Eternal and Not MADE. IT is well known that THE SUPREME BEING has a number of ABILITIES. These are prerequisites for the explanation of a number of DOINGS\ ACTS OF SUPREME BEING.

FOR EXAMPLE THE SUPREME BEING POSSESS THE ABILITIES OF SAYING AND HEARING. [For sake of simplicity only two Abilities are discussed]. IF the Supreme Being does not possess these 2 Abiities then SUPREME BEING NEITHER SAY can ANY THING [ WORDS/SAYINGS\SENTENCES] NOR can HEAR\LISTEN any thing [ WORDS/SAYINGS\SENTENCES]. THERE ARE TWO 2 QUESTIONS:A] Are these ABILITIES Eternal.? B] Are these ABILITIES Made? One thing is clear that if these Abilities OF SUPREME BEING are Eternal then then they are NOT MADE. The only possible answer is that each one of the ABILITIES [which are the Attibutes\Qualities of Supreme Being] is ETERNAL AND NOT MADE. This is the only possible answer since any other answer is IMPOSSIBLE. Let it be supposed that the ABILITY Of Saying OF SUPREME BEING is NOT ETERNAL. Then the Supreme Being DID LACK THE ABILITY TO SAY IN ETERNITY. This is SIMILAR TO THE CLAIM THAT THE SUPREME BEING IS DUMB IN ETERNITY. Similarly of the DIVINE ABILITY Of hearing \ listening is NOT Eternal then THE SUPREME BEING did lack this ABILITY in ETERNITY. This similar to the claim that the Supreme Being is ETERNALLY DEAF. THIS Eternity of Abilities is even true from the Trinitical point of view as well. Suppose that the First Hypostatic Person in the Ousia Of God the Trinity says some thing to the Second Hypostasic Person , and the Second Hypostatic Person says some thing to the First Hypostatic Person In the OUSIA of GOD THE TRINITY. For sake of simplicity let it be supposed that the third Hypostatic Person in the the OUSIA OF GOD THE TRINITY does not enter in the conversation between the first two Hypostatic Persons in the BEING OF TRINITY. As the First Hypostatic Person says some thing to the Second Hypostatic Person this implies that the First Hypostatic Person does possess the ABILITY to SAY. This Ability is Eternal Otherwise the First Hypostatic Person In The Ousia Of GOD THE TRINITY DID lack the ABILITY TO SAY IN ETERNITY. This is once again similar to the CLAIM THAT The First Hypostatic Person is Eternally Dumb, which no Trinitarian can accept and is against the TRINITICAL DOGMA. The act\doing of saying is NOT ETERNAL. Similarly if the Second Hypostatic Person Hears \ Listens the SAYING of the FIRST HYPOSTATIC PERSON THIS implies that the Ability Of Hearing \ Listening Of the Second Hypostatic Person Is Eternal Otherwise It is Implied that THAT The Second Hypostatic Person in the Ousia Of GOD THE TRINITY is ETERNALLY DEAF; which can never be accepted by any true Trinitarian and is not implied by the Trinitical Dogmas of Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics. So this Eternity of Abilities of Hypostatic Persons are proved. Second Priliminary:The acts \ doings:Acts\Doings Of the Supreme Being are immanent ,and are occurred in Ousia Of Supreme Being. The DOINGS\ACTS OF THE SUPREME BEING MAY BE DIVIDED INTO TWO TYPES\KINDS. A]The Intransative Doings\Acts. B] The Transitive Doings\Doings. The former set of Immanent Doings\Acts have no grammatical Objects [Terms] which are the immediate Consequences of them. E.G HEARING\ LISTENING , SEEING. ETC. The latter have Grammatical Objects [Terms] SUCH AS SAYING,IDEALIZING [ACT\DOING OF INTELLECT] AND ACT \DOING OF MAKING. In all these cases each act\doing is NEITHER ETERNAL NOT MADE. PROOF:One can not say thart the act \ doing of HEARING is a MADE THING. SIMILARLY THE ACT\DOING OF SEEING\WATCHING Can not be claimed to be a made thing.These are ACTS\DOINGS DONE AND NOT THING MADE.q.e.d One may say that they are Emanated,Proceeded,Issued , Occurred from their respective Abilities , in the Ousia Of Supreme Being but none of them is Eternal.THEY EXIST IN ALIO I.E OUSIA OF SUPREME BEING.

