John 1:1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dan_Parker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1John 6:6-9 NAB with footnote
NAB 1 John 4:6 We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit. 7 (1 )Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.

NAB Notes (1Jo 4:7)
<1> [7-12] Love as we share in it testifies to the nature of God and to his presence in our lives. One who loves shows that one is a child of God and knows God, for God’s very being is love; one without love is without God. The revelation of the nature of God’s love is found in the free gift of his Son to us, so that we may share life with God and be delivered from our sins. The love we have for one another must be of the same sort: authentic, merciful; this unique Christian love is our proof that we know God and can “see” the invisible God.​

Danno2281:
Look again at v. 6 "This is how we know the spirit of truth (Now look at Jn. 15:26).

Dan:
Lets finish the sentence before we do that, shall we 🙂
This is how we know the spirit of truth **and **the spirit of deceit.

Earlier you insisted that I look at the word “and” in Theophilus. Now I ask you to do the same.

NJB 1 John 4:6 We are from God; whoever recognises God listens to us; anyone who is not from God refuses to listen to us. This is how we can distinguish the spirit of truth from the spirit of falsehood.

Note that the spirit of truth is being contrasted with the spirit of falsehood. Who is the spirit of falsehood? Is it a person? Why is spirit not capitalized in the DR, NJB or NAB if your catholic bibles consider this to be a person? Note in John 15:26 to which you appeal, spirit is capitalized.

NJB John 15:26 When the Paraclete comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the **Spirit **of truth who issues from the Father, he will be my witness.

Danno2281:
That spirit, which procedes from the Father, is how we know the love of the Father. The Father and the Spirit proceding from Him cannot be separated, or God is divided into parts. If the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, and the Spirit that procedes from the Father and the Son (see Jn. 20:22), the Spirit abides in the Father and the Son, essentially, substantially, en morphe Theou, morphe having the meang of form as in Aristotle’s formal cause - that which makes what is what it is.

Dan:
I agree the spirit of the Father cannot be separated from the Father and so does St Paul. Lets see why:

NAB 1 Corinthians 2:10 this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. 11 Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God.

Note that Paul compares the spirit of God with the spirit of a human person to make a point as to how one can know God. Just as the spirit of a human person is not another person, so too the spirit of God is not another person.

As for the Son in the Father and Father in the Son, John teaches that this is also something Christians have as well and that they are also given of his Spirit.

NAB 1 John 3:24 Those who keep his commandments remain in him, and he in them, and the way we know that he remains in us is from the Spirit that he gave us.

Your stated view that the love of God is the holy spirit is not consistent with the context of the passage or the NAB notes. When John says God is love he refers to the God and Father of Jesus Christ.
 
The Lord asserts that in the aforesaid psalm David speaks of the Messiah. The Jews do not deny this. Now if the Messiah were merely a man, a mere human descedant of David, it would be unreasonable for David to address to address him, as he does in the psalm. By his perfect knowledge Christ knew that by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit David addressed the Messiah as Lord, meaning thereby Christ’s consubstantial Divinity. The form of David’s statement is in agreement with the truth that Christ was God. David certainly acknowledged the Messiah as his superior, and Christ challenges the Jews to explain David’s words, except they admit that the Messiah be greater than the mere son of David. The conscious certainity of this truth which was in the Lord’s mind is reflected in the Lord’s argument. The Messiah was recognized as God by David; the sentence of David expresses this; and Christ with greater comprehension of truth saw more clearly the same truth. He invites the Jews to receive the true import of David’s words.

cont.
 
Danno2281 said:
Just in passing, what happens to the drop of wine in the ocean? It becomes indistinguishabvle from the ocean. If you believe that their philosophy came from science, it is obvious that you know little of Plato, just for openers. Yes, Aristotle commented on “scientific” matters (Physics), as well as ethics, poetry, music, art, and metaphysics, and a host of others, but to categorize Greek philosophy as dependent upon Greek science betrays a great ignorance of their philosophy.
I did not say that God is ouitside of time, but that He is not subject to it. Re-read the article and see the He is IN the fullness of time.
Now, if you object to my observations on time, tell me how far back time goes. Does it have a beginning? How do you define it? Does it end? Is God in charge of it? You find it easy to snipe at my observations, so let’s hear yours. And please, no citations from the Greeks, like time being a measurement of motion.
Click to expand...
To the Greeks their science and religion were intertwined. The hypostatic union derives from the science of Aristotle. While the wine may not have been discernible by human eyes or senses we don’t believe today that it turns into water as did Aristotle.

