Partaking Of The Divine Nature

  • Thread starter Thread starter Protestant101
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
I didn’t demand anything.
Click to expand...
But you did “ask” that I “respond” to two posts of your’s before you would be willing to answer my questions re the divine nature.

What do Catholics teach officially about “the divine nature?” How is 2 Pet.1:4 related to the Catholic view?
 
Protestant 101, did you see mine and Triune Unity’s posts above? Triune Unity put it better I think.
 
TriuneUnity said:
You would think it would be that easy for Reformed/Zwinglian Christians to understand!
Click to expand...
Does any Christian really doubt God’s omniscience? 🤷
I would see it more as taking what that event did and making it present to us in the present age. Fr. Corapi explained it really well once by saying that the sacraments are like a divine baseball; they take the grace that was won for us at the cross and hurl it through time so that those of us who are not witness to the time-bound event of the crucifixion may participate in it.
Click to expand...
Yes, you said it better than I did, Triune Unity. I love Fr. Corapi’s programs. They’re awesome. 👍
St. Peter mentions this. I believe it is in the context of the resurrection at the end of the age. We will be glorified in our bodies as Christ was glorified.
Click to expand...
Oh, thanks for correcting me. It is Saint Peter, not Saint Paul.
 
TriuneUnity said:
haha…sorry, didnt mean theologically. The way he sounds when he preaches.
Click to expand...
Oh… we went to a Baptist community when we lived in Virginia, and the only thing I heard differently is that they use highly colloquial speech and local colour. 🤷

But Corapi is polished and refined. 😛
 
Protestant101 said:
😛

The way I see it now is that this is a classic, textbook case of making an entire doctrine out of just one text, which in effect, makes it a pretext.

One can argue till the cows come home about if it’s just a piece of Jesus’ body, or if it’s His whole body, or anything in between. it is all too easy to make the Protestant out to be one who “misunderstands” by trying to bring up points like this. Everyone, on both sides of this knows full well that Jesus is omiscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.

If you say that it is “the whole body” of Christ, then there are many ways that makes no sense.

I would like to ask you a question. What is meant by the Bible when it says “divine nature?” What is required if we are to “partake” of it?
Click to expand...
It wasn’t my intent to "make the Protestant out to be one who ‘misunderstands’; I just wanted to clarify what Catholic doctrine actually is. In the Eucharist every communicant receives Jesus whole and entire. And every communicant receives one and the same Jesus. The appearances of bread and wine are multiplied. Jesus is not.
 
JimG said:
It wasn’t my intent to "make the Protestant out to be one who ‘misunderstands’; I just wanted to clarify what Catholic doctrine actually is. In the Eucharist every communicant receives Jesus whole and entire. And every communicant receives one and the same Jesus. The appearances of bread and wine are multiplied. Jesus is not.
Click to expand...
What does the Bible mean when it says “divine nature?” (2 Pet.1:4)
 
Protestant101 said:
What does the Bible mean when it says “divine nature?” (2 Pet.1:4)
Click to expand...
Peter says that we as followers of Christ can become sharers in the divine nature.

I pretty much gave my understanding of the divine nature in post #22. My understanding of how we can share in a divine nature which is simple, indivisible, pure spirit, and infinite, is a sacramental one. We share in the divine nature by union with Christ, a union which is begun at Baptism and continued thereafter as long as we do not voluntarily reject Christ. As a Catholic I believe that sharing in the divine nature is strengthened by each of the sacraments, as well as by prayer, adoration, and sacrifice for the love of God.
 
Peter_J said:
Um, would you mind first responding to what I’ve already posted regarding “partaking of the divine nature” (posts #23 and #25) before asking for more posts about it?
Click to expand...
Hmm … perhaps this ^^ wasn’t the right question to ask.

Instead I should say: Why does it seem like whenever someone tells you something about “partaking of the divine nature”, you suddenly switch to talking about the eucharist, and vice versa?

It seems a little like you’re “playing hard to get”, as it were.

🤷
 
Peter_J said:
Hmm … perhaps this ^^ wasn’t the right question to ask.

Instead I should say: Why does it seem like whenever someone tells you something about “partaking of the divine nature”, you suddenly switch to talking about the eucharist, and vice versa?

It seems a little like you’re “playing hard to get”, as it were.

🤷
Click to expand...
I think we need to clarify for Protestant 101, as the “Partaking of Divine Nature” is related, but mostly another subject apart from the blessed Sacrament:

“Partaking of the Divine Nature” refers to theosis (In Protestant theology I think this is called sanctification and glorification? Theosis covers both.) As such, we should have a separate thread dealing with theosis, and leave this one to discussing the Christian doctrine of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, as stated by Christ, St.Paul, Ignatius, Clement, and the other Church Fathers,.
 
JimG said:
Peter says that we as followers of Christ can become sharers in the divine nature.

I pretty much gave my understanding of the divine nature in post #22. My understanding of how we can share in a divine nature which is simple, indivisible, pure spirit, and infinite, is a sacramental one. We share in the divine nature by union with Christ, a union which is begun at Baptism and continued thereafter as long as we do not voluntarily reject Christ. As a Catholic I believe that sharing in the divine nature is strengthened by each of the sacraments, as well as by prayer, adoration, and sacrifice for the love of God.
Click to expand...
In the Lord’s Supper there is indeed a real communion with Christ, though not with the idea that Christ’s body and blood are present in the elements. That would be ingestion of Christ; not communion with Him. The Bible is clear that “body” and “blood” are used in these passages are symbolic characterizations.

Christ’s body and blood are no more present today in the elements of bread and wine than they were when the Lord instituted the ordinance, took bread and gave it to the disciples, saying, “Take, eat; this is my body,” then likewise took a cup and gave it to them, explaining, “Drink of it, … for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:26–28 ). His real body and blood could not have been in the bread and wine then, because he was right there talking to the disciples!

Likewise today; Jesus is somewhere, mediating on our behalf; but not in the real form of flesh and blood in the bread and wine; for this would contradict what he has established as a beautiful communion with Him personally. During the Lord’s supper, Jesus invites us to intimate communion with Him; and committment to Him and to one another in the Church; he does not therein invite us to eat Him. Salvation, forgiveness of sin, relationship with Christ, etc., are not effected by literally eating anyone’s flesh and blood.

Jesus’ instruction was clear: “Do this is remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:24, 25). The unleavened bread and unfermented fruit of the vine—which alone can appropriately symbolize the sinless perfection of the person of Christ—are shared “in remembrance of me”; they speak of sacrificial death and salvation and proclaim them until He comes.
 
Protestant101 said:
Jesus’ instruction was clear: “Do this is remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:24, 25). The unleavened bread and unfermented fruit of the vine—which alone can appropriately symbolize the sinless perfection of the person of Christ—are shared “in remembrance of me”; they speak of sacrificial death and salvation and proclaim them until He comes.
Click to expand...
How is it that you have come to believe the bread was unleavened and the grapes were not fermented?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top