J
JohnDom
Guest
So what is your interpretation of what is stated? I know God to be unbreakable Oneness and the basic gospel message to be that we are one with this Oneness.
We cannot become God in His transcendent essence, however we can become the image of God holding nothing earthly in ourselves. Ephesians 2:4-7So what is your interpretation of what is stated? I know God to be unbreakable Oneness and the basic gospel message to be that we are one with this Oneness.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of the great love he had for us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, brought us to life with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 raised us up with him, and seated us with him in the heavens in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.
There is a very real problem with your position. It is inconsistent with itself. On the one hand you say that time is not a reality except in our minds. Then you say that Jesus is a real person and the significance of the purity of a virgin. Newsflash, Every woman is a virgin until they no longer are which involves time. Jesus being born of a virgin took place in time. Mary was not a mother, and then at the proper moment in time, became a mother. What sins of the world did the Lamb of God take away? Sins have to be committed before they could be forgiven which again involves a chronological order involving time. You were a Catholic for 35 years (time again) then changed your beliefs probably as gradual change (once again over time).Jesus was a real person. Please don’t get it twisted. I am not here to negate anyone’s interpretation. The soul is here to fulfill not destroy. I’m simply saying there is another way to see things.
God is timelessness in itself and more of course. The belief in time and in the mind are an intrinsic part of the reason why humanity feels separated from God.
In Christianity the person is a composite of the spiritual immortal rational soul that animates their material body and their material body. Although the soul is simple it is not without accidents, which are its faculties, and every experience adds to its accidental form.The personality doesn’t know when to quit judging
I never heard of judging the soul as something bad in Christianity, but there is the idea that the individuality is ignorance in some Indian philosophies. The Catechism has insight into this:The biggest accident is that we are often the ones judging the soul as something bad, wrong, no good. Remember the lesson of the Garden of Eden is that judgment is the downfall of mankind. We don’t know when to stop. We judge ourselves to the point where we feel distant and apart from God’s sacredness. Yet God is infinite so how could we ever be apart from what’s infinite except in our own minds? It’s not possible. It’s a delusion.
285 Since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the question of origins that differ from its own. Ancient religions and cultures produced many myths concerning origins. Some philosophers have said that
All these attempts bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctively human.
- everything is God, that the world is God, or that the development of the world is the development of God (Pantheism).
- Others have said that the world is a necessary emanation arising from God and returning to him.
- Still others have affirmed the existence of two eternal principles, Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, locked, in permanent conflict (Dualism, Manichaeism).
- According to some of these conceptions, the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism).
- Some admit that the world was made by God, but as by a watch-maker who, once he has made a watch, abandons it to itself (Deism).
- Finally, others reject any transcendent origin for the world, but see it as merely the interplay of matter that has always existed (Materialism).
Yes, indirectly. God allowed free will which means that a person can sin mortally, but God also provided grace so that a human can remain free from mortal sin.Can something bad come from that which is good? Can something bad come from God?
However, man has human nature not divine nature.That is one way to see it but that view is coming from the eyes of the personality. It is trapped in duality because it eyes have not seen nor it’s ears have heard the purity of indivisible Oneness in the Lord. This Oneness is on a unprecedented level, on a much higher order than can be comprehended by the mind. It is purity, impeccability, spotlessness in itself. The clarity is a shimmering radiant brilliance that quickly and easily exposes the personality for the falseness that it is. It can do nothing bow down instantly at the majesty, the holiness and the beauty of the reality of God.
No, the soul is not our source of divinity, because we are adopted sons and in that way share in the divine life without having divine nature. The source is always God that gives us grace.The soul is the source of our divinity but we’ve misjudged it as sinful.
Catholic teaching (dogma) is that God created ex nihilo.The unconscious belief is that we are separate and apart from God. Yet God is infinite. God is the miracle of unity and oneness. So if God is infinite then would you mind please explaining how we could be separate from His divinity?
Siegfried, F. (1908). Creation. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04470a.htmThe ex means (a) the negation of prejacent material, out of which the product might otherwise be conceived to proceed, and (b) the order of succession, viz., existence after non-existence. It follows, therefore, that;
- creation is not a change or transformation, since the latter process includes an actual underlying pre-existent subject that passes from one real state to another real state, which subject creation positively excludes;
- it is not a procession within the Deity, like the inward emission of the Divine Persons, since its term is extrinsic to God;
- it is not an emanation from the Divine Substance, since the latter is utterly indivisible;
- it is an act which, while it abides within its cause (God), has its term or effect distinct therefrom; formally immanent, it is virtually transitive;
- including, as it does, no motion, and hence no successiveness, it is an instantaneous operation;
- its immediate term is the substance of the effect, the “accidents” (q.v.) being “con-created”;
- since the word creation in its passive sense expresses the term or object of the creative act, or, more strictly, the object in its entitative dependence on the Creator, it follows that, as this dependence is essential, and hence inamissible, the creative act once placed is coextensive in duration with the creature’s existence.
I. On God the creator of all things
1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema.
5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or
denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema.