R
rcwitness
Guest
What is the Gospel to you?
- Status
T
thistle
Guest
I don’t agree with that. As there is only one God when we know Jesus we know the Father and the Holy Spirit.
When we receive Communion we are not just receiving Jesus but the divinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The three persons are present in the Eucharist.
S
steve-b
Guest
Keep going back and back and they all need to come to the realization of the uncaused cause, who caused everything.
Example
Time is an effect, God The uncaused cause of everything that is, has always existed, and had to always exist or there would be NOTHING including time.
Last edited:
B
BlackFriar
Guest
Making is not caring. Any soldier in a foreign country can do that whether it be rape or a one night stand.
K
Kei
Guest
You have to put some iota of care in order to create something.
A potter doesn’t just make a pot, unless he cares about something, even if it’s just money.
I reccomend looking at the writings of the saints.
A potter doesn’t just make a pot, unless he cares about something, even if it’s just money.
I reccomend looking at the writings of the saints.
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
I respectfully disagree, in part. Holy Communion is the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. The Father and the Holy Spirit are pure spirits, who have no body or blood; therefore, they are not present in the Eucharist as Jesus is. Nevertheless, we come to the Father through the Son, and the Holy Spirit dwells within those who are in a state of grace.
B
BlackFriar
Guest
Tell that to solo mums with 3 kids by different fathers whom they often don’t know due to alcohol 
I recommend looking at reality.
I recommend looking at reality.
Last edited:
T
thistle
Guest
When we receive Communion we do not just receive the body and blood of Jesus. We receive the body, blood, soul and DIVINITY of Jesus (the divinity is one God - all three persons present).
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Certainly there is only one God, but the three Persons are distinct, and to a certain extent, separable in their Personhood, though not their essence. Personhood is an individual thing; essence is common. Every member of the Church (Suffering, Glorified, and Militant) is part of the Mystical Body of Christ (essence), but they are separate persons.
Neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit were crucified on the Cross; only the Son. It was Jesus who said, when he instituted the Eucharist, “…this is MY body, this is MY blood…”, etc. He did not say we are consuming the entire Trinity. He did not say it was the body and blood of the Father and the Holy Spirit, who have never had body or blood. Never. The Real Presence is the presence of the glorified body of the Risen Christ, and Christ alone.
The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son.
Jesus is, and always was, divine, i.e., God. But he, and he alone took on flesh. By your reasoning, we would be consuming all of humanity in the Eucharist as well since Jesus, while retaining his divinity, became man and shared fully in our humanity, our essence, even to the point of suffering and death. We are not consuming all of humanity in the Eucharist.
Another example of the separability of the Persons can be found in the celebration of Pentecost, when Jesus asked the Father to send the Holy Spirit to dwell in the souls of the apostles. (The Father and the Son were not “sent.” Indeed, no one sends the Father; he is the Sender.) The Apostles were sad because the Risen Jesus said he must leave them and ascend to his Father. Jesus answered,“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate to be with you forever — the Spirit of truth. The world cannot receive Him, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him. But you do know Him, for He abides with you and He will be in you…”. (Jn 14:15-16).
Note, the Son is going to ask the Father to send the Holy Spirit. One God, three distinct Persons. The Apostles did not receive the Father or the Son on Pentecost. Only the Holy Spirit.
During the consecration, the priest prays to the Father to send the Holy Spirit to transform the bread and wine into the glorified Body and Blood of Christ, but only Christ is present in the Eucharist. Again, I refer you to Christ’s own words when instituting the sacrament and to the USCCB.
Edited for italic insertion.
Last edited:
K
Kei
Guest
The father(s) cared about something alright, even if it is just their own satisfaction.
B
BlackFriar
Guest
So, back to my original observation then…most people arent interested in whether an unmoved mover exists. They wonder if He/It actually cares beyond the initial self “satisfaction” of the act of creation as you put it.
