L
lelinator
Guest
What impresses me? That reality is able to ponder its own existence. That impresses me. That it only does so because some God decided that it should, that doesn’t impress me. In fact it saddens me a bit.
If God is unchangeable, then how could there be a beginning in time?
- Status
G
goout
Guest
In any case, the phrase expresses the reality that everything “is present” for God. Or to say it another way that you would object to on the same grounds, everything is present for God because God simply is.
(God self identifies as I Am Who Am)
(God self identifies as I Am Who Am)
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
That it happened with no (name removed by moderator)ut. With no forethought. With no intention. That is monstrously impressive.lelinator:
How can you not be impressed with existence and with the whole of creation (including yourself), none of which you or anyone else can claim responsibility for?sainteriksrose:
I look around at the world that God supposedly created…and I’m not impressed. Nature, it seems to me, could do just as well. Now that would indeed be impressive.
All of it is completely unexplainable as to it’s essential origins, and none of it is willed into existence by human beings. If that doesn’t “make an impression” on you, what would?
It’s like those artificial islands that have been built. A lagoon just here. A beach there. Some plam trees along here, spaced just so. It’s beautiful. But compared to a natural island?
G
goout
Guest
What? who said anything about lack of intention?goout:
That it happened with no (name removed by moderator)ut. With no forethought. With no intention. That is monstrously impressive.lelinator:
How can you not be impressed with existence and with the whole of creation (including yourself), none of which you or anyone else can claim responsibility for?sainteriksrose:
I look around at the world that God supposedly created…and I’m not impressed. Nature, it seems to me, could do just as well. Now that would indeed be impressive.
All of it is completely unexplainable as to it’s essential origins, and none of it is willed into existence by human beings. If that doesn’t “make an impression” on you, what would?
It’s like those artificial islands that have been built. A lagoon just here. A beach there. Some plam trees along here, spaced just so. It’s beautiful. But compared to a natural island?
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
God does not have to change in order to make changes in creation.
M
Mmarco
Guest
Actually, in the Bible we find many time the expression “the living God”. Christ Himself says “I am the life” (John 11:25, John 14:6, see also 1 John 1:2) I think that the words “life” and “living” are much more meaninful that the word “is”, which is more typical of the greek philosophy. Of course, we know that God does not live in time; nevertheless we know that He lives.
G
goout
Guest
Well yes but observe that even in the phrases you cite you have tense. So…goout:
Actually, in the Bible we find many time the expression “the living God”. Christ Himself says “I am the life” (John 11:25, John 14:6, see also 1 John 1:2) I think that the words “life” and “living” are much more meaninful that the word “is”, which is more typical of the greek philosophy. Of course, we know that God does not live in time; nevertheless we know that He lives.
human expression is simply inadequate no matter how precise you try to be
Last edited:
L
lelinator
Guest
It’s like animals in a zoo. It doesn’t matter how nice the zoo is, it’s still a zoo.
V
VeryBlessed
Guest
I see your point of course. But for me the claims of Islam seem far-fetched, as it revised earlier Jewish & Christian texts and then claims to be more accurate than those original documents… And as a revert I found the “Baptist God” (or more broadly the Sola Scriptura God) too subject to us recreating him in our image (which the dual anchors of church tradition & scripture in Catholicism minimize). I do think about other faiths including atheism but none have yet outweighed Christianity.
Pascal’s wager isn’t why I believe. I committed long before ever hearing of it. Although, I do think it has some value in pointing out the risk of never giving faith an honest examination to the many who seem never to have spent any time thinking about it’s claims. I believe for many reasons, but mostly because I (subjectively of course, but not necessarily untrue just because it is subjective) have seen God so much in my life, it would be a bigger leap of faith to doubt him at this point.
F
Freddy
Guest
Do you think God is surprised at how it’s all turned out? Or did He intend it to be so?
F
Freddy
Guest
Then we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.WannabeSaint:
God does not have to change in order to make changes in creation.
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
Describing God from our point of view does not define God as He is. God is not defined or limited by emotions. But when we try to describe Him, sometimes we have to use human concepts.Zaccheus:
Then we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.WannabeSaint:
God does not have to change in order to make changes in creation.
G
goout
Guest
I think God’s intention, or his motivation, or that which moves the will, or is the will…is love. God’s “surprise” at the results is taken up in the outpouring of love.goout:
Do you think God is surprised at how it’s all turned out? Or did He intend it to be so?
So you might wonder how pure intention could result in misery. And of course you have the intersection of human free will with love.
