False Prophets the most used comeback!

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyfish58
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
the RCC teaches that the Father and Son share the same Divine Nature, completely and inseparably.

i do not know what non-christians teach about God or His Nature.

but, whether you understand it in any way or understand the significance of it in any way, the above is some of what the RCC teaches about the Divine Nature and the relationships that exist between the Three Persons who fully share in the Divine Nature.

in RC teachings on the Trinity, the Divine Nature is not the same thing as Divine
Personhood.

these are divine mysteries so it is not surprising that with your lack of instruction in to the divine mysteries that you find them confusing.
 
Servant19 said:
Thank you, so is the Father greater than Jesus?

If the Father produce the “idea” of creation “through whom” the Son created, the the Father is greater than the Son, correct?
Click to expand...
There is only one God, Servant. The only distinction between the Father and the Son is one of relationship, not of power or “greatness” or ability.
 
Techno2000 said:
newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm The Incarnation
Click to expand...
Ok thankyou…

So clearly, after having studied this same page you linked another time just now, it indicates that the human body and human soul of Jesus were UNITED with a Divine Nature…

This Divine Nature is NOT the soul of Christ, the soul of Christ simply “manifested” PERFECTLY the Godly attributes of this Divine Nature, since Jesus human soul was sinless.

If we look back therefore at my post which started this dialogue with you in the first place, you will notice that as there is a UNION between the human aspect and this Divine nature of Jesus…

"One of the most important effects of the union of the Divine nature and human nature in One Person is a mutual interchange of attributes, Divine and human, between God and man, the Communicatio Idiomatum."

…one can conclude that they were not in UNION before the birth of Jesus, otherwise there would never need to be a union in the first place.

This “Divine Nature”, the “I am” of the “Before Abraham was, I am” is clearly the a separate entity.

Jesus simply manifested this “Divine Nature” in human form.

The point is, that this “Divine Entity” that says “I am” become united with other human Temples from Age to Age.

🙂

.
 
Techno2000 said:
newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm The Incarnation
Click to expand...
Techno,
. If I may ask, are you familiar with the analogy of the mirror and the sun?

. The mirror is constructed of glass made from sand, and a wooden frame made from trees. When the glass is treated with a silver reflective coat, a mirror effect is produced. When the mirror is turned towards the sun, we see the sun, right?

. Now if the sun could talk, its words would be etched in light, and the light would essentially be the voice of the sun. When the sun speaks to us through the mirror and says: “I am the sun”, we are tempted to say that the mirror is the sun, rather than the conveyor of the message.

. One way of describing this phenomenon is to say that the sun has been “incarnated” in the mirror, yet we can go into space and confirm that in fact the sun remains where it has always been. While the “image” of the sun is being truly reflected in the mirror, the sun has not actually been incarnated in the mirror, although it is tempting to say so.

. Now the mirror can say to us: “These are not my rays, but come from the sun”. or it can say, “The sun is greater than I.” It may also say “I and the sun are one”. Each of these statements is true.

. Jesus said, “These are not My words, but Him that sent Me.” He can say: “The Father is greater than I.” Yet He also says: “I and the Father are one.” All of these statements are true.

. The light of the sun is manifest in the mirror, through its rays. The LIght of God is made manifest in Jesus, through the Holy Spirit. Yet the sun remains in the sky and, while it sends its rays, does not come down to earth. We would fry, right?

. So another way of looking at the divine relationship of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is that of a Divine Mirror, made of the elements of the earth, the minerals from the soil and the fibers from the plants. The Holy Spirit is brought to us by this Perfect Mirror, and thus reflects to us the Light of God.
.
 
Servant19 said:
Ok thankyou…

So clearly, after having studied this same page you linked another time just now, it indicates that the human body and human soul of Jesus were UNITED with a Divine Nature…

This Divine Nature is NOT the soul of Christ, the soul of Christ simply “manifested” PERFECTLY the Godly attributes of this Divine Nature, since Jesus human soul was sinless.