As for what I quote, I quote the bible to support my beliefs, not Greek philosophy. There is a forum on CAF to discuss philosophy but as yet I have not had the interest to pursue it.

You have not answered my question yet:
A modern day Catholic would NEVER say that John 1:1a means that "at first God was alone, and the Word in Him, would they?
 
Dan,

Turning now to consider the psalm in itself, we are persuaded that it is Davidic. Its title ascribes it to David; in style it is similar to the other David psalms; and every intrinsic evidence confirms its Davidic origin. But greater that all this is the Lord’s authority. If it were not David who uttered those words, the Lord would not be a true teacher. The whole force of the argument lies in the specific fact that David, the father of the Messiah, calls him Lord. Now if it be not David who uttered these words, the argument loses all point; it becomes a mere juggling of words.

So, Dan, Jesus is the Messiah! Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity! Jesus is God!

Hope this helps! :tiphat:
 
Dan_Parker said:
To the Greeks their science and religion were intertwined. The hypostatic union derives from the science of Aristotle. While the wine may not have been discernible by human eyes or senses we don’t believe today that it turns into water as did Aristotle.

As for what I quote, I quote the bible to support my beliefs, not Greek philosophy. There is a forum on CAF to discuss philosophy but as yet I have not had the interest to pursue it.

You have not answered my question yet:
A modern day Catholic would NEVER say that John 1:1a means that "at first God was alone, and the Word in Him, would they?
Click to expand...
Dan,

And, as it has been stated many times on these boards in so many different ways, your interpretations are fallible and faulty.

In the light of Christ’s divine sonship, as I just proved for you, strictly so-called the mysterious announcement of the Angel Gabriel to Mary become luminously clear: “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee, and therefore also the Holy that shall be born of thee shall be called (A hebraism for “shall be.”) the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35) No wonder then that her cousin Elizabeth hailed her as blessed among women, humbly confused by the honor of this visit from the “mother of HER LORD.” Remember how I just explained to you the proper contextuality of the word “Lord” in my previous explanation to you? No wonder that the Precursor himself, though yet unborn, is constrained to give testimony to the presence of the divine Messiah by leaping in his mother’s womb. We may also note as particularly significant the fact that the first spoken words of Christ related in the Gospel are a reference to his divine sonship - “Know you not that I must be about my Father’s business?” (Luke 2:49) And that his public life begins with a most solemn revelation of his unique relationship to the Father: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17) Hence he justly claimed a love and a reverence due to God alone (John 6: 29-47; 11:26; 14:1; 14:21-28;16:7-13) Since he is eternal he lived before the time of Abraham (Ibid. 8:52-56). He has power to forgive sins by his own authority, a power which the Pharisees recognized as divine (Mark 2:1-12). Being the Son of God he spoke with authority, no longer merely conveying a message from God, as the prophets had done, “Thus sayeth the Lord,” but making laws in his own name: “I say unto to you”; he power to perfect, and if necesary even to set aside as obsolete, the prescriptions of the Old Testament; he is greater than David, he is Lord of the Sabbath. Nor did the Jews misunderstand his claim. They knew well that he was calling himself God. “Art thou then the Son of God?” asked Caiphas; and when Jesus answered that he was indeed, he was accussed of blasphemy and regarded as worthy of death (Luke 22:67-71). This was the reason why from the beginning they had sought to kill him. It was not because of his works that they took up stones to cast at him, but for blasphemy, and because being a man, he made himself God (John 10:30-33), and “because he said that God was his Father, making himself equal to God.” (Ibid. 5:18)

So, Dan, as you can see, directly from the Bible too, that Jesus is the Messiah!, that he is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity!, and that Jesus is God!

Hope this helps! :tiphat:
 
Tomster said:
Dan,

Turning now to consider the psalm in itself, we are persuaded that it is Davidic. Its title ascribes it to David; in style it is similar to the other David psalms; and every intrinsic evidence confirms its Davidic origin. But greater that all this is the Lord’s authority. If it were not David who uttered those words, the Lord would not be a true teacher. The whole force of the argument lies in the specific fact that David, the father of the Messiah, calls him Lord. Now if it be not David who uttered these words, the argument loses all point; it becomes a mere juggling of words.

