[...]
That light is not an energy, alone, but God's nature, God's essence itself
Perhaps I am not alone in my confusion. Isn't "nature" supposed to refer to one of the two natures of Christ, divine and human, while "essence" is the single essence of the Triune God.
| Who | Has what | Acts how | Known how |
|---|---|---|---|
| Truine God | Essence | Creates, ... | Imperfectly |
| Christ the Son | Person | Acts in harmony of the two wills, ... | Uncreated energies (?), ... |
| Divine | Nature | Wills, redeems, ... | Uncreated energies (?), ... |
| Human | Nature | Wills, suffers, dies, ... | Gospels, ... |
Is this the framework of the discussion?
Nature = essence = ouisa.
When discussing the Hypostatic Union of Christ, we see two natures united in one person.
When discussing the Trinity, we see one nature fully present in all three persons.
In either case, it is the nature, not the person, that is responsible for the action - thus, this is why Jesus has TWO wills, and not ONE. This was THE deciding factor regarding the orthodox battle vs. those Jacobites and such who thought Christ had only one will.
Thus, my problem with an energy that is God but that doesn't also include the essence. God is simple (no parts)
Regards