Jesus in Heaven and in the Second Coming

  • Thread starter Thread starter meltzerboy2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, if He comes back as a nuclear missile, an inanimate object, how is everyone going to “look upon Him Whom we had pierced” and “mourn for Him as for a firstborn son”?

There are some Fat Man and Little Boy casings at a museum near me, and they do not inspire me to feel sorry for them as people.

Jesus already told us that He would come back dressed like a king, bearing a sword, and surrounded by His victorious armies of angels and saints. So you are just incorrect.

But if you were right, you would be thinking too small. The end of the world is not one nuclear warhead. God made the entire universe, and He will roll up the heavens like a scroll, throw away the skies like a dirty robe, and and furl up the universe like a tent. He is the ultimate consuming fire. The Big Bang was not even a fraction of God’s power. You literally cannot imagine the greatness of God.
 
Last edited:
Mintaka said:
So, if He comes back as a nuclear missile, an inanimate object, how is everyone going to “look upon Him Whom we had pierced” and “mourn for Him as for a firstborn son”?

There are some Fat Man and Little Boy casings at a museum near me, and they do not inspire me to feel sorry for them as people.

Jesus already told us that He would come back dressed like a king, bearing a sword, and surrounded by His victorious armies of angels and saints. So you are just incorrect.

But if you were right, you would be thinking too small. The end of the world is not one nuclear warhead. God made the entire universe, and He will roll up the heavens like a scroll, throw away the skies like a dirty robe, and and furl up the universe like a tent. He is the ultimate consuming fire. The Big Bang was not even a fraction of God’s power. You literally cannot imagine the greatness of God.
Click to expand...
I am not sure who suggested ‘a nuclear missile’ (it helps if you quote the person you replying to), but Jesus also said he would return ‘like a thief in the night’, so we should not necessarily expect armies and trumpets.
 
His return will only surprise those who don’t recognize the signs. Those who see the signs of the times will be waiting for Him, though they know not the day nor the hour.
 
He is not part one and part the other. He is 100% God the Son, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, and is no less so for assuming a human nature. Likewise he is 100% a human being, body and soul, united to but distinct from the Divine Nature. He’s not God in a human suit, or a lesser derivative of God. When He wept over Jerusalem and the times she had refused His embrace, He was speaking as the God of Israel. When He wept over His dead friend Lazarus, it was the honest reaction of a human being. What it was like to be both of those things at the same time, we cannot imagine, but the data (of Scripture and Christian tradition) say he was.
 
Yes. No longer exclusively Spirit in the Son’s case (He now has a body and always will, albeit the kind of “spiritual body” promised to us in the Final Resurrection). But He is still invisibly omnipresent and all that.
 
Yes and yes. Jesus retains His humanity now (albeit in the glorified form we will all have one day since His Resurrection). A human being (who is also the eternal God) now sits upon the throne of the universe and will for eternity. It is our species’ particular honor (and, according to some thinkers, the reason the Devil fell, unable to accept that God would lower Himself to assume such an inferior nature and thereby elevate it above angels like himself).
 
@meltzerboy2

It is even more wonderful! God made man lesser than the angels. There was a test and one third of the angels were thrown out of heaven. The speculation is that the test involved God letting the angels know that humanity in the person of Jesus would be raised above the angels. The fallen angels couldn’t stand that because it offended their pride. Our God is an awesome God!
 
So the angels, including Satan, live in our finite time rather than in G-d’s extra-temporal state? I ask this because you say that the Devil could not accept that G-d would lower Himself below the angels and that may be one of the reasons why Satan fell. I interpret this as meaning Satan witnessed a change in G-d. However, G-d did not lower Himself by means of temporal change since G-d in the Person of the Son is coeternal with G-d the Father and remains unchanged. That would also mean that G-d always had a human nature as well as a divine nature in His “timeframe” although not in ours, would it not?
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
So the angels, including Satan, live in our finite time rather than in G-d’s extra-temporal state? I ask this because you say that the Devil could not accept that G-d would lower Himself below the angels and that may be one of the reasons why Satan fell. I interpret this as meaning Satan witnessed a change in G-d. However, G-d did not lower Himself by means of temporal change since G-d in the Person of the Son is coeternal with G-d the Father and remains unchanged. That would also mean that G-d always had a human nature as well as a divine nature in His “timeframe” although not in ours, would it not?
Click to expand...
The Son is one person of the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ is the human, so there are:

person, The Son
  • divine nature
  • rational soul
  • body
In humans other than Jesus Christ:

person
  • rational soul
  • body
In angels:
  • spiritual nature (each unique)
  • assumed bodies (not a natural body)
 