Neither the ACT\DOING of Generation was supposed to be Eternal nor the ACT\DONG of Sparation was supposed to be Eternal. They only exception is of the EMMANENT ACT OF MAKING. The terms implied by this act\doing is Out Side THE SUPREME BEING. How ever the act\ doing of making is not made.It is done. PROOF:If an Act\Doing of making is a thing made then it does require an other act\ding of making omplying an infinite series of makings. This is impossible in relation to the Supreme Being namely IHVH. Qed. Third Primilinary:From the time Genesis was written to the time Iohn was written Jewish Scholors did not discussed the difference between a Divine ACT\DOING and A thing made. How ever Ante Nicean fathers were first to face this problem .But they did not discuss DIVINE DOINGS\ACTS as a General case and ACTS\DOINGS OF MAKING AND SAYING AS TWO SUBCASES OF THIS SUPER CASE. Rither they discussed each one of them as an independent case. This made unsolvable problems BY USING AMBIGOUS LANGUAGES and the DOGMA OR TRINITY EMERGED AS A N EVOLUTION OF THESE PROBLEMS OF AMBIGUITIES. A Divine Act\Doing is NOT made but it is also NOT ETERNAL It may be called to EMANATE ,TO PROCEED, TO ISSUE BUT IT MAYNOT BE CALLED MADE. The act\doing of making is one of a number of DOING\ACTS DONE BY SUPREME BEING ,Can be done by Supreme Being .If the Supreme Being Hears [any sentence] it is Not the act of Making, and If Supreme Being makes something, it is NOT the act\doing of Hearing. Hearing and Making are two Distinct and Distinguished Acts\Doings. What so ever is said for these two acts\doings Can be said for any two Doings\Acts Of THE SUPREME BEING. They opined that act\doing of Generation \Begetting\Bearing is different from the act\doing of making. Since they made a distinction b/w a saying which is said and a thing made.Former is unmade and the latter is un -said.Latter they made an other distinction b/w the Procession Of Spiration and Procession Of Generation\ Begetting. Post Nicean Fathers were somewhat correct in assuming that the PROCESSIONS OF SPIRATION AND GENERATIONS ARE NOT ONLY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER BUT ALSO DIFFERENT FROM THE ACT\DOING OF MAKING. It is clear that if there are several types \ kinds of Supreme Being or I there are infinite types\kinds of Acts\Doings Of Supreme Being then it is incorrect to claim that each and every act/doing of SUPREME BEING is like the act \doing of MAKING OF SUPREME BEING. Act\Doing Of Intellect /Procession of Generation and Act\Doing Of Will/ Procession of Sparation may differ from ACT\DOING OF MAKING done by Supreme Being but none of these two can be claimed to be Eternal. They are some what analogous to the Supposed Human Nature In the Supposed Second Hypostatic Person in the OUSIA Of GOD THE TRINITY producing\forming a Supposed Hypostatic Union with the said Hypostatic Person namely Logos\Son. This shall be discussed in somewhat detail latter. But it is not beyond the scope of this present Priliminary TO discuss the differences and similarities AMONG these ACTS \DOINGS. A] All Acts\Doings Of Supreme Being are Temporal. Ante Nicean Fathers did not believed that any act/doing is eternal. Particularly in the case of Logos \ Word \ Saying. But in order to differentiate a term [GRAMMATICAL OBJECT] Of ACT \DOING Of SAYING FROM THE TERMS OF ACT\DOING OF MAKING THEY USED THE TERM BEGETTING\BEARING INSTEAD OF MADE.Thus a SAYING of SUPREME BEING can not be said to be made but Begotten\Born\Generated [or even Concepted in mind or Intellect or in Ousia]. One may see IN GENESIS THAT SUPREME BEING SAID:LET THERE BE LIGHT This is a sentence and this sentence as reported by Genesis is said by SUPREME BEING. In Active voice Supreme Being said this Sentence.Now LIGHT Did Come In BEINGNESS \ EXISTENCE [ FROM NOTHINGNESS] IMMEDIATELY. These words or this sentence are/is NOT ETERNAL. PROOF:-

If This Divine SENTENCE is supposed to be Eternal then it is IMPLIED THAT the LIGHT is ALSO Eternal.Since any thing which is immediately connected whith ETERNITY IS ETERNAL. An Infinite gap b/w Eternity and Non Eternity ANNIHILIATES Immediateness. Q.E.D. It is not Eternal. If it is NOT ETERNAL THEN then the Act \ Doing of this sentence that is Saying Of This Sentence is also NOT ETERNAL. PROOF;There can not be an Infinite GAP B/W the act\doing of saying a sentence and the sentence itself. QED. PROOF:THE ACT\DOING OF SAYING A SENTENCE [say LET THERE BE LIGHT] AND THE OCCURRENCE OF THE SENTENCE [ LET THERE BE LIGHT] DO OCCUR SIMULTANIOUSLY. SINCE 1] AN INFINITE GAP B/W THE ACT\DOING OF A SENTENCE AND OCCURANCE OF THE SENTENCE IS NOT POSSIBLE.2] In that case the act\doing of saying a sentence shall cease to be the act\doing of saying the sentence.Q.E.D. GENESIS reports that the Supreme Being said this sentence and does not report that Supreme Being MADE THIS SENTENCE.This is an scriptural proof that this DIVINE SENTENCE is SAID NOT MADE. If Supreme Being Did Not Made this Sentence but Did Said this Sentence then this Does Imply that ACT\DOING of SAYING and DOING\ACT of MAKING ARE TWO TRUELY MUTUALLY DISTINCT ACTS \DOINGS OF SUPREME BEING. A Made thing Is a Term of Act\Doing Of Making , nothing But a Term Of Making and Only and Only The Term Of Act\Doing Of Making in the proper sense of the Word MAKING.

A Said Thing Is a Term of Act\Doing Of Saying , nothing But a Term Of Saying and Only and Only The Term Of Act\Doing Of Making in the proper sense of the Word SAYING. But there are some Divine Doings\Acts which do no not have got a Term at all. A Grammatical Object is far more general in meaning\sense then the term TERM. For Example the Act\Doing Of Hearing\Listenting may have a Grammatical Object But No Term. The Act\Doing Of Hearing\Listening may have some thing HEARED\LISTENED But It can not be termed as A Term Of Act\ Doing Of Listening\Hearing. One may term such acts\doings of the doer\agent\actor as Transative Acts\Doings or RETERM\RENAME IT AS TERMIAL ACTS\DOINGS. FORHT PRIMILINARY:Acts\Doings Osupreme Being cannot occur Out Side Supreme Being, but in Ousia [Essence\Subsance] Of Supreme Being. Proof:Suppose that all acts \doings OCCUR OUT OF SUPREME BEING. Then they are made things. Since any thing Out Side Supreme Binge is Made [By Supreme Being]. This implies the reduction of infinite many kinds\types of Acts\Doings\Operations\Proceedings\Functions\Issuance\Processions Of Supreme Being in Only and Only one kind\type and that is Making. This implies that if SUPREME BEING Hears\listens some thing [say a sentence] or sees\watches some thing then both of these acts\doings of Hearing[Listening] and Seeing[Watching] are made things. This implies that only One Kind\Type of Act\Doing is Possible for Supreme Being. And this kind\Type is nothing but Act\Doing Of Making. This is incorrect . It denies All the Tanach and Septuagint. Since they report a number of different Acts\Doings of Supreme Being Beside the Act\ Doing Of Making. Q.E.D The Supreme Being Does do a number of Different Types\Kind of Acts\Doings. All these DO OCCUR in the OUSIA Of Supreme Being. Any thing which does occur in the Out Of The Supreme Being is a Made thing. Acts\Doings of Supreme Being may be considered as some what analogous to the Human

Nature Of the Hypostasis in the Hypostatic Union as believed by Trinitarians. The Acts\Doing are similar to THE HUMAN NATURE in the following aspects:= 1] An Act \ A Doing Exists in ALIO. It is NOT PER SEORSUM. 2]An Act \ A Doing is NOT PERSE SUBSISTENT. 3] An Act \ A Doing is COMMUNICATED BY ASSUPTION. 4] An Act \ A Doing has No Separate BEINGNESS\EXISTENCE. 5]An Act \ A Doing EXISTS by the Infinite BEINGNESS\EXISTENCE of The Ousia Of Supreme Being. 6]An Act \ A Doing is Perfected By the Union,Assumption etc. 7] A Nature Of an Act\a Doing overlaps the Act\theDoing. 