F
Freddy
Guest
Then using human concepts, we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.Freddy:
Describing God from our point of view does not define God as He is. God is not defined or limited by emotions. But when we try to describe Him, sometimes we have to use human concepts.Zaccheus:
Then we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.WannabeSaint:
God does not have to change in order to make changes in creation.
You either have to describe Him using language we can understand or you don’t describe Him at all. You can’t say that He is benevolent or just because ‘those are just human concepts’.
G
goout
Guest
Still the description doesn’t define the person, objectively speaking. It might define the person and enable your comprehension, but it’s not the person him/her/it self.Zaccheus:
Then using human concepts, we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.Freddy:
Describing God from our point of view does not define God as He is. God is not defined or limited by emotions. But when we try to describe Him, sometimes we have to use human concepts.Zaccheus:
Then we have to believe, just mentioning two characteristics, that He’s angry and benevolent at the same time.WannabeSaint:
God does not have to change in order to make changes in creation.
You either have to describe Him using language we can understand or you don’t describe Him at all. You can’t say that He is benevolent or just because ‘those are just human concepts’.
F
Freddy
Guest
Then the description is pretty much worthless. I know what angry means. I know what people do when they’re angry. Likewise benevolent. Or loving. These terms either describe God or they do not.
If you say that God loves us then say that we can’t use the term loving in any meaningful way to describe Him because that’s a human term then it becomes smoke and mirrors.
W
Wesrock
Guest
Both terms do pertain to God, in a way, though just anger is not in contradiction to love. Love is also essential to what God is and his eternal activity, and anger is something humans have attributed to him to describe when they feel they humans have received punishment from God.
God doesn’t “feel” emotions, though. Not in his divinity. Love refers to him eternally willing the good in himself and in creation. And that’s not redefining love. Love in action in humans works the same way. From a non-emotional, intellectual perspective we say the same things about people. Whether or not they particularly feel loving at a moment, we can see them choose to express it in action.
Just as God in his divine nature doesn’t have a possible emotion of love, he doesn’t have a possible emotion of anger. But when people have felt like God has taken action to punish them, they sometimes speak of God being “angry” with them.
While we do speak of love in action (whether or not there’s feeling), do we do the same thing in anger? I really don’t think we do so much. It strikes me as being a bit more of an anthropomorphism than how we talk of God being love. Love is his action, anger isn’t really his action but is our perception of his action towards us (sometimes) based on how we’d expect a human to feel. But I speak on this point as someone talking it through, not as someone committed to the point absolutely.
God doesn’t “feel” emotions, though. Not in his divinity. Love refers to him eternally willing the good in himself and in creation. And that’s not redefining love. Love in action in humans works the same way. From a non-emotional, intellectual perspective we say the same things about people. Whether or not they particularly feel loving at a moment, we can see them choose to express it in action.
Just as God in his divine nature doesn’t have a possible emotion of love, he doesn’t have a possible emotion of anger. But when people have felt like God has taken action to punish them, they sometimes speak of God being “angry” with them.
While we do speak of love in action (whether or not there’s feeling), do we do the same thing in anger? I really don’t think we do so much. It strikes me as being a bit more of an anthropomorphism than how we talk of God being love. Love is his action, anger isn’t really his action but is our perception of his action towards us (sometimes) based on how we’d expect a human to feel. But I speak on this point as someone talking it through, not as someone committed to the point absolutely.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
Imagine me doing all the loving things for my wife that she expects. Imagine a lifetime of love. And then imagine me telling her that I don’t emotionally feel love. It’s just that I ‘will the good for her.’ That I always want to do everything that I can for her and I want her to love me. But I personally have no sense of that emotion whatsoever.
That’s truly horrifying.
M
Mmarco
Guest
I totally agree with you about this point. God is not a robot. Mediaval thelogians were deeply influenced by the greek philosophy, which has nothing to do with the biblical teachings about God. The Bible describes a living God who feels emotions. The point is that God lives out-of-time, and we cannot even imagine how an out-of time life may be; time is a limit of ours and neither our reason nor our imagination can lead us beyond time. Out-of-time does not mean “at the same time”; this is a typical error. We can however understand that we have limits and that God is not fully understandable because of our limits, and we must accept our limits. I believe that God lives His emotions, which are different from our emotions; God the Father lives an infinite feeling of love for His Son and God the Son lives an infinite feeling of love for His Father. When we feel a true love for somebody, our feeling of love is only a finite share of the infinitely purer divine love.