So, Dan, Jesus is the Messiah! Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity! Jesus is God!

Hope this helps! :tiphat:
Click to expand...
Dan,

Sorry, I forgot to metion in my riveting explanation to you that St. Peter adds his own authority. Please read Acts 2:34-36. In these verses he speaks thus: “For David ascended not into heaven, but he saith himself: The Lord said unto my lord: Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thy enemies the footstool of thy feet. Let all the house of Israel, therefore, know assuredly, that God hath him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” And, yes, the correct word, here is CRUCIFIED, ON A CROSS!

St. Peter bears witness to the Davidic character of the psalm, and he also founds an argument on the title of Lord given to the Messiah by David.

The throne of God is a symbol of his almighty power and infinite dominion. The sitting of the Messiah at the right hand of God is an anthropomorphic figure to declare that the second person of the Blessed “Trinity” is associated with the Eternal Father in an equal power and dominion. Deep is the mystery of the Trinity of God, and that mystery has been intensified by the Incarnation.

You have mentioned on other threads how you believe JW theology comes closest to the theology of Apostolic times.

You couldn’t be more wrong.

Jesus is the Messiah! Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity! Jesus is God!

Hope this helps. :tiphat:
 
Tomster said:
Dan,

Sorry, I forgot to metion in my riveting explanation to you that St. Peter adds his own authority. Please read Acts 2:34-36. In these verses he speaks thus: “For David ascended not into heaven, but he saith himself: The Lord said unto my lord: Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thy enemies the footstool of thy feet. Let all the house of Israel, therefore, know assuredly, that God hath him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” And, yes, the correct word, here is CRUCIFIED, ON A CROSS!

St. Peter bears witness to the Davidic character of the psalm, and he also founds an argument on the title of Lord given to the Messiah by David.

The throne of God is a symbol of his almighty power and infinite dominion. The sitting of the Messiah at the right hand of God is an anthropomorphic figure to declare that the second person of the Blessed “Trinity” is associated with the Eternal Father in an equal power and dominion. Deep is the mystery of the Trinity of God, and that mystery has been intensified by the Incarnation.

You have mentioned on other threads how you believe JW theology comes closest to the theology of Apostolic times.

You couldn’t be more wrong.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:
Click to expand...
 
Tomster said:
Dan,

And, as it has been stated many times on these boards in so many different ways, your interpretations are fallible and faulty.

In the light of Christ’s divine sonship, as I just proved for you, strictly so-called the mysterious announcement of the Angel Gabriel to Mary become luminously clear: “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee, and therefore also the Holy that shall be born of thee shall be called (A hebraism for “shall be.”) the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35) No wonder then that her cousin Elizabeth hailed her as blessed among women, humbly confused by the honor of this visit from the “mother of HER LORD.” Remember how I just explained to you the proper contextuality of the word “Lord” in my previous explanation to you? No wonder that the Precursor himself, though yet unborn, is constrained to give testimony to the presence of the divine Messiah by leaping in his mother’s womb. We may also note as particularly significant the fact that the first spoken words of Christ related in the Gospel are a reference to his divine sonship - “Know you not that I must be about my Father’s business?” (Luke 2:49) And that his public life begins with a most solemn revelation of his unique relationship to the Father: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17) Hence he justly claimed a love and a reverence due to God alone (John 6: 29-47; 11:26; 14:1; 14:21-28;16:7-13) Since he is eternal he lived before the time of Abraham (Ibid. 8:52-56). He has power to forgive sins by his own authority, a power which the Pharisees recognized as divine (Mark 2:1-12). Being the Son of God he spoke with authority, no longer merely conveying a message from God, as the prophets had done, “Thus sayeth the Lord,” but making laws in his own name: “I say unto to you”; he power to perfect, and if necesary even to set aside as obsolete, the prescriptions of the Old Testament; he is greater than David, he is Lord of the Sabbath. Nor did the Jews misunderstand his claim. They knew well that he was calling himself God. “Art thou then the Son of God?” asked Caiphas; and when Jesus answered that he was indeed, he was accussed of blasphemy and regarded as worthy of death (Luke 22:67-71). This was the reason why from the beginning they had sought to kill him. It was not because of his works that they took up stones to cast at him, but for blasphemy, and because being a man, he made himself God (John 10:30-33), and “because he said that God was his Father, making himself equal to God.” (Ibid. 5:18)

So, Dan, as you can see, directly from the Bible too, that Jesus is the Messiah!, that he is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity!, and that Jesus is God!