8]There is Only and Only One Ousai which is the Divine Narure and the Divine Ousia but there is no Doingual Ousa . The Nature of An Act \ A Doing IS NOT An OUSIA. This 7th similarity needs some clearifications. One may term any thing as a Nature from the Point of View Of Acts\Doings. Divine Ousia may be termed as an Essence\Substance from the point of view of Qualities and Characterstics [which is the non- dynamic point of view]. It may be termed as a Nature from the point of view of Acts\Doings [which is the dynamic point of view]. It may be noted that Divine Ousia may be termed as Nature. But the Human Nature in the Divine Hypostasis forming the Hypostatic Union can not be termed as Human Ousia\Human Essence\Human Substance \ Human Form. This proves that the term Nature is for more general then the terms Ousia ,Suppositum, Essence,Substance and even the term Form. The conclusion is that any thing may be termed as a Nature from the point of view of atleast one Act\ Doing whether it is an Ousia Or NOT. In this sense an Act \ Doing may be termed as a Nature from its own respect. So there is Only One Ousia which is THE Divine Ousia there is no Human Ousia in the Trinity and any thing in the trinity according to the trinitical dogmas of Trinitarians. But there are two natures one human and one divine. Similarly onemay say there is one Divine Nature\ One Ousial Nature and one Active Nature \Doingual Nature in the OUSIAIC UNION.Thus numerically two Natures. BUT ONLY ONE OUSIA IN THE OUSIAIC UNION WHICH IS THE DIVINE OUSIA. Further An Act\ A Doing may be termed as an Atomic Nature Or Simple Nature. This implies that there are two Natures. 1] OUSIA Of SUPREME BEING. 2] An Act \ A Doing of the Supreme Being. The latter mensioned Nature is NOT An OUSIA. Now we come to study some differences between the Human Nature as according to the Trinitical Dogma of Hypostatic Union / Incarnation / Assumption and the above mensioned Dogma Of Actual Nature(s). 1] The Human Nature in the Hypostasis of the Hypostatic Union is Supposed to be made. But it An Act\A Doing is Neither Made Not Eternal ,since it lacks the NECESSARY CONDITION Of Being Made that is to be Out Of SUPREME BEING. If this condition is accepted \ imposed then the Human Nature CAN NOT be termed as Made. If this condition is relaxed \ dropped an Act \ a Doing may be termed as a made thing. But this condition can not be dropped as a joint result of reason and faith. 2]The Human Nature in the Second Hypostasis and the Second Hypostasis forms a Hypostatics Union. But in this case An Act\ A Doing [Actual Nature\Doingual Nature] and Ousia Of The Supreme Being constitute An Ousial Union; Since there is No Second Hypostasis as according to this Dogma. 3] Assumption of the Human Nature by the Second Hypostasis makes a Hypostatis Union ,with the consequence that the Second Hypostasis becomes a Human \ Man \Human Being with out ceasing to be the Eternal Hypostasis. But in the Ousiaic Union does not become An Act \ A Doing Neither With Ceasing to be What the Ousia Was Nor without Ceasing What the Eternal Ousia Eternally Was. Since the Ousia Does Not become any thing neither with ceasing nor with out ceasing. So one must be careful to use the word ASSUMPTION in the latter case.Here it is not Associated with the dogma of becoming but merely with the Dogma Of Union.

4] If the Hypostatic Union ceases to be then the Human Nature shall upgrade to a person. But in this case if the Ousiaic Union Ceases to be then Acts\Doing shall Ceases to Be. A TERM of an Act \ a Doing may have a strong analogy to the supposed Human Nature in the Hypostasis namely Logos as according to Trinitical Dogmas.It may be discussed latter. There are some more laws which must be written at this portion. 1] Neither the NATURE Of An Act \ A Doing Of The SUPREME BEING Can Be Converted Into the SUPREME BEING Nor The SUPREME BEING Can Be Converted Into An ACT \ A DOING. 2] Neither the Nature of An Act \ A Doing Nor The Nature Of The Ousa Of Supreme Being [Which is Identical to Ousia \Which Overlaps a the Ousia] form a third thing in proper sense. 3]The Union Of The Ousia Of Supreme Being and Nature Of Act \Doing Is In The Ousia Of the Supreme Being neither Exteriorly added to it nor is in exterior fasion. 4] Any Act \Doing and any nature of doing is according to the Ousia Of Supreme Being ,neither substantially implied nor is accidently. 