E
Elzee
Guest
what’s an anthropormorphism?
- Status
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
If what is meant by “suffer” is “passible,” all indications are that the Divine nature is impassible.
St. John Damascene: “we do not say that the Godhead is passible.” (De Fide Orth. iii, 4).
St. John Damascene: “we do not say that the Godhead is passible.” (De Fide Orth. iii, 4).
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
J
JimG
Guest
Anthropomorphism is a speaking of God in human terms, including such things as emotions, changing his mind, and so forth. But God in His divine essence is pure spirit. Emotions and feelings do not apply to him. Neither does ‘sitting at his right hand,’ since God, as God, has no hands.
For a further discussion of God’s essence, I would recommend Theology for Beginners by Frank Sheed.
But also keep in mind that God in his divine will, loved us so much as to send his son to take on a human nature for our sake. The Second Person of the Trinity, in his divine nature, could not suffer and die, yet he willing did so for our sake, in his human nature. By reason of the Incarnation, a divine Person was able to suffer and die (and also feel every human emotion.)
For a further discussion of God’s essence, I would recommend Theology for Beginners by Frank Sheed.
But also keep in mind that God in his divine will, loved us so much as to send his son to take on a human nature for our sake. The Second Person of the Trinity, in his divine nature, could not suffer and die, yet he willing did so for our sake, in his human nature. By reason of the Incarnation, a divine Person was able to suffer and die (and also feel every human emotion.)
J
JimG
Guest
The article from First Things magazine linked by Dave in post #22 addresses most of the things you have mentioned. It is worth a careful reading. I can’t resist posting a brief quote here, but the article is more in depth: (emphasis added by me)
Second, . . .it was the human suffering and death of the Son, enacted on the stage of real history, that is salvific. In espousing that the Son of God suffered *as God * and that the *Father suffered in union * with His divine Son, contemporary theologians have reduced the passion and death of Jesus to a myth. . . .
. . .The bodily resurrection testifies that Jesus’ offering of His human life was salvific, and thus that the human suffering and death He bore were of the utmost importance. To place the significance of the Son’s suffering within His *divine nature * is to relegate His human suffering and death to insignificance, and thus to relegate all human suffering to insignificance. The fully human resurrection of Jesus not only authenticates the reality and even importance of human suffering, it equally ensures that sin and death and the suffering these cause have been vanquished. The suffering and death of the Son incarnate is the Father’s answer to human suffering.
A
Anonymous_1
Guest
very very interesting subject…
does the Church hold any official position on this topic?
does the Church hold any official position on this topic?
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
John Paul II, quoting from St. Irenaeus, said regarding the Incarnation, “the impassible became passible.” (John Paul II, General Audience, 14 Feb 2001)
The distinction of the passible human nature and the impassible Divine nature was also held by Pius XII (Sempiternums, Rex Christus), John XXIII (Aeterna Dei Sapientia), and St. Leo the Great (Letter 28, 3-4).
C
CollegeCatholic
Guest
If you would consent that there is a divine “will,” you must also recognize the existence of the divine “will not.” With that said, God reacts to that which happens in the temporal realm. This reactivity is evidenced by either support or punishment of the Jewish people based on their following of the law. God’s will is formulated to include the free will of those who are to come as revealed by God’s foreknowledge. This is reactionary and thus, proves that God, although by His own design, is concerned with what happens. This concern includes blessings and curses and reveals room for God to act within His own bounds in a non-stagnant (moving) way. Although it would not be entirely accurate to say that God “changes” it would also not be accurate to say that God does not move. As such, one could say that God moves proximally within His own bounds without contradicting the reality of His omnipresence and omnipotence.
God does not “change” but God does “move” and thus, has established the divine law to incorporate movement on behalf of the faithful with the recongnition of the open heart and prayer in its intercessory, communal, and personal forms.
M
mosher
Guest
I think it may be better to put it in a more theologically sound way. God has a will. We know by that will that he has a Universal Salvific Will and a Permissive Will. We know that He has a plan of salvation, a plan of justice and a plan of mercy. I all of these God acts constantly but never in a reactive way but rather in a proactive way. God himself is immovable in His will but H allows for our participation as co-workers in the divine plan. Yet prayer does not change God not can it - rather prayer is the method by which we seek the grace to participate in His plan.
M
Montie_Claunch
Guest
But, I want to say that I remeber reading that The Isrealites had made God mad and he was going to wipe them out and start out anew with just Moses but, Moses begged him not to, to spare them and of coarse God did. Wouldn’t that be God feeling compasion and mercy (without the physical body) and being moved by an intercession to change his will?
To an earlier post on What I mean by suffer. I mean like emotional suffering. Like if your son is dieing and you would suffer, not physically of coarse but, it would be a mental anquise.