Hope this helps! :tiphat:
Click to expand...
Tomster,
I asked you what time it was and you are trying to tell me how to build a watch. As a result I have not seen any Catholic on this board, after a great many posts and a greater number of words answer my simple question:

** A modern day Catholic would NEVER say that John 1:1a means that "at first God was alone, and the Word in Him, would they?**
 
Dan_Parker said:
John teaches that the Father is love, not another Person called the Holy Spirit

You should really read the passage in context and also study up on your own Catholic reference materials. The God that is love sent his only Son into the world. That can only be the Father.

NAB 1 John 4:6 We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit. 7 (1 )Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.

NAB Notes (1Jo 4:7)
<1> [7-12] Love as we share in it testifies to the nature of God and to his presence in our lives. One who loves shows that one is a child of God and knows God, for God’s very being is love; one without love is without God. The revelation of the nature of God’s love is found in the free gift of his Son to us, so that we may share life with God and be delivered from our sins. The love we have for one another must be of the same sort: authentic, merciful; this unique Christian love is **our proof that we know God and can “see” the invisible God. **
​
Click to expand...
Dan,

Try these Catholic reference materials on for size.

The central dogma of the Christian faith, that of the Blessed Trinity, is one that was only foreshadowed under the old dispensation. It is not to be denied that, in the light of the New Testament revelation, many traces of the docttrine may be observed in the pages of the Old Testament. It is commonly maintained that the generality of mankind under the Old Law could find only scanty and indecisive warrant for such a belief in the pages of the sacred text.

This is especially true as regards the Holy Spirit. Though the term "Spirit (of God) occurs no less than ninety-four times in the protocanonical books alone (Cf. the Oxford Hebrew Lexicon, pp. 925b-926a) it is far from clearthat the readers or writers of those books were aware of any distinction of persons in God.

To pass from the obscure teaching of the Old Testament on the Holy Spirit to the clear abundant testimony of the Gospels and apostolic writings is to enter into another world. Whole volumes have been written that are solely occupied with a discussion of the New Testament teaching on the subject.

In approaching these texts it is to be noted that three scriptural uses of the word “Spirit” must be carefully distinguished. First, the term is used to signify the divine essence as wholly immaterial. It was in this sense that Our Lord said to the Samaritan woman, “God is a spirit and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:24) Secondly, there is the use of the word so common in the Old Testament in which the term might be understood of a divine attribute or operation (Genesis 1:2). Thirdly, there is the frequent and unmistakable use of the term in the New Testament for a distinct person in the Godhead, who is called in a peculiar sense the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit of Father and Son. It is our claim that the New Testament witnesses to a Person, who is divine and is distinct from the Father and the Son.

The fact that the Holy Spirit is a person appears, in the first place, from the titles given to him by Our Lord in his last discourse to the disciples (John 14:15-18, 26; 15:26; 16:7-15). Our Lord calls him “the Spirit,” and though the Greek word for “spirit” is of the neuter gender, the pronoun used in referring to it is the masculine gender. Again, he calls him by another name, the “Paraclete,” which more probably means an advocate or pleader, a friend of an accused person called to testify to his character or to enlist sympathy in his favor. This term is used four times in regard of the Holy Spirit in St. John’s Gospel (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7), but occurs in his first Epistle as the title of Our Lord, who is our “Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just.” (1 John 2:1) The title, therefore,is evidently a personal one.

The same fact may be seen from a comparison between the Holy Spirit and other persons. Besides the one just mentioned, we find in the gospels a comparison between blasphemy against the Son of Man and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which brings out even more clearly the personality of the Spirit (Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10). And again the formula of baptism containe in the risen Christ’s commission to his Apostles (Matthew 28:19) associates the Holy Spirit with the other two persons of the Trinity in a manner that shows clearly that he too is a person.

cont.
 
Dan_Parker said:
Tomster,
I asked you what time it was and you are trying to tell me how to build a watch. As a result I have not seen any Catholic on this board, after a great many posts and a greater number of words answer my simple question:

** A modern day Catholic would NEVER say that John 1:1a means that "at first God was alone, and the Word in Him, would they?**
Click to expand...
Dan,

It has been answered. Open your eyes.

BTW- Quit deflecting! Respond to the Catholic truth that has been presented to you.
 