That cannot be proven, though it has been revealed.
That cannot be proven, though it has been revealed.
Last edited:
T
thistle
Guest
Are you really claiming that in the Eucharist the Holy Trinity (one God) is not present?? Yes or no?
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
No, I’m not claiming the Trinity is not present in any way. I’m saying Christ is present in a special way and that the Holy Eucharist, primarily, belongs to Christ.
I probably used the word “separability” wrong in a previous post. I did not mean to imply that the Three Persons, though distinct from one another can be wholly separate. They can’t because each is the One God. I was referring more to the separability of their tasks.
I still believe the Eucharist belongs primarily to Christ, but since the Holy Trinity is One God, and God is inseparable, I don’t believe the Father and Holy Spirit are entirely absent. I still do believe, though, that we only come to the Father through the Son.
I probably used the word “separability” wrong in a previous post. I did not mean to imply that the Three Persons, though distinct from one another can be wholly separate. They can’t because each is the One God. I was referring more to the separability of their tasks.
I still believe the Eucharist belongs primarily to Christ, but since the Holy Trinity is One God, and God is inseparable, I don’t believe the Father and Holy Spirit are entirely absent. I still do believe, though, that we only come to the Father through the Son.
Last edited:
B
BlackFriar
Guest
The word you are looking for is likely “concomitance.”
It explains how another presence is necessaily there yet in a linked “indirect” causal manner.
It explains how another presence is necessaily there yet in a linked “indirect” causal manner.
Last edited:
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Thank you, BlackFriar.
T
TheButler
Guest
Actually it does.
The 46th chapter of the Bible (Gen 46), 3rd verse, word 8 is God:
And he said, I am God, the God of thy father
Take the numbers 4, 6, 3 and 8 and put them on a grid, 4638 top horizontal, 4638 left vertical. Cross-add the numbers together into the grid.
Then take PI: 3.14159265359
There are no 5’s in the grid so use 6-1 and 4+1 instead. Trace PI in the grid. Then take the mirror image of the result (God in His image) and overlay.
You get GOD.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Silly, I know, but you started it!
)
Last edited:
A
anhphan
Guest
Thank you all very much.
D
Damian
Guest
Proof is a mathematical term, not a scientific term. Logical proofs for example: A + B = C is a logical proof if everyone agrees with the definitions of the terms and operators.
Science only offers the most accurately predictive models of something.
What does “exist” mean to you? To me, “to exist” is necessarily temporal since I understand time to be just transition from A to B, thought is linear in this way as well. I can’t understand what it means to exist for a negative amount of time or for no, 0, time. Also, how can you have non-linear thought in a place before time. Everything your deity would have thought to have done, would all happen instantaneously. There is no “before thinking of bringing the universe into existence” in a realm without time, since there could be no “before”. We currently, tentatively, reference the beginning of the Big Bang as time=0 for the “known” universe. This is because we can not know what events happened before that point in time, so there is an unknown number of events before that point, so it is impossible to know how much time passed up to that point.
You can be logically correct and still factually wrong. Our understanding of logic is in our experience of our reality. This is a good way to start making predictive models of where to look for causes. But if we can not run the experiment to look for that cause or have the tools to find that cause, we are stuck at only being justified to go look there in the future but are not justified in believing that our logical conclusion is the actual answer. Example: Einstein mathematically concluded that gravity waves should exist. However, we did not teach that they were part of reality until we could falsify that conclusion. We kept running tests that never came back with any data to falsify that but the tests were not incorrect in their processes for detection. They just never came back with any data either way. Not until 2015, when we actually detected the gravity waves were we able to make a justified conclusion about Einstein’s mathematical assumption. We could, justifiably, conclude that Einstein was correct. That is when you can be justified in your conclusions about reality, and not a moment before. He still could have been factually wrong, even if his mathematical model appeared to be logically correct.
