N
NotWorthy
Guest
Wow! I said all that?!? I really **AM **a deep person!
- Status
S
Spirithound
Guest
Point taken. Thank you for the correction.
H
Huiou_Theou
Guest
I would also say the reason he saved us this way is to strip the Devil the victory of “not Serving” him – a justice of sorts – for in his envy and striking at God – God both allows the Devil to succeed – and at the same time (moment) the devil unwittingly provides the very means of man’s salvation in partial reperation for his//its part in murdering man in the beginning. His miserable being in its’ very disobendence manages to bring ABOUT THE WILL OF GOD.
CCC:391 – Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks … “Satan” or the “devil”.267 The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel …
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…
One thing that bothers me about the “love” explanation (alone) is that God created us freely – not because “love” required him to. Love is what one does, including the willing of “good” (…only God…) for the other – and since God’s being and doing are inexplicably intertwined as St. Thomas notes (on this point I have no objection) → God is necessarily Love (and love is not God by itself as excessive “love” of ones-self is pride – but God can not be excessive himself. )
So, I do not think God created us solely “out of love” because that would allow the misconception to arise that we are a natural corolary of “God being love” – which flies against the catechism’s anti-pantheist requirement that we not be “a necessary” emanation or bringing forth of God. Rather – he “freely chose us”.
Not from any desire, lack or need. (Sounds Autistic, I know).
Just so – even though love by definition is involved in some way in our creation, I am uncomfortable attributing it as the sole cause of our salvation. In giving us existance he does the act of “love” and by saving us he “loves” us by giving us existance even more fully. Yet that is like saying north is “that way” – it never really explains “why” it is that way – there is always something alien, something foreign about God who has NO SIN.
God has no need of anything, for he is fulfilled in himself – never bored. He is macarious-- blessed – Happy – Life, Truth, Good.
(Boy, I had to edit this an amazing number of times to fix typos – bedtime, I suppose!
)
H
Huiou_Theou
Guest
Where’d everybody goe?
How about these few things that it misses – one does not sacrifice one’s self TO one’s self. The son sacrificed To the Father (a different hypostasis / person) and perhaps To “US” in that his body was laid down FOR us.
The everlasting testament of that sacrifice – the Eucharist – is for US.
And if we love the Father – we are “for” the father as part of Christ’s sacrifice.
The cartoon is trying to simplify God – sacrifice “myself” to “myself” which is not quite true – it is a confusing of the 3 person(s) of God – and that is how it get’s its “funny” by misrepresenting whom (all 3) God is.
And again, the sacrifice is not of Jesus’ alone – that “sweet” odor of his sacrifice rising like incense – in a putrid parody even strangely includes the wicked in hell.
The whole world is a sacrifice – Small sacrifices are the way we really communicate. I give up something of me in order to listen to you – you impose your thoughts and affect my “brain” which means I “sacrifice” a little bit of it for you. The evil are a sacrifice too – just not one which is sweet, good, pleasant – rather one which is sulferous, putrid, and rises forever. That is their “communication” to the world – a stink bomb.
In war, even here in the secular U.S. , we speak of the supreme “sacrifice” made by those whom defend our country – the message is clear and understandable – even to the feeble minded. We can make fun of our military – too.
R
rcjones
Guest
If you look closely at the Tree of Life you will see that he did introduce us to Jesus immediately.
It is in Genesis and Revelation as Christ is the beginning and the end.
It’s trunk is split in two, just as the water was divided, the rock was split, the veil was torn, etc.
Water flows between the split just as water came from the rock and poured from Jesus side. His side also had blood, and since life is in the blood, it made the water ‘living water’.
Trees symbolize men and the singular Christ. The word for ‘leaf’ also means ‘tribe’… the closer you look the more you will see that the tree of Life is Christ.
Now since Adam already had eternal life, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil could also be called the tree of death.
If we referred to it this way, We would see that Adam chose death to be with his dying wife. And we , like Seth, made in Adam’s image and likeness inherit his “deathness”.
This is an important part of understanding the cross because it prefigures Christ choosing death to be with his dead bride.
In the priestly-allegorical layer of understanding, when Adam’s rib was taken from his side, it prefigured the woman’s separation from the man by sin. We were first reconciled to Christ in the flesh by him being made to be sin just as Adam chose to eat the fruit.
We were then reconciled to God together when he conquered death. Being ‘in Christ’ is like the rib being placed back in Adam where it belongs. And we have the imagery of putting on the garment of Christ, dwelling in him, etc that all say the same thing.
In the shadow layer of understanding, when Adam’s rib was taken from his side, it prefigures the bride being born from Christ’s death (Adam’s sleep).
The answer to the OP:
1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
So yes and no. Your answer is a litmus test for whether you are perishing or not.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Yes, yes, yes, but you would never see this introduction unless you read these Scriptures in the Light of Christ. The Theology of the early Jews is a clear indication that the Messiah they were looking for is not the Messiah they got.
R
rcjones
Guest
I think we fundamentally agree.
I would just make note that there are more subtle indications that the Jewish leadership knew exactly what was coming and rather than accept it, lied about it to the people.
- When Jesus was 12 he taught about the Messiah in ways they had not heard. It is likely that when he asked “What are these stones?” that he did not ask about a pile of rocks down by the river, but asked of the stone that followed Israel in the desert and gave water, the stone Jacob used as a pillow, the stone that covered Rachel’s well, the stone with the cleft. As he did so, all the stones were seen by the teachers to be speaking of the same Messiah. They had 18 years to realize the implications and stir up the people for an earthly king instead.
- He called them children of the Devil (brood of vipers) for lying about him.
- In sequential parallel passages in Matthew (i.e. blessed are the poor in spirit, he heals a leper) The parallel passage to Jesus casting out the Gadarene demons is a confrontation with the Pharisees. The subtle message is that the demons (and the Pharisees) knew exactly who Christ was, but rather than worship him they would rather kill the pigs just as the Pharisees would kill the one who was an abomination by being made to be sin for us.
In other words, had they known the Messiah was to come from a woman who was suspected of adultery, they would have built brothels to help usher in the Messianic age. (Just as people now are trying to help rebuild the temple to usher in the end of the age).
Once Christ was revealed, Jews flocked to him as the true Messiah… finally recognizing him from the scriptures. So many Jews were leaving the leadership of the Pharisees that they had to persuade Rome that the new Christian sect was a threat.
So the early church was made up of the Jews who realized Jesus was the one they were expecting.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
How were the Jews able to see Messianic prophecies in these? I don’t see them, and I’m trying to look at them in the light of Christ.
I can’t expect the Jews to figure out the puzzle when the biggest piece is missing.
BTW, where does it indicate that Jesus asked them questions of stones in the Temple at 12?
I think the early Church was made up of the Jews who CAME TO realize that Jesus was the one they were expecting.
In regards to the Pharisees rejecting Christ and his message, I think that was influenced by them gradually realizing that Jesus’ popularity growth was going to result in their loss of power. People of authority don’t tend to give up that authority without a fight.
N
Nickkname
Guest
“The foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of man.”
Wherever that comic is from, it’s garbage. The art is horrible and the artist dosen’t even understand Catholicism. It’s so sad that people can get away with such garbage in this time and day.
Wherever that comic is from, it’s garbage. The art is horrible and the artist dosen’t even understand Catholicism. It’s so sad that people can get away with such garbage in this time and day.
R
rcjones
Guest
I agree. i just didn’t word it precisely. Sorry.
I am glad you asked, but would rather talk about it elsewhere. We should start a thread called “These stones”.
- Status