Dan_Parker said:
You are changing the wording. Here it is again:

"at first God was alone, and the Word in Him"

What you have done is change the way the word “alone” is being used. To say that God was “alone” means without companion and to say that nothing exists but God alone is quite different.

You omitted the part about the Word in Him because that you have you say:
at first nothing existed but God alone, and the Word in Him.

To say this would mean also among other things that there was no person called the holy spirit either.

As a modern Catholic, can you use the words the same way as Theophilus did?

at first God was alone, and the Word in Him
Click to expand...
Have I changed the meaning of the word, or have you steadfastly refused to see that Theophilus says clearly AND the Word with Him (as in pros ton theon, not syn), not in a mere companionship, as if they were separate entities, but in relationship. The Persons of the Trinity are not companions, but intimately united in being. If you can understand that, you will see why I said that in speaking for myself I HAVE NO PROBLEM with Theophilus’ statement. Yes, I can say what Theophilus says.
 
Dan_Parker said:
John teaches that the Father is love, not another Person called the Holy Spirit

You should really read the passage in context and also study up on your own Catholic reference materials. The God that is love sent his only Son into the world. That can only be the Father.

NAB 1 John 4:6 We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit. 7 (1 )Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.

NAB Notes (1Jo 4:7)
<1> [7-12] Love as we share in it testifies to the nature of God and to his presence in our lives. One who loves shows that one is a child of God and knows God, for God’s very being is love; one without love is without God. The revelation of the nature of God’s love is found in the free gift of his Son to us, so that we may share life with God and be delivered from our sins. The love we have for one another must be of the same sort: authentic, merciful; this unique Christian love is **our proof that we know God and can “see” the invisible God. **
​
Click to expand...
Dan,

Thirdly, it is made clear from the attributes of the Holy Spirit, which testify to his personal character. He speaks, teaches, and testifies. “When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth.” (John 14:13) He chooses to constitute ministers in the Church. “Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Spirithas placed you (as) bishops to rule the Church of God.” (Acts 20:28) The Holy Spirit said to them: “Separate me Saul and Barnabas for the work thereunto I have taken them.” (Acts 13:2) He issues a decree to the Church through his Apostles. “It hath seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.” (Acts 15:28)

Moreover, the Holy Spirit is a person distinct from the Father and the Son. Apart from the evidence of the baptismal formula in St. Matthew, we may gather from St. John’s gospel that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, is sent by the Father, is demanded by the Son from the Father. Further, he receives of the Son, is sent by the Son, gives testimony of him, and takes his place. “I will ask the Father and he shall give you another Paraclete.” (John 14:16) “The Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name.” (John 14:26) “But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.” (John 15:26) “He shall glorify me, because he shall receive of mine.” (John 16:14) “If I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.” (John 16:7)

That the Holy Spirit is a divine person may be seen from the frequency with which he is identified with God. So to lie to the Holy Spirit is to lie to God (Acts 5:3-4) and to offend him is to offend God. Again, to be the temple of the Holy Spirit is the same as to be the temple of God. “Knoweth you not that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (1 Corinthians 3:16)

cont.
 
Dan_Parker said:
Dan:

While they could say the Word was eternal as an attribute of God they would agree that he had a beginning as a person and before this God was alone.

Therefore in this view the person of the Word was not already in existence at the beginning in John 1:1.
Click to expand...
God’s Blessings,

Thank you Dan for answering me again. I will attempt in my own way to express myself. Please forgive me if I am not as well versed as you are and some other members of this forum.

I would like to point out the fact that Jesus was drawn (born, begotten) from the Father’s very being or essence and thus must have the same properties (divine) as His Father. No creature in Heaven or on Earth can ever claim this. Though heavenly creatures are considered to be divine, but not like unto God and the Son. The Father did not create Jesus in the same way He created the angels etc. Therefore Jesus is above all created things and through Him and for Him was everything created.

Col1:15-20 “…Jesus is the image of the invisible God: his is the primacy over all created things…19 For in Him(Jesus) the complete being of God, by God’s own choice, came to dwell.”