5] If an Act \ A Doing has a term then the Term obeys all the laws of the Act \ Doing. NOTE:- IT MAY BE RECALLED THAT IF A NATURE IS NOT NECESSORY AN OUSIA EVEN THEN IN THE CASE OF SUPREME BEING , NATURE OF OUSIA IS IDENTICAL TO THE OUSIA . .THAT IS THE REASON DIVINE OUSIA IS ALSO TERMED AS DIVINE NATURE. SIMILARLY THE BEINGNESS OF THE SUPREME BEING IS IDENTICAL TO THE OUSIA OF THE SUPREME BEING Thus Ousia is a BEING. Being. FIFTH PRIMILINARY:Supreme Being is the Only Creator \Maker\Omnific Of All things [Out Side Supreme Being]. SUPREME BEING does not require instruments, tools,machines, robotics to make things. Supreme Being is Omnipotent. Supreme Being Can Make any thing just by SAYING LET THERE BE THE THING for the thing ; AND the Thing comes into Beingness\Existence. The Question is to whome Supreme Being says when there is no one there to hear or listen to The Supreme Being. Trinitarians suggest that the First Hypostasis in the GOD THE TRINITY Says to the Second Or Third Person Or Both In Godhead Of God The Trinity. Unitarians say that Supreme Being talks \ says to Himself. Augustine believed that any external act \doing is the Act \Doing Of GOD THE TRINITY not an Act \ A Doing of any Hypostatic Person In Triune Godhead. One may distinct b\w God The Trinity and the Godhead [ Ousia Of God The Trinity ]. It is just a Habbit Of Supreme Being namely IHVH [IAHUVAH\YAHUVAH] To say Some Thing even if there is no one else to hear \ to listen to The SUPREME BEING. SUPREME BEING HAS OMNIPOTENCE TO SAY EVEN IF THERE IS NO ONE TO LISTEN THE SUPREME BEING. Jewish Interpretation about the Divine SAYINGS were never challaenged by Iesous, and they are valid interpretations. But If it is supposed that The Supreme Being Said These Sayings to any one of the NON ETERNAL Terms In The Ousia , It does not mean that the term makes things. It is still the Supreme Being Which Makes things. This type of LETTING is a Letting of Majesty and Highness. Any Term Has No Power to let or Not to Let the Supreme Being. This is a way to inform that Do not opine otherwise. It must be noted once for all that the Act \ Doing of Saying the Sentence Let there be the thing and the said sentence Let there be the thing [ which is a Term Of the Act \Doing Of Saying] both lack beingness of there own and Exist In Alio [ that is the beingness of Ousia which is identical to Ousia hence in the Ousia]. An Act Or A Doing IS THE Only Medium which is Possible for THE SUPREME BEING. For example it is impossible to make any thing with out the act of

making,it is impossible to say some thing with out saying etc. EXPLANATION:= It is correct that SUPREME BEING Does Not Require\Need any External Medium \ External Through-ness eg. Instrument, Tool, Equipment, Engine, Machine, SUPPOSITUM, THING, OBJECT etc. TO MAKE ANY THING. But an Act A Doing \ An Operation \ A Procession \ A Proceeding \ A function \ An Issuance May Be Called A Medium In the case of The Supreme Being. Examples:= 1]The Supreme Being made the Heaven. The Act \ the Doing \ etc. Ogf Making is Neither Made Nor Eternal as mentioned above. This Act \ Doing \Operation \ etc. Of Making Occurred in THE OUSIA OF THE SUPREME BEING. This Act \Doing\etc. Of Making may be termed as A MEDIUM. That is Supreme Being Made the Heaven With \By\ Through the Act \Doing \ etc. Of Making. Proof: It is Rediculus and OBSCURE to suggest that the Supreme Being made the Heaven Without any act \ doing \ etc. of Making. Since If SUPREME BEING MAKES \ DOES MAKE A THING THEN THEN SUPREME BEING DOES THE ACT \ DOING\ETC. OF MAKING AND MAKES is Identical to DOING THE ACT \DOING OF MAKING. To makes some thing without ACT\DOING of Making is TO MAKE WITH OUT TO DO MAKING. THIS IS THE NEGATION OF VERY MAKING ITSELF. 2] Act \ Doing Of SUPREME BEING are mediums. For example The SUPREME BEING SEES a THING [Say I or You] , THE IT IS REDECULUS TO SAY THAT SUPREME BEING SEES WITHOUT ACT \ DOING OF SEEING. This sort of Medium does not contradict Divine Seeing. Truely denial of Act \ Doing of Seeing a made thing implies denial of seeing it self. 3] Similarly Logos is a SAID thing or an UTTURED thing which is a Term Of Act \ Doing Of Saying. An Act \ A Doing may not be a(n) Rational \ Intellegent Nature but a Term Of An Act \A Doing MAY BE a(n) Rational \ Intellegent Nature. If an Act \ Doing \etc. Occurs with an other Act \ Doing \etc. which has a TERM, The latter mentioned Act \ Doing may be called a sort of a DIVINE MEDIUM \ THROUHG-NESS. Some times ACTS \ DOINGS \ETC. do occur simultaneously and consequently the inner Occurance of the term of a Doing \ an Act [ if it has any] also occurs simultaneously.Similarly if Divine Being \Supreme Being makes some thing while saying some thing or just after saying the EXTERIOR OCCURRANCCE OF THE MADE THING FROM NOTHINGNESS and the saying \sentence spoken occur simultaneously. In the above mentioned since they may be called a medium \ through-ness. BUT THIS SORT OF DIVINE MEDIUM IS DIFFERENT FROM NON DIVINE MEDIUMS. THIS DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE CONCEPT THAT SUPREME BEING IS THE OMNIFIC \ OMNI-MAKER AND ONLY MAKER OF EVERY THING WHICH NONETTERNALLY OCCURS. FIFTH PRIMILINARY:There are two types of Acts \ Doings \Operations \Processions. A] Those which has terms. B] Those which do not have any term. Eg. Of the latter .is Seeing. The seen one may be a made thing but a seen one [ one who / which is seen] is not a term of act \ doing of seeing. There are two subdivisions of the former. A1] Those which have internal or inner terms. For example, the act \ doing of saying. B2] Those which have exterior or External Terms say the act \ doing of

Making. If an interior term of an Act \ a Doing Occurs simultaneously with an Exterior Term say the thing made ,the interior \inner term may be called a MEDIUM. SIXTH PRIMILINARY:1] 1]Trinitarians believe that only a Hypostatic Person in God the Trinity has power to Assume a Nature, but one may respond that THE SUPREME BEING HAS POWER \ OMNIPOTENCE TO UNITE A SECONDARY NATURE WIT A NONETERNAL TERM OF A NON-ETERNAL ACT \DOING. 2]Trinitarians believe that Only the Male Human Nature can be Assumed . One may respond that Super Human Natures may also be Assumed as LOGOSIAL NATURE, PNEUMAL NATURE OR EVEN THEOPHANOC NATURES ( NON- OUSIAL NON ETERNAL NATURES). 3] Logos may be considered as a conceived mental thought \ idea in the mind [which is nothing but the Ousia in the case of Supreme Being] or an uttered \ said saying \sentence it does not make much difference since ACTS \Doing \OPERATIONS \etc. of thinking \ conception of thought (in Ousia) ,saying\uttering etc. are Not Eternal, consequently their terms are also not Eternal. 4] As a Non Divine Nature in the Ousia [which is NON ETERNALLY] united is Not an Ousia the , Divine Ousia [ IN WHICH THE NON DIVINE INTERNAL \INTERIOR\ INNER TERM OCCURS) IS an Ousia For these kind \ type \ sort of Natures mensioned above. Yet this Ousia is not the Nature of these Natures. 5] One may term an Act \A Doing \ etc. as A NATURE and the term of it may also be called a Nature. SEVENT PRILIMINAY:The meaning of 1] Union:The word Union may be used in several sense. It may be used in the meanings of a] fusing, b] composition, c] combination, d] compound e] formation a thing from other things, f] Corporeal closeness, g] sextual activity etc. But the following meaning are used and may be kept in mind. 1] An Act \ Doing \ Operation \ etc. which JOINS \CONJUCTS any two things. 2] A COMPOUND of two or more things. 3] A COMBINATION of two or more things. 4] A group of two ar more things such that any one of them has a LINK \ Linckage with at least one of the rest of the member of the group such that no one is with out a link. 5] Two or more things forming a COMPOSITE / COMPOUND One. 6] A TOTALITY \ENTIRETY\ WHOLE of WITH-NESS and Inness. Ex:- Let a thing say S is with out an other thing say S in it initially / eternally. How ever Now S is with S in It. Now the Whole\ Total\Entire S with S In It may be termed as a UNION, Or Inner Union / Interior Union. I is different from Exterior or External Union, where the latter and the former things Are mutually out , that is each one is out of the other. 2] PERSON \HYPOSTASIS \ HYPOSTASE. The necessary condition for a Person \ Hypostasis \ Hypostatic Person\ etc. As according to Trinitical Dogmas is that it must be PAR SE SUBSISTENCE \ SUBSISTENS. That is why the do not term the Human Nature In the Supposed Second Hypostasis [ Acquired Divine Humanity] as A Person \ A Hypostasis. But it is incorrect that any thing in GOD Must be Par Se Subsistence \ Subsistens. This is a fallacy since they them selves believe that Logos is GOD and Human Nature is in Logos but the Human Nature is Not Par Se Subsistent. The truth is that any thing if exist GOD MUST Exist In Alio and Must Subsist In Alio. That is It May Be Subsistent In Alio; and may Subsist in Alio.It is not necessary that it is

