Turcescu criticizes the Metropolitan on the question of person versus individual by indicating that St Gregory of Nyssa sometime uses ἄτομον (''atomon'') “to express the notion of the person.” Of the Cappadocians, only St Gregory uses ''atomon'' as equivalent to ''hypostasis'' or ''prosopon''. So one could stop here and say that only one of the Cappadocians followed a usage contrary to the Metropolitan’s reading. But that would still leave a misimpression. For if one thought that St Gregory was saying atomon as predicated of human persons could be predicated of divine persons ''simpliciter'', we would be left with the heresy of tritheism. But St Gregory was not foolish, which is why he never said any such thing. The other Fathers (Cappadocian or otherwise) never run the risk of confusing someone (such as Turcescu and his fervent disciple, Cebactokpatop) by using ''atomon'' as equivalent to person. While we find the Orthodox confession of three ''hypostaseis'' or three ''prosopa'', nowhere in Orthodox theology do we find the confession of three ''atoma''. Thus Turcescu’s criticism of the Metropolitan’s refusal to equate ''atomon'' with either ''prosopon'' or ''hypostasis'' can only by employed in a defense of tritheism. While at no point on these pages has Cebactokpatop ever read someone else’s posts charitably, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and not infer that he is arguing for tritheism. And if I am right about his intent (I am no mind reader, as he pointed out), then he needs to consider revising his support of Turcescu’s argument. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 00:40, May 9, 2008 (UTC)

== Who believes that 'to differ from Lossky is to differ from patristic theology'??? ==