An exerpt from the The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus referring Jesus as the Creator
“…but truly God Himself, who is almighty, the Creator of all things, and invisible, has sent from heaven, and placed among men, [Him who is] the truth, and **the holy and incomprehensible Word, and has firmly established Him in their hearts. **He did not, as one might have imagined, send to men any servant, or angel, or ruler, or any one of those who bear sway over earthly things, or one of those to whom the government of things in the heavens has been entrusted, but the very Creator and Fashioner of all things— by whom He made the heavens— by whom he enclosed the sea within its proper bounds— whose ordinances all the stars faithfully observe— from whom the sun has received the measure of his daily course to be observed — whom the moon obeys, being commanded to shine in the night, and whom the stars also obey,…” see Gen 1:26

If the Father is eternal and always existed then so is the Son because He existed in Him as the Word. The Word came from God Almighty and therefore is God. God from God. The Almighty is presumed to be first before all things were, He being infinite, can only give birth (if you will) to an infinite being whose existence cannot be placed in time because time has no relevance in infinity.

In conclusion this is not about who preceded the other but about God’s divinity being exalted through His Word.
If I cannot make myself clear on this point then perhaps the only God you know is the one that is limited to the bible and scriptures. Do not get me wrong, I live by the bible principles but I know my Lord to be so much more.

‘Our idea of God can never truly represent Him as He is, and, because He is infinite while our minds are finite, the resemblance between our thought and its infinite object must always be faint.’

Source. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0101.htm.
 
Dan_Parker said:
John teaches that the Father is love, not another Person called the Holy Spirit

You should really read the passage in context and also study up on your own Catholic reference materials. The God that is love sent his only Son into the world. That can only be the Father.

NAB 1 John 4:6 We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit. 7 (1 )Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.

NAB Notes (1Jo 4:7)
<1> [7-12] Love as we share in it testifies to the nature of God and to his presence in our lives. One who loves shows that one is a child of God and knows God, for God’s very being is love; one without love is without God. The revelation of the nature of God’s love is found in the free gift of his Son to us, so that we may share life with God and be delivered from our sins. The love we have for one another must be of the same sort: authentic, merciful; this unique Christian love is **our proof that we know God and can “see” the invisible God. **
​
Click to expand...
Dan,

It may also be proved from the divine operations that are attributed to him. He fully knows the secrets of the divine counsels. “For the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God . . . So the things also that are of God no man knoweth but the Spirit of God.” (1 Corinthians 2:10-11) To him are appropriated the the inspiration of the prophets (2 Peter 1:21) and the foretelling of the future. (Acts 20:23) He is the giver of various gifts and graces, and, on this account, one finds a striking reference to all three persons of the Blessed Trinity in St. Paul (1 Corinthians 12:4-6,11).

"Now there are varieties of gifts but the same Spirit, And there are varieties of minstrations but the same Lord. And there are varieties of workings but the same God, who worketh all things in all . . .

But these things are the work of one and the same Spirit, who apportioneth severally to each as he will."

To him is also attributed the conception of Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin. The verbal parallelism in St. Luke’s narrative is to be noted (Luke 1:35). The angel says to Mary: “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee. And the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee.”

Here “the power of the Most High” is clearly a synonym for the Holy Spirit.

Again, it is his function to sanctify and regenerate fallen men. “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5) “The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given to us.” (Romans 5:5) Finally, it is his office to be at once the earnest and the agent of the resurrection. “He that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead, shall quicken also your mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” (Romans 8:2)

One may summarize this teaching in the last words of a martyr, St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who suffered for his faith in the year 155 A.D. many centuries before the formation of the JW cult. After he had been bound to the stake, he lifted his eyes to heaven and prayed, saying, “Lord God Almighty, Father of thy only blessed Son, Jesus Christ, I bless thee that thou hast counted me worthy of this day and hour, that I may have a part in the numberof thy martyrs, in the Cup of thy Christ, unto resurrection to life eternal of both soul and body in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit . . . I glorify thee through the eternal and heavenly High Priest, Jesus Christ, thy only Son, through whom be glory to thee, together with him and the Holy Spirit now and forever.” (Martyrdom of St. Polycarp, 14: 1-3)
 
Danno2281 said:
Have I changed the meaning of the word, or have you steadfastly refused to see that Theophilus says clearly AND the Word with Him (as in pros ton theon, not syn), not in a mere companionship, as if they were separate entities, but in relationship. The Persons of the Trinity are not companions, but intimately united in being. If you can understand that, you will see why I said that in speaking for myself I HAVE NO PROBLEM with Theophilus’ statement. Yes, I can say what Theophilus says.
Click to expand...
You say you can say it, but you have not said it. Let’s get this in writing, shall we?