Last edited:
I was going to say that your words remind me of the Book of Hebrews Ch. 10 vv. 15-18, where the following are quoted from Jeremiah 31:30-33 (Chabad):

|30 Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will form a covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, a new covenant.|

|להִנֵּ֛ה יָמִ֥ים בָּאִ֖ים נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֑ה וְכָֽרַתִּ֗י אֶת־בֵּ֧ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה בְּרִ֥ית חֲדָשָֽׁה:|

|31 Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord.|

|לאלֹ֣א כַבְּרִ֗ית אֲשֶׁ֚ר כָּרַ֙תִּי֙ אֶת־אֲבוֹתָ֔ם בְּיוֹם֙ הֶֽחֱזִיקִ֣י בְיָדָ֔ם לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֖רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֜מָּה הֵפֵ֣רוּ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֗י וְאָֽנֹכִ֛י בָּעַ֥לְתִּי בָ֖ם נְאֻם־יְהֹוָֽה:|

|32 For this is the covenant that I will form with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will place My law in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts, and I will be their God and they shall be My people.|

|לבכִּ֣י זֹ֣את הַבְּרִ֡ית אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶכְרֹת֩ אֶת־בֵּ֨ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אַֽחֲרֵ֨י הַיָּמִ֚ים הָהֵם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה נָתַ֚תִּי אֶת־תּֽוֹרָתִי֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔ם וְעַל־לִבָּ֖ם אֶכְתֳּבֶ֑נָּה וְהָיִ֚יתִי לָהֶם֙ לֵֽאלֹהִ֔ים וְהֵ֖מָּה יִֽהְיוּ־לִ֥י לְעָֽם:|

|33 And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.|

|לגוְלֹ֧א יְלַמְּד֣וּ ע֗וֹד אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֜הוּ וְאִ֚ישׁ אֶת־אָחִיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר דְּע֖וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֑ה כִּֽי־כוּלָּם֩ יֵֽדְע֨וּ אוֹתִ֜י לְמִקְּטַנָּ֚ם וְעַד־גְּדוֹלָם֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֚י אֶסְלַח֙ לַֽעֲו‍ֹנָ֔ם וּלְחַטָּאתָ֖ם לֹ֥א אֶזְכָּר־עֽוֹד:|

Hebrews 10 NABRE (USCCB):

 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
So the angels, including Satan, live in our finite time rather than in G-d’s extra-temporal state? I ask this because you say that the Devil could not accept that G-d would lower Himself below the angels and that may be one of the reasons why Satan fell. I interpret this as meaning Satan witnessed a change in G-d. However, G-d did not lower Himself by means of temporal change since G-d in the Person of the Son is coeternal with G-d the Father and remains unchanged. That would also mean that G-d always had a human nature as well as a divine nature in His “timeframe” although not in ours, would it not?
Click to expand...
The scholastic theologians (of whom Thomas Aquinas is perhaps the most famous among Catholics) distinguish between the eternal (God), the aeviternal (angels and human souls after death), and the temporal. I am not well versed on the aeviternal, which can have a type of order of change, though not necessarily requiring our type of time as there are no physical parts that need to move or process over time.

Anyway, traditional scholastic teaching is that the angels were made with infused knowledge. Their first act was self-reflection, which was good. This non-temporal act was pretty much reflex. It was their next act following upon their self-reflection, their first choosing their will, which was irrevocable (given the nature of the angelic intellect). (Acts without time might be confusing, but to the scholastics, the will follows the intellect, so even without time the intelligible act of the intellect must be prior to the intelligible act of the will, at least in an order of dependency, with the will being dependent upon the intellect and that it cannot be without the intellect/knowledge).