Science, also works by methodological naturalism. That means that the only way to justify the answer to a question, must be within the realm of understand we can investigate the solution to be. That is why we can say the moon’s gravity creates the ocean’s waves. Gravity is something we can investigate as to how it interacts with matter. Since we can not investigate the supernatural in any way, it is not allowed to be an answer to a question. We have not way to understand what it can and can not do, how to investigate an event to see the markers of supernatural involvement or just an unknown natural cause, etc.
Science only offers the most accurately predictive models of something.
What does “exist” mean to you? To me, “to exist” is necessarily temporal since I understand time to be just transition from A to B, thought is linear in this way as well. I can’t understand what it means to exist for a negative amount of time or for no, 0, time. Also, how can you have non-linear thought in a place before time. Everything your deity would have thought to have done, would all happen instantaneously. There is no “before thinking of bringing the universe into existence” in a realm without time, since there could be no “before”. We currently, tentatively, reference the beginning of the Big Bang as time=0 for the “known” universe. This is because we can not know what events happened before that point in time, so there is an unknown number of events before that point, so it is impossible to know how much time passed up to that point.
You can be logically correct and still factually wrong. Our understanding of logic is in our experience of our reality. This is a good way to start making predictive models of where to look for causes. But if we can not run the experiment to look for that cause or have the tools to find that cause, we are stuck at only being justified to go look there in the future but are not justified in believing that our logical conclusion is the actual answer. Example: Einstein mathematically concluded that gravity waves should exist. However, we did not teach that they were part of reality until we could falsify that conclusion. We kept running tests that never came back with any data to falsify that but the tests were not incorrect in their processes for detection. They just never came back with any data either way. Not until 2015, when we actually detected the gravity waves were we able to make a justified conclusion about Einstein’s mathematical assumption. We could, justifiably, conclude that Einstein was correct. That is when you can be justified in your conclusions about reality, and not a moment before. He still could have been factually wrong, even if his mathematical model appeared to be logically correct.
Science, also works by methodological naturalism. That means that the only way to justify the answer to a question, must be within the realm of understand we can investigate the solution to be. That is why we can say the moon’s gravity creates the ocean’s waves. Gravity is something we can investigate as to how it interacts with matter. Since we can not investigate the supernatural in any way, it is not allowed to be an answer to a question. We have not way to understand what it can and can not do, how to investigate an event to see the markers of supernatural involvement or just an unknown natural cause, etc.
0
0104
Guest
I have to disagree this is something that our finite minds will never understand. There are three persons in ONE God. The Council of Nicea (AD325), God from God light from light true God from true God begotten not made the SAME SUBSTANCE ( homoousion) with the Father.
The creed of Nicea and of Constantinople in 381 both use the words same substance. When the two creeds were translated into Latin the term was rendered as “ CONSUBSTANTIALEM” the same substance of the Father.
Read CCC 255 this is not figurative talk. The Catholic Church says the Father is wholly in the Son and the Son is wholly in the Holy Spirit and Vice versa.
Where Christ is in the Eucharist there the Father and Holy Spirit are. They can NEVER be separated that is what the Church teaches. We are not eating Gods flesh are The Holy Spirit. But Jesus’ flesh But they are one God.
God bless
The creed of Nicea and of Constantinople in 381 both use the words same substance. When the two creeds were translated into Latin the term was rendered as “ CONSUBSTANTIALEM” the same substance of the Father.
Read CCC 255 this is not figurative talk. The Catholic Church says the Father is wholly in the Son and the Son is wholly in the Holy Spirit and Vice versa.
Where Christ is in the Eucharist there the Father and Holy Spirit are. They can NEVER be separated that is what the Church teaches. We are not eating Gods flesh are The Holy Spirit. But Jesus’ flesh But they are one God.
God bless
H
HarryStotle
Guest
“Making” as in keeping you in existence at each moment in time.
Soldiers going into foreign countries do not do that with the children they euphemistically are said to “create.”
- Status