Parse Subsistent. If so then A Doing \ An Act In the Ousia Of Supreme Being may Not be Termmed as A Hypostasis \ A Person. But if some of such self imposed restrictions are relaxed \ dropped one may use these terms even for the Assumed Nature(s) as well. It is just a matter of definition in the trinitical System of Nomenclature. If so then one may get a permition to use the word temporal Hypostasis \Person even for the Human Nature. But Trinitarians can not use such terms even if the are redefined since they are not religiously allowed to do so. We are also not going to disturb them How ever one may use some different terms as Semi Person Or Hemi Hypostasis for Such a Nature. If so then one has right to use the terms like Hemi Person \Semi Hypostasis for the TERMS OF ACTS \ DOINGS OF SUPREME BEING. 3] Ousia \ Essence \Substance Of Supreme Being Is Believed to be PAR SE SUBSISTENT but It is not a Person \ Hypostasis\Hypostase.Since it is Neither Distinct Nor Incommunicable from any one of the Hypostatic Person. Religiously it is not allowed to use the words like Ousia ,Substance, Essence, Nature for the Hypostases In the TRIUNE GOD. One should not disturb it. But One may coin new terms like SUB ESSENCE, SUB SUBSTANCE ,SUB OUSIA , SUB NATURE FOR Hypostases and Persons in the Triune Godhead. Augustine opined that the word Substance may nopt be used even for the Divine Essence. Perhaps the real reason is that he understood the problem that in a sense a Subsistent is a Substance, and in a sense a Substance is an Essence. However the appearent reason is that the WORD SUBSTANCE was used by him for the first Aristotelian Category. 4] Suppositum is a term which is related to the terms Hypostasis, Person,Essence, Substance. A person\ hypostasis may be expressed/ defined as AN INTELLEGENT \ RATIONAL SUBSTANCE \ESSENCE or even as an Intelligent \ Rational Nature, but the best of all may be said as follow:A PERSON \ HYPOSTASIS IS AN INTELLEGENT \ RATIONAL SUPPOSITUM. One may use the word suppositum as a general term for Essence, Substance, Nature, Person, Hypostasis,Form, Hpostase, OUSIA. 5] Godhead. It may be defined / expressed as: THE Ousia \ Essence\ Nature\ Substance Of God is called GODHEAD. One may see the differences b/w the 2 sentences. 1]There are Three Hypostatic Persons In the Essence Of GOD. 2] There are Three Hypostatic Persons In the Godhead. One may need to use Of GOD AFTER the words Ousia \ Essence\ etc. but may not need after the word Godhead. 6] Nature. Not every Nature is an Ousia \ Essence but the Nature of Divine Ousia \Essence is Identical to It. So the Divine Ousia \ Essence may be termed as Divine Nature but Human Nature ( in the Hypostasis forming a Hypostatic Union) can not be Termed as Human Ousia \ Essence (in the HYPOSTASIS of the Hypostatic Union). 7] TERM OF A DOING\ AN ACT. If a thing is implied by an Act \Doing and with out the the thing there is no positive sense of the act \doing then it is a term of an act \ a doing. For example :- There is no concept of saying with out a Said (Sentence\word). YET THE SAID IS NOT THE SAYING. SO IT IS A TERM . 8]Essence/Essentia:It is incorrect to define the term Essence \ Essentia in strict sence s\ meanings. Ingeneral two in definations are propagated:1] THE INNER DISTINCTIVE NATURE OF A THING. 2]The Qualities which makes a thing what it is. Both of the mensioned above definations are misleading. The following are the most accurate definations. 3] An Essence is that Whereby A Thing ( whether Subsistent or Not) is THAT IT is. 4]An Essence is the Subsistent Ground\Radical from which All the