If Satan fell because of “jealousy” (intellectual, not an emotional reaction) over humans, it’s not because he witnessed a change in the divine nature, it’s because he rejected that a human nature would be glorified (through the hypostatic union) above his own nature and set above him in the order of things.

But I don’t think that motivation for Satan is dogma, just popular theological opinion.
 
Last edited:
I believe the speculation is that the angels were told of the Incarnation or shown a vision of it, as the common understanding is that the angelic fall occurred long before Jesus came along.

But you are correct, the angels are not eternal as God is, though it’s possible they don’t experience time quite as we do. They underwent change at least the once, when they declared for God or against Him, and they seem to experience a before and after.

God, on the other hand, is eternal and outside of time, but the Incarnation did take place at a particular point in history. There was a time when the body and soul of Jesus had not been created yet, even though God The Son has always existed (He’s the Son by virtue of His relationship to the Father, not because of the Incarnation).

Now, God being independent of time, could He have “accessed” His human nature from the beginning? It’s an interesting question, but it’s somewhat like asking if He could have spoken to Moses from the beginning. In the timeless/changeless conception of God, the whole universe from beginning to end is one single creative act from His perspective, since He doesn’t do one thing and then something else. But Moses (and Jesus as a human) only come into existence at certain points temporally speaking
 
Usagi said:
I believe the speculation is that the angels were told of the Incarnation or shown a vision of it, as the common understanding is that the angelic fall occurred long before Jesus came along.

But you are correct, the angels are not eternal as God is, though it’s possible they don’t experience time quite as we do. They underwent change at least the once, when they declared for God or against Him, and they seem to experience a before and after.

God, on the other hand, is eternal and outside of time, but the Incarnation did take place at a particular point in history. There was a time when the body and soul of Jesus had not been created yet, even though God The Son has always existed (He’s the Son by virtue of His relationship to the Father, not because of the Incarnation).

Now, God being independent of time, could He have “accessed” His human nature from the beginning? It’s an interesting question, but it’s somewhat like asking if He could have spoken to Moses from the beginning. In the timeless/changeless conception of God, the whole universe from beginning to end is one single creative act from His perspective, since He doesn’t do one thing and then something else. But Moses (and Jesus as a human) only come into existence at certain points temporally speaking
Click to expand...
I refer to the Catechism

I. THE ANGELS

The existence of angels - a truth of faith

328 The existence of the spiritual, non-corporeal beings that Sacred Scripture usually calls “angels” is a truth of faith. The witness of Scripture is as clear as the unanimity of Tradition.

Who are they?

329 St. Augustine says: "‘Angel’ is the name of their office, not of their nature. If you seek the name of their nature, it is ‘spirit’; if you seek the name of their office, it is ‘angel’: from what they are, ‘spirit’, from what they do, ‘angel.’"188 With their whole beings the angels are servants and messengers of God. Because they “always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven” they are the “mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word”.189

330 As purely spiritual creatures angels have intelligence and will: they are personal and immortal creatures, surpassing in perfection all visible creatures, as the splendor of their glory bears witness.190
 
also…

II. THE FALL OF THE ANGELS

391 Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy.266 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or the “devil”.267 The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel, made by God: "The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing."268

392 Scripture speaks of a sin of these angels.269 This “fall” consists in the free choice of these created spirits, who radically and irrevocably rejected God and his reign. We find a reflection of that rebellion in the tempter’s words to our first parents: "You will be like God."270 The devil “has sinned from the beginning”; he is “a liar and the father of lies”.271

393 It is the irrevocable character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgivable. "There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death."272

394 Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls “a murderer from the beginning”, who would even try to divert Jesus from the mission received from his Father.273 "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil."274 In its consequences the gravest of these works was the mendacious seduction that led man to disobey God.