If we look back therefore at my post which started this dialogue with you in the first place, you will notice that as there is a UNION between the human aspect and this Divine nature of Jesus…

"One of the most important effects of the union of the Divine nature and human nature in One Person is a mutual interchange of attributes, Divine and human, between God and man, the Communicatio Idiomatum."

…one can conclude that they were not in UNION before the birth of Jesus, otherwise there would never need to be a union in the first place.

This “Divine Nature”, the “I am” of the “Before Abraham was, I am” is clearly the a separate entity.

Jesus simply manifested this “Divine Nature” in human form.

The point is, that this “Divine Entity” that says “I am” become united with other human Temples from Age to Age.

🙂

.
Click to expand...
Augustine and the Seashell

The great Doctor of the Church St. Augustine of Hippo spent over 30 years working on his treatise De Trinitate [about the Holy Trinity], endeavoring to conceive an intelligible explanation for the mystery of the Trinity.

St Augustine with the boy on the beach

Augustine meets a boy on the beach
He was walking by the seashore one day contemplating and trying to understand the mystery of the Holy Trinity when he saw a small boy running back and forth from the water to a spot on the seashore. The boy was using a sea shell to carry the water from the ocean and place it into a small hole in the sand.

The Bishop of Hippo approached him and asked, “My boy, what are doing?”

“I am trying to bring all the sea into this hole,” the boy replied with a sweet smile.

“But that is impossible, my dear child, the hole cannot contain all that water” said Augustine.

The boy paused in his work, stood up, looked into the eyes of the Saint, and replied, “It is no more impossible than what you are trying to do – comprehend the immensity of the mystery of the Holy Trinity with your small intelligence.”

The Saint was absorbed by such a keen response from that child, and turned his eyes from him for a short while. When he glanced down to ask him something else, the boy had vanished.

Some say that it was an Angel sent by God to teach Augustine a lesson on pride in learning. Others affirm it was the Christ Child Himself who appeared to the Saint to remind him of the limits of human understanding before the great mysteries of our Faith.

Through this story, the sea shell has become a symbol of St. Augustine and the study of theology.

This painting of St. Augustine is part of the outside murals in the Augustinian monastery of Quito, Ecuador. It was done by Miguel de Santiago in 1656.
traditioninaction.org/religious/h065rp.Shell.html
 
Techno2000 said:
Augustine and the Seashell

The great Doctor of the Church St. Augustine of Hippo spent over 30 years working on his treatise De Trinitate [about the Holy Trinity], endeavoring to conceive an intelligible explanation for the mystery of the Trinity.

St Augustine with the boy on the beach

Augustine meets a boy on the beach
He was walking by the seashore one day contemplating and trying to understand the mystery of the Holy Trinity when he saw a small boy running back and forth from the water to a spot on the seashore. The boy was using a sea shell to carry the water from the ocean and place it into a small hole in the sand.

The Bishop of Hippo approached him and asked, “My boy, what are doing?”

“I am trying to bring all the sea into this hole,” the boy replied with a sweet smile.

“But that is impossible, my dear child, the hole cannot contain all that water” said Augustine.

The boy paused in his work, stood up, looked into the eyes of the Saint, and replied, “It is no more impossible than what you are trying to do – comprehend the immensity of the mystery of the Holy Trinity with your small intelligence.”

The Saint was absorbed by such a keen response from that child, and turned his eyes from him for a short while. When he glanced down to ask him something else, the boy had vanished.

Some say that it was an Angel sent by God to teach Augustine a lesson on pride in learning. Others affirm it was the Christ Child Himself who appeared to the Saint to remind him of the limits of human understanding before the great mysteries of our Faith.

Through this story, the sea shell has become a symbol of St. Augustine and the study of theology.