Qualities\Attributes\Nature(s) of a Thing Originates\Emanates\Issues , AND TO WHICH THEY ARE REFFERED TO. 5]An Essence is what, that is followed from the very definition of a thing. ( This definition is not applicable to undefined terms and is only applicable to defined terms). 6] An Essence a is whereby a thing Possesses All Its Attributes\Qualities what so ever it Possesses. 9] Nature:It is incorrect to define the term nature in the proper sense. FOLLOWING ARE THE definations often used. 1] The set of All Attributes which makes a distinguish a thing from an other thing. 2]The Qualities which makes/constitutes a thing what it is. 3]A Nature is that whereby a thing acts what it acts. Form:A Form is either a Nature or An Essence. That is A Form is either whereby a thing is what it is or the thing acts what it acts. 10]Substance:- Like Other terms it can not be defined properly. Thomas was against the use of the term Substance for the Essence of Supreme Being. Some still follow him. But the do forget that if Essence Of Supreme Being can not be termed as Substance Of Supreme Being then the dogmas of Co-Substantiality Of Logos and EuChristic Transsubstantiality are become invalid. Actually they are unable to distinguish b/w a Substance and a Subsistent. So intheir zeal to make a difference they hurriedly deneied the use of the term Substance for the Divine Essence. One may have a number of definations .The following are most accurate in theological discussons. 1]If a Subsistent is ABSOLUTELY Identical to Its Essence then It is A Substance. 2] A Substance is a Subsistent whereby a thing is what it is. 3] If a SUBSISTENT thing is what it is and The Whereby the thing is what it is ,ARE ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL then the thing is a Substance. This depends upon the term Identity. 4]If the Existence \Esse\Beingness of that Subsistent Existent whereby a Thing is what(soever) It is, is Directly and Uniquely reffered to the Thing and nothing but to the thing then the Thing is a Substance. From this definition it is clear that why Trinitarians do not call a Hypostasis as a Substance. The immediate reason is that the Existence\Beingness of the Divine Essence is not Uniquely ascribed\reffered to any one of the Hypostases but equally to all Hypostases. 5] A subsistent Nature which does not exist in Alio is a Substance. 11]IDENTITY:= There are different meanings of the term IDENTITY. 1]IF TWO OR MORE DIFFERENT THINGS ARE EXACTLT ALIKE AND NONE OF THEM IS A COPY, ALL OF THEM ARE ORIGINAL OR GENENUNE THEN EACH ONE OF THEM IS IDENTICAL TO THE OTHER THING. OFTEN the term IDENTICAL COPY IS USED BUT THE TERM COPY IS MISLEADING. 2] ABSOLUTE IDENTITY[ IDENTY IN THE STRICTEST MEANING\SENSE] If two or more things are such that any two of them are 1]]one and the same thing from ALL\EACH AND EVERY respect 2]] Mutually Identical / Identical to each other then they are Absolutely Identical . Following necessary Attributes of Absolute Identity are:If A is Absolutely Identical to B then A is B and B is A. One may substitue A for B and B for A. 2] If A is Absolutely Identical to B and B is Absolutely Identical to C THEN :1]]] A is Absolutely Identical to C, and C is Absolutely Identical to A. 2]]] A is C and C is A. These laws are valid with out ant shadow of doubt of any Exception. THIS IS THE STRICTEST SENSE\MEANING OF THE TERM IDENTY,NAMELY ABSOLUTE IDENTY.

10

EXAMPLE :- Identity Of Essence Of Supreme Being and Existence \ Beingness Of Supreme Being. RELATIVE IDENTITY:If any two things are IDENTICAL in Regard to some thing / some respects then it is a Relative Identity. Examples:1] If a thing has two different Attributes\Qualities say Power and Knowlidge then they are Identical in Essence ,which is a Relative Identity .Not an Absolute Identity that both of them are one and the same Attibute\Quality in All respects. Just two different words for one and same Attribute\ Quality. 2] A Hypostatic Person may be said to be Relative Identical to the Ousia\ Essence but not Absolutely Identical since The Ousia\Essence is Not A Person ,Not a Hypostasis, and not a Hypostatic Person. EIGHT PRIMILINARY:THE WORKS OF ANTE NICEAN FATHERS ARE INTERPRETED. [to be continued] Please ignore spelling mistakes since I had no time to correct typing mistakes. \ = alternative terms. /=not alternatives but one have a choice to choose. This is case sensitive,colour sensitive ,fond sensitive etc.

11