To yet another earlier post. I don’t see why it would matter if one had a body or not to feel emotion. I wouldn’t see why one would have to have a physical sensation to be feeled with joy or sorrow or greif. I babysitt a lot and I am moved to tears some times when one of the children is hurt. There was no physical pain on my part but, I suffered with the child. Why would God the Father who is infinatly better than I not be feeled with such emotions for/towards his children, in their pains and in their triumphs and so on?
J
JimG
Guest
And of course, there is the story in the OT of Abraham bargaining with God about the number of good men in the town of Sodom which would result in the town being spared. And of course, Abraham succeeds in bargaining God down from 50 to 10.
But these are all anthropomorphisms to demonstrate a spiritual truth. If God was undecided, He wouldn’t be God. And if God felt mental anguish, he also wouldn’t be God.
But these are all anthropomorphisms to demonstrate a spiritual truth. If God was undecided, He wouldn’t be God. And if God felt mental anguish, he also wouldn’t be God.
M
Montie_Claunch
Guest
But, why would mental anguish detract from his godness? I don’t think that it would make him undecided but, that he could change his mind if want to. And I don’t see why he couldn’t change his mind if he wants to either. I mean if “God so loved the world,” I would assume that that would be that he could feel love (I think there is a scripture that says that God is love) which is an emtion. And emotion that gives to other emotions, Like me with the kids I babysitt or any parent with children can have a wide range of emotions depending on what is happening with the child.
But, still I don’t see why the fact God the Father doesn’t have matireal body have anything to do with weather or not he has a body? I mean, A body doesn’t dictate what we feel (it can certainly contribute to our emotions but, is not the sole determinante). The feeling we gain from a movie certainly don’t have anything to do with our body. We wern’t crying because we were at the titanic or laughing because we amongst the three stuges. Why would the precense of a body be the decideding factor in this? Thanks and God bless.
J
JimG
Guest
Montie Claunch:
In a human being, that decision can be preceded, and followed by, emotions, and that’s good, for us because we are made to feel emotion.
And emotions really are quite connected to the body; hormones, chemicals, and a variety of physical factors affect emotions.
And at a movie, we are crying or laughing, because the physics of the movie affect our senses–the sight and sounds make it seem as though we are there. Any good movie director knows which music will affect your emotions, and in what way. Those are all physical things. A body is required, because sense experience is needed.
But God is pure, infinite, eternal Spirit. If he changed his mind, it would mean that there was some uncertainty in his mind to begin with, which means he would not be God.
I don’t mean by this to make God sound “cold and unfeeling,”
that’s just not the way He operates. If his love is sufficient to have sent the Son to actually suffer and die for us and experience every human emotion, as one of us–isn’t that a pretty good indication that the Father does understand us, and does love us?
Well, first off, I’d have to disagree that love is an emotion. I’ll pull a quote from the Marriage Encounter people who never tire of saying that “Love is a decision.”
In a human being, that decision can be preceded, and followed by, emotions, and that’s good, for us because we are made to feel emotion.
And emotions really are quite connected to the body; hormones, chemicals, and a variety of physical factors affect emotions.
And at a movie, we are crying or laughing, because the physics of the movie affect our senses–the sight and sounds make it seem as though we are there. Any good movie director knows which music will affect your emotions, and in what way. Those are all physical things. A body is required, because sense experience is needed.
But God is pure, infinite, eternal Spirit. If he changed his mind, it would mean that there was some uncertainty in his mind to begin with, which means he would not be God.
I don’t mean by this to make God sound “cold and unfeeling,”
that’s just not the way He operates. If his love is sufficient to have sent the Son to actually suffer and die for us and experience every human emotion, as one of us–isn’t that a pretty good indication that the Father does understand us, and does love us?
M
Montie_Claunch
Guest
Yes they are connected but, not dependent. Dreams create emotions and that is purly mind (as the body isn’t doing anything). But, doesn’t God see what’s going on and God has talked with people which would imply that he could hear. Elijah (or Elisha) was brought back by a king of Isreal (name slips me right now) and even though pure spirit, could hear so Physicalness doesn’t play a factor there. So if sight and sound would be part of emotions wouldn’t God have that scince he has those two ablitlies.
Not nessecarily. It could be that he just wanted to change it. If preston, a child I babysit, asked me for a glass of milk and I said no. Then he says,“Pleeasse.” and I say, alright. It doesn’t imly that I was unceartin in any fashion but, that I simply changed my mind for whatever reason.
And agian, how do we know that spirit does not have emotion? Spirit might not have chemical reactions but, I don’t see how that means that means there is no emotions. And if Demons beleive about Jesus and tremble, being a sign of fear, and them being spirit, I would not see why spirit could have emotions.
Sorry for prolonging this in such a fashion. I just can’t grasp why this wouldn’t be.