God, in His essence is not understandable by our finite intellect, but in Christ God has made Himself knowledgeable, and in the Gospels Christ feels emotions.
Besides, Christ talks about His emotions also in His apparitions to Saint Faustina; for example
50 " Distrust on the part of souls is tearing at My insides. The distrust of a chosen soul causes Me even greater pain; despite My inexhaustible love for them they do not trust Me. Even My death is not enough for them."
Other examples in the following post.
M
Mmarco
Guest
300 "Oh, how much I am hurt by a soul’s distrust! Such a soul professes that I am Holy and Just, but does not believe that I am Mercy and does not trust in My Goodness. Even the devils glorify My Justice but do not believe in My Goodness.
My Heart rejoices in this title of Mercy.
366 I desire to bestow My graces upon souls, but they do not want to accept them. You, at least, come to Me as often as possible and take these graces they do not want to accept. In this way you will console My Heart.
367 To comfort you, let Me tell you that there are souls living in the world who love Me dearly. I dwell In their hearts with delight. But they are few. In convents too, there are souls that fill My Heart with joy. They bear My features; therefore the Heavenly Father looks upon them with special pleasure. They will be a marvel to Angels and men. Their number is very small. They are a defense for the world before the justice of the Heavenly Father and a means of obtaining mercy for the world. The love and sacrifice of these souls sustain the world in existence. The infidelity of a soul specially chosen by Me wounds My Heart most painfully. Such infidelities are swords which pierce My Heart.
512 You are my great joy; your love and your humility make Me leave the heavenly throne and unite myself with you. Love fills up the abyss that exists between My greatness and your nothingness.
580 “Ingratitude in return for so many graces is My Heart’s constant food, on the part of [such] a chosen soul. Their love is lukewarm, and My Heart cannot bear it; these souls force Me to reject them. Others distrust My goodness and have no desire to experience that sweet intimacy in their own hearts, but go in search of Me, off in the distance, and do not find Me. This distrust of My goodness hurts Me very much. If My death has not convinced you of My love, what will? Often a soul wounds Me mortally, and then no one can comfort Me. They use My graces to offend Me. There are souls who despise My graces as well as all the proofs of My love. They do not wish to hear My call, but proceed into the abyss of hell. The loss of these souls plunges Me into deadly sorrow. God though I am, I cannot help such a soul because it scorns Me; having a free will, it can spurn Me or love Me. You, who are the dispenser of My mercy, tell all the world about My goodness, and thus you will comfort My Heart.”
http://www.seraphim.my/divinemercy/diary/text/DiaryII.htm
My Heart rejoices in this title of Mercy.
366 I desire to bestow My graces upon souls, but they do not want to accept them. You, at least, come to Me as often as possible and take these graces they do not want to accept. In this way you will console My Heart.
367 To comfort you, let Me tell you that there are souls living in the world who love Me dearly. I dwell In their hearts with delight. But they are few. In convents too, there are souls that fill My Heart with joy. They bear My features; therefore the Heavenly Father looks upon them with special pleasure. They will be a marvel to Angels and men. Their number is very small. They are a defense for the world before the justice of the Heavenly Father and a means of obtaining mercy for the world. The love and sacrifice of these souls sustain the world in existence. The infidelity of a soul specially chosen by Me wounds My Heart most painfully. Such infidelities are swords which pierce My Heart.
512 You are my great joy; your love and your humility make Me leave the heavenly throne and unite myself with you. Love fills up the abyss that exists between My greatness and your nothingness.
580 “Ingratitude in return for so many graces is My Heart’s constant food, on the part of [such] a chosen soul. Their love is lukewarm, and My Heart cannot bear it; these souls force Me to reject them. Others distrust My goodness and have no desire to experience that sweet intimacy in their own hearts, but go in search of Me, off in the distance, and do not find Me. This distrust of My goodness hurts Me very much. If My death has not convinced you of My love, what will? Often a soul wounds Me mortally, and then no one can comfort Me. They use My graces to offend Me. There are souls who despise My graces as well as all the proofs of My love. They do not wish to hear My call, but proceed into the abyss of hell. The loss of these souls plunges Me into deadly sorrow. God though I am, I cannot help such a soul because it scorns Me; having a free will, it can spurn Me or love Me. You, who are the dispenser of My mercy, tell all the world about My goodness, and thus you will comfort My Heart.”
http://www.seraphim.my/divinemercy/diary/text/DiaryII.htm
- Status