When you refer to John 1:1a (In the beginning was the Word) do Modern Catholics including you interpret this to the effect that: at first God was alone, and the Word in Him

What this means is that “at first” there was only one person.
 
humble_maid said:
God’s Blessings,

Thank you Dan for answering me again. I will attempt in my own way to express myself. Please forgive me if I am not as well versed as you are and some other members of this forum.

I would like to point out the fact that Jesus was drawn (born, begotten) from the Father’s very being or essence and thus must have the same properties (divine) as His Father. No creature in Heaven or on Earth can ever claim this. Though heavenly creatures are considered to be divine, but not like unto God and the Son. The Father did not create Jesus in the same way He created the angels etc. Therefore Jesus is above all created things and through Him and for Him was everything created.

Col1:15-20 “…Jesus is the image of the invisible God: his is the primacy over all created things…19 For in Him(Jesus) the complete being of God, by God’s own choice, came to dwell.”

An exerpt from the The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus referring Jesus as the Creator
“…but truly God Himself, who is almighty, the Creator of all things, and invisible, has sent from heaven, and placed among men, [Him who is] the truth, and **the holy and incomprehensible Word, and has firmly established Him in their hearts. **He did not, as one might have imagined, send to men any servant, or angel, or ruler, or any one of those who bear sway over earthly things, or one of those to whom the government of things in the heavens has been entrusted, but the very Creator and Fashioner of all things— by whom He made the heavens— by whom he enclosed the sea within its proper bounds— whose ordinances all the stars faithfully observe— from whom the sun has received the measure of his daily course to be observed — whom the moon obeys, being commanded to shine in the night, and whom the stars also obey,…” see Gen 1:26

If the Father is eternal and always existed then so is the Son because He existed in Him as the Word. The Word came from God Almighty and therefore is God. God from God. The Almighty is presumed to be first before all things were, He being infinite, can only give birth (if you will) to an infinite being whose existence cannot be placed in time because time has no relevance in infinity.

In conclusion this is not about who preceded the other but about God’s divinity being exalted through His Word.
If I cannot make myself clear on this point then perhaps the only God you know is the one that is limited to the bible and scriptures. Do not get me wrong, I live by the bible principles but I know my Lord to be so much more.

‘Our idea of God can never truly represent Him as He is, and, because He is infinite while our minds are finite, the resemblance between our thought and its infinite object must always be faint.’

Source. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0101.htm.
Click to expand...
Thank you. Jehovah’s Witnesses agree that " The Father did not create Jesus in the same way He created the angels."
 
Dan_Parker said:
Thank you. Jehovah’s Witnesses agree that " The Father did not create Jesus in the same way He created the angels."
Click to expand...
Actually, the Word was eternally begotten and was made flesh in the womb of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity.
 
John 14:10 “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me?”

“In the beginning was the Word.” St. John is illustrating to us here that the Word was before all creation. In the beginning… and he continues with “he was before all things that exist.” AND alll things owe their existence to him. Just so you didn’t miss the point, the Holy Spirit then inspires him to say “NOT one thing was made that he didn’t make.”

If Rev 3:14 says Jesus is the arche origin of the creation of God. Then he isn’t one of the things created. If he is before all things. Is it honest to insert the word (Other) there? It’s just not the bible, the holy spirit didn’t inspire that word to be there.

We can really hit this out of the park now if you’d like…

All creatures under God are Greek: *dolous *(servants), but Christ did not exist in the form of dolous, he humbled himself and *took upon *the form of dolous. If he was any type of creation at all, he would not have humbled himself and “taken upon servanthood.” He would already be a servant. The angels are syn-dolous “fellow-servants” of God alongside Christians. (Rev. 19:10; 22:19.) Christ emptied himself and took upon the form of a servant.

bump
 
Dan_Parker said:
You say you can say it, but you have not said it. Let’s get this in writing, shall we?

When you refer to John 1:1a (In the beginning was the Word) do Modern Catholics including you interpret this to the effect that: at first God was alone, and the Word in Him

What this means is that “at first” there was only one person.
Click to expand...
It is you who have determined that that this means that there was only one person; it does not, for the Person of the word was in Him, loved by Him as a person: “hen dedokas moi hoti egapesas me pro kataboles kosmou****” (You have loved me before the creation of the world) Jn.17:24. Before the creation of the world, God was alone, and the Word in HIm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top