Paul of Samosata


Also found in: Wikipedia.

Paul of Samosata

(səmŏs`ətə), fl. 260–72, Syrian Christian theologian, heretical patriarch of Antioch. He was a friend and high official of ZenobiaZenobia
, d. after 272, queen of Palmyra. She was of Arab stock and was the wife of Septimius Odenathus. He was murdered, probably through her contrivance, and she obtained rule of his lands in the name of her son.
..... Click the link for more information.
 of Palmyra. Paul enounced a dynamic monarchianismmonarchianism
[Gr.,=belief in the rule of one], the concept of God that maintains his sole authority even over Christ and the Holy Spirit. Its characteristic tenet, that God the Father and Jesus are one person, was developed in two forms in early Christianity.
..... Click the link for more information.
, denying the three Persons of the Trinity. He taught that the Logos came to dwell in Jesus at baptism, but that Jesus possessed no extraordinary nature above other men, the Logos being entirely an attribute of God. Paul was repeatedly challenged and finally excommunicated (269), but he continued to function as bishop under Zenobia's protection until the Romans took Palmyra (272). Arius may have been his pupil and his influence on Nestorius was considerable, but his connection with the PauliciansPaulicians
, Christian heretical sect. The sect developed in Armenia from obscure origins and is first mentioned in the middle of the 6th cent., where it is associated with Nestorianism.
..... Click the link for more information.
 is disputed. See adoptionismadoptionism,
Christian heresy taught in Spain after 782 by Elipandus, archbishop of Toledo, and Felix, bishop of Urgel (Seo de Urgel). They held that Jesus at the time of his birth was purely human and only became the divine Son of God by adoption when he was baptized.
..... Click the link for more information.
.
References in periodicals archive ?
Patronage in Early Christianity: Its Use and Transformation from Jesus to Paul of Samosata.
Yet he does not consider the action of councils prior to Nicaea, such as Antioch that condemned Paul of Samosata in 268.
Luijendijk conjectures that Sotas was in Antioch either on business or possibly to participate in the excommunication of that city's bishop, Paul of Samosata.
28) This illustrates that Theodore regarded his own understanding of Christ's humanity as notably different from that of Paul of Samosata.
Theodore's oppositions to Paul of Samosata, Arius, and Apollinaris clearly sets off the parameters of his own position.
Here the transcript made it easier to refute the opponent, Paul of Samosata, by recording the inconsistencies of his statements.
Second, Paul of Samosata as a Roman bureaucrat who introduced Roman legal trappings into the congregation may not be exceptionally strange.
First, there is a theological connection between second- and third-century adoptionism, expressed by such figures as Theodotus of Byzantium and Paul of Samosata, and the eighth-century Spanish variety of the heresy found in the thought of Elipandus of Toledo and Felix of Urgel.
Concerning the courageous attempt to define the true nature of the doctrine of Paul of Samosata (207-35), I would personally have given more credit to the precious testimony of Hilary of Poitiers, On the Councils 81, on the Modalism of the Samosatene, quoted at page 219 (see my article: "The Word `Homoousios' from Hellenism to Christianity," Church History, 71:2).
This fact also sheds some light on the affair of Paul of Samosata.
In the third century Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, had been a rich, established Roman procurator when he became bishop.