This painting of St. Augustine is part of the outside murals in the Augustinian monastery of Quito, Ecuador. It was done by Miguel de Santiago in 1656.
traditioninaction.org/religious/h065rp.Shell.html
Click to expand...
Beautiful and thankyou Techno 🙂

I am familiar with this story from long long ago, thankyou for jogging my memory 🙂

May I ask you what is your understanding of this passage from St. Basil:
  1. Since then, as says the Lord in the Gospels, John 14:9 he that has seen the Son sees the Father also; on this account he says that the Only-begotten is the express image of His Father’s person. That this may be made still plainer I will quote also other passages of the apostle in which he calls the Son “the image of the invisible God,” Colossians 1:15 and again “image of His goodness;” not because the image differs from the Archetype according to the definition of indivisibility and goodness, but that it may be shown that it is the same as the prototype, even though it be different. For the idea of the image would be lost were it not to preserve throughout the plain and invariable likeness. He therefore that has perception of the beauty of the image is made perceptive of the Archetype. So he, who has, as it were mental apprehension of the form of the Son, prints the express image of the Father’s hypostasis, beholding the latter in the former, not beholding in the reflection the unbegotten being of the Father (for thus there would be complete identity and no distinction), but gazing at the unbegotten beauty in the Begotten. Just as he who in a polished mirror beholds the reflection of the form as plain knowledge of the represented face, so he, who has knowledge of the Son, through his knowledge of the Son receives in his heart the express image of the Father’s Person. For all things that are the Father’s are beheld in the Son, and all things that are the Son’s are the Father’s; because the whole Son is in the Father and has all the Father in Himself. Thus the hypostasis of the Son becomes as it were form and face of the knowledge of the Father, and the hypostasis of the Father is known in the form of the Son, while the proper quality which is contemplated therein remains for the plain distinction of the hypostases.
Click to expand...
newadvent.org/fathers/3202038.htm
Click to expand...
Thankyou for reading and giving us your thoughts 🙂

.
 
Servant19 said:
Beautiful and thankyou Techno 🙂

I am familiar with this story from long long ago, thankyou for jogging my memory 🙂

May I ask you what is your understanding of this passage from St. Basil:

Thankyou for reading and giving us your thoughts 🙂

.
Click to expand...
It seems little too complicated for me to understand.🙂
 
Techno2000 said:
It seams little too complicated for me to understand.🙂
Click to expand...
Well it seems a bit presumptuous for the “little sea shells” gathered preparing the Nicene Creed to make such definitive statements then doesn’t it?

🙂

.
 
Servant19 said:
Well it seems a bit presumptuous for the “little sea shells” gathered preparing the Nicene Creed to make such definitive statements then doesn’t it?

🙂

.
Click to expand...
I think the Nicene Creed is just basic it doesn’t go into great detail .
 
Techno2000 said:
I think the Nicene Creed is just basic it doesn’t go into great detail .
Click to expand...
I would humbly suggest that the usage of such basic words as “begotten”, “not made” and** “consubstantial”** together with the word “incarnation” implies anything but basic, my friend.

Using such words means you know what these words mean…if it is basic then the meaning of these words should be simple to understand, no?

🙂

.
 
Servant19 said:
I would humbly suggest that the usage of such basic words as “begotten”, “not made” and** “consubstantial”** together with the word “incarnation” implies anything but basic, my friend.

Using such words means you know what these words mean…if it is basic then the meaning of these words should be simple to understand, no?

🙂

.
Click to expand...
Try the apolgetics forum Servant. 👍

MJ
 
Servant19 said:
I would humbly suggest that the usage of such basic words as “begotten”, “not made” and** “consubstantial”** together with the word “incarnation” implies anything but basic, my friend.

Using such words means you know what these words mean…if it is basic then the meaning of these words should be simple to understand, no?

🙂

.
Click to expand...
Yes you are right they are easy for me to understand because it’s like preaching to a choir.
 
Servant19 said:
I would humbly suggest that the usage of such basic words as “begotten”, “not made” and** “consubstantial”** together with the word “incarnation” implies anything but basic, my friend.

Using such words means you know what these words mean…if it is basic then the meaning of these words should be simple to understand, no?

🙂

.
Click to expand...
. Pardon me good fellow, but are you suggesting that the colossal conundrums of accoutrements embedded in such idiosyncratic equilateral equations of diametrically opposed circumlocution are somehow coruscant in gasconading caricatures for proficuous remunerative sesquipedalians?

. If so, how?

… 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top