Christology & the religious state at the collapse of the Roman empire

Following on from Christendom and the Religious State Divide

The nature of Christ inters a set of fundamental dilemma’s, often conferred in the Bible as the response by God to mankind. On account of one person turning to a pillar of salt for looking back upon God’s devastation, another for the death of someone who stumbled, and most controversially, that of the Cruxifixction of God’s own son. The contextual determinations of an ethical foundation is per say, prescribed, as the justice of regular causal influences in society. When key individuals maybe robbed of their pleasure, merely annoyed, or corrupted entirely; the concurrence instilling such thereby, is removing any means for avoidance, in perceivable soluble justice to the individual (to live the good life). An appeasement or dignity is seemingly unavailable and is not applied where causation refers to a wider motivation, but a divine influence in effect, where one’s will is inverted in sheer loss and a helplessness before commonalities affected. 

Problematically to instill justice in a society at the same time as imbuing the will to be lawful, one must infer that what happens is for a good reason, even if it’s bad. This issuance means the dilemma of justice in society, in explanation of bad events to badly effected people, is toward the providence of Christ nature for realist purposes. Whereby strictly, the nature of Christ represented in any event, person, or conjoining of these, is due to bad luck ultimately in which others are not implicated in the fashioning of the unwanted occurrence, which as occurring is perceptibly a negatuvuum (a ultimate negativity manifest, classically the will of God in sheer destruction, condemnation or such, but popularly termed evil - as a power against one’s life, or their attempt to live, as direct to a conceptual presence, evil is the term live backwards). On the contrary one may in attaining a posituvuum perceptibly represent the divine, and not to oneself, rather to everyone else which has become the concentration of religious society so inferred, and the economy inadvertently through the prophet/profits.

The term ‘uvuum’ bears a total and all encompassing measure to the commonly recognised positivism and negativism, alternatively which usually describe an open active effect, on the contrary to a closed natural determination, which is total in effect, and not essentially always active. In approaching the historical dilemma of the monophysite and dyophysite doctrines whereby natures divinity is expressed in duality or as a singularity; the alternatives in bearing openness or closure also concern the imperceptibility of God, of whose perception is essentially infinite. Relative to according perception, whether self-perceived or externally the measure of closure deems force regularly unnatural and immortal or natural and mortal. More so and in case, the dissolution of a negatuvuum represents the disdain of rulership, whilst paradoxically the posituvuum represents a pinnacle, whether by which citizens maintain the ultimate positive means (a holy providence), and/or it’s rulers retain such for maintenance of their power and enforcing law (the holy ordnance), even across generations. 

The historical case is that the Eastern and Western division of the Roman Empire was divided over the essential matter of Christ’s nature, that’s whether as one divinity which is also manifest in the Holy Emperor; or as seperate to the holy ordinances, rulership, and the law, evident as an essential form of mankind, whereby the lord and ruler is also human ultimately, thus not wholly part of the divine. The matter of pressing concern for an expansionist regime of course. The conceptual distinction became known as Christology, whereby the cause and influence of the distinction of such so came to determine the transition of Kings, dynasties and empires via the acceptance or rejection of rulership by the citizen. In case the attempted treaty by Emperor Zeno with the Henoticon relays the formal efforts at designation of the duality ensued directives subordinate in conspiracy to a singularity. The pre-arranging of permissions, in detailed contingencies is typical of contractual law, but also defines a monotheistic allowance for polytheism. The emergence of a sanctity accorded in Christianity by the manifestation of Jesus, would see to justify the anomalous nature of this tandem agreement and essential descent from the divine providence within mankind, evident in rulership (though this wouldn’t fully transpire for over one thousand years later till the Tudors). In effort essentially for the brokering of monophysites, recognition of the matters of divine right tend to corrupt other dignitaries in the processes and formalities of ensuing practices. The efforts in aligning with the divine (in man) represented one of the final measures of the eastern Roman empire, with the collapse of the West, and has played out through the Catholic Church ever since, an echo only, by the emissary of God. 

Dated unequivocally: 15/4/2017