395 The power of Satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. He is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God’s reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Christ Jesus, and although his action may cause grave injuries - of a spiritual nature and, indirectly, even of a physical nature- to each man and to society, the action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but "we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him."275

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm
 
undead_rat said:
Global nuclear war is coming at the world like a runaway freight train, but few see it, and it will catch the world by surprise.
Click to expand...
I personally doubt there will be a global nuclear war. But some kind of reckoning is definitely coming. Also we should not forget what Jesus predicted about separation of humanity into right and left - I think that process is happening right now and people don’t recognize it.
 
openmind77 said:
I personally doubt there will be a global nuclear war. But some kind of reckoning is definitely coming. Also we should not forget what Jesus predicted about separation of humanity into right and left - I think that process is happening right now and people don’t recognize it.
Click to expand...
Most of humanity feels the same way about the coming nuclear war, and this is understandable. The nations have had a few close calls, but safeguards have become better and the number of nuclear weapons deployed has been reduced. Neither Russia nor the USA want this war to happen.

On the other hand, both Russia and the USA continue to develope and deploy their nuclear first-strike capabilities, and these actions tend to destabilize the MAD protocol. Russia has its Kilo-class non-nuclear submarine which the US Navy is unable to track and which is able to carry Russia’s stealth nuclear cruise missile. This system will be able to place nuclear warheads on US ICBM silos, and the only warning will be when the warheads detonate. On the other hand, the USA has placed an advanced fusing system on its SLBMs that enable these missiles to accurately attack Russian ICBM silos with only a 15 minute warning time. Of course the USA has its SLBM subs and Russia has its railroad-mounted ICBMs. Both of these present a targeting problem which has the potential to solved at some future point.

The minor nuclear players may be the biggest issue. The N. Korean leadership does think like we do and may be willing to initiate a nuclear exchange in order to promote the unification of Korea. India and Pakistan present another potential flash point. Iran regards (what they see as) the Zionist occupation of Palestine as on outright crime against humanity. No one should doubt that Iran continues to develop a nuclear weapon. Israel has said that it will not be the first to use a nuclear weapon in the middle east. Will Israel keep this promise if Iran threatens it with a nuclear armed IRBM?

Jeremiah 25:32 seems to indicate that the nuclear war will start with minor players and then spread to the rest of the world:
See! The disaster spreads
from nation to nation.
A mighty tempest rises
from the far ends of the world.
 
OP, one metaphor that Christians use for the Trinity is the three-leaf clover, attributed to St. Patrick among the ancient pagan Irish.

A more modern metaphor is that the Trinity is like water. Water can take the form of steam/vapor, or of liquid, or of ice. But it is all one substance: the compound called Water.

(But not Modalism … never Modalism. That’s a term for the notion that God cannot be more than one Person of the Trinity but must take turns among Godself. That’s like saying that Water can never exist anywhere as more than one form at once. Say, one person lives near the poles and another person lives in a sweltering desert. They both see clouds. One sees ice. Neither of them see liquid water that day. Does that mean that liquid water just doesn’t exist, or does it mean that they are in a place in their lives here they didn’t see any that day? There could be water flowing deep beneath their feet, or it could rain tomorrow, and they would have no way to know it. And does ice cease to exist if the person in the desert has never seen any?

So, Modalism is the false belief that parts of God wink in and out of existence so as to have only one in existence at any given time.)

I’m not sure what we Christians truly understand about the form of God the Son before the Incarnation. I do believe that God the Son of course existed before Incarnation, though.

(Trinity Sunday is the time in the liturgical calendar when we especially contemplate the nature of the Trinity.)
According to Judaism, this will be realized at the Coming of the Messiah, when the Law will be renewed and studied and practiced with utmost intensity. This is one of the missions of the Messiah according to Jewish teaching. I’m sure the Christian viewpoint is different.
Click to expand...
I think Christians believe that one of several things Jesus was doing was to write the law on our hearts, where yes, we should be studying and practicing it. And the name of the New Law is love.

More in mind, but I’m out of time. :eep:
 
Last edited:
Analogies can help, but if we’re being technical I’d just caution against taking them as perfect models of the Trinity. No analogy works, as there’s nothing in nature like God. Analogies, if taken too seriously, can lead one to partialism, modalism, arianism, and other inaccuracies.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top