C
CollegeCatholic
Guest
It is not that He is uncertain, it is that he is open to interacting with our free will. If we participate with God, if we are able to love, then there is a freedom that God, by his creation of the particulars of the Divine Law, has arranged for the participation of humanity in the will of God. The specific plan of God is planned in light of the interactions of humanity and thus, God is moved by His foresight into what exactly we will be freely doing.
A
Anne_G
Guest
I personally believe God suffers every day, with all the terrible things that go on in the world. He wouldn’t be God the Father if he didn’t suffer seing his own children get hurt. Love is an emotion not a decision. If you do not love someone, you can’t make a decision to love them and therefore you do. It doesn’t work that way. The Bible also says God is a jealous God, that’s an emotion. He did in the Bible and still does show compassion fro us, another emotion, as already stated. and as also stated, anger is an emotion that God has. If he didn’t have emotions he wouldn’t understand our emotions, and he couldn’t have given us emotions when he created us. Just my opinion.
L
Le_Cracquere
Guest
Anne G:
I, too, could go back and link to the First Things article, but one line about God’s alleged sufferings stuck so firmly in my mind that I can paraphrase it on my own: “What comfort could be had in discovering that God is in as much trouble as we are?”
Just as God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, He possesses omniplenitude. Suffering and pain arise from an absence of the good, and God lacks nothing. (Neither, I might add, do the “anger” and “jealousy” of God map neatly onto our human experiences and emotions that we call by those words.)
I, too, could go back and link to the First Things article, but one line about God’s alleged sufferings stuck so firmly in my mind that I can paraphrase it on my own: “What comfort could be had in discovering that God is in as much trouble as we are?”
A
Anonymous_1
Guest
love is not merley an emotion…it is an act of the will…
of course I speak of agape not eros or phillia
thats not to say that there is not an emotional component to Love…but love is not merley a feeling but a choice…
of course I speak of agape not eros or phillia
thats not to say that there is not an emotional component to Love…but love is not merley a feeling but a choice…
J
JimG
Guest
Anne G:
Yes, that line from the First Things article struck me, too. What good does it do us if God is as emotional as we are? When we are suffering, when we are emotional wrecks, does it help us if He is too? Emotions are fickle. And, I can’t help repeating, they are physical manifestations. Emotions felt in dreams are physical. Let’s make a distinction between the mind and the imagination. Imagination has a physical component. Mind does not.
The bible can’t help but use emotionally laden words when describing God’s words and actions—because that’s how we think. The bible is written in terms familiar to us.
God’s existence as a pure spirit does not make him less compassionate, but more so. He understands perfectly our every emotion and feeling without having to “experience” it himself.
Keep in mind that, for God, time does not flow from one time to another; space does not stretch from one point to another. He doesn’t change from one mood to another. It may be a hard concept to grasp, but it prevents us from creating God in our own image.
Being in love is an emotion. Love itself is a decision. When the feeling becomes less pronounced, you will continue to love because you choose to do so. And by a remarkable quality of human nature, the more you choose to love, the more the loving feelings will return!
Oh dear, where is Frank Sheed when we need him? I’ll just keep on recommending his book .
Yes, that line from the First Things article struck me, too. What good does it do us if God is as emotional as we are? When we are suffering, when we are emotional wrecks, does it help us if He is too? Emotions are fickle. And, I can’t help repeating, they are physical manifestations. Emotions felt in dreams are physical. Let’s make a distinction between the mind and the imagination. Imagination has a physical component. Mind does not.
The bible can’t help but use emotionally laden words when describing God’s words and actions—because that’s how we think. The bible is written in terms familiar to us.
God’s existence as a pure spirit does not make him less compassionate, but more so. He understands perfectly our every emotion and feeling without having to “experience” it himself.
Keep in mind that, for God, time does not flow from one time to another; space does not stretch from one point to another. He doesn’t change from one mood to another. It may be a hard concept to grasp, but it prevents us from creating God in our own image.
Being in love is an emotion. Love itself is a decision. When the feeling becomes less pronounced, you will continue to love because you choose to do so. And by a remarkable quality of human nature, the more you choose to love, the more the loving feelings will return!
M
Montie_Claunch
Guest
Imagination is not Physical. Imagination is mental. No matter how many times you pock the doughboy in the belly it wouldn’t stir his imagination. His imagination might have an effect on his body, pshycosematic but, that is not what you’re talking about. And I have never had a dream (day or nightdream) that was ever effected by my body (seeing how it has the same stimulas I would get the same result). And seeing that the mind, which isn’t physical, can feel emotions, I don’t see what would prohibit God from having emotions.
I learned that Shakespear came up with new words all the time. There would be nothing stoping any author of the bible from making up one to describe what happens in Gods mind.
But, if that deceision produces an emotion and God has a will for love, as you yourself has said before, wouldn’t that mean that God has emotion.
- Status