Two questions about the trinity

[curtish1947]

Apologies if this is a repetition.
Alongside all the ‘splainin’ going on it’s good to remember that the Trinity is a mystery. Mystery does not mean something completely un-knowable, but is something not knowable in it’s fullness.

Hi,
I hope also your work is not repitition to others, I love it. In male paralance that translates to I like it. I understand, I think, all of the above and agree with all of the above.
Item 237, although mine, ~Mary had revealed to me in the A GIFT, I was asked to go and get, not only what is referred to as The Trinity, but on the next day Jesus, his core personality and the reason that He loves, I know now. On the next day but off the point, she herself for the first of two times that I am aware of, presented herself to me, in answer to a prayer and a wish, to know what she looked like, when she was older. ~, is not the point.
I am here to try and do something, if I can but in words you will find distasteful: to LOVE, all of you. In that love, you are most troubled it seems by the nature of God here on earth, I was and am only trying to help you end lots and lots of discussion by bringing into this, my approved by a Spiritual Director, experiences of a two year period, which definitely had to include an excellent understanding of the Trinity, at least is some ways.
The reason ~which I didn’t know of at the time, was to answer a single question. I had to know some things in order to answer that question. One of them, is and was the Trinity, another maybe just a gift, but the core personality of Jesus, the one you call The Christ, for what He has done.~
The Apostles Creed says this, on our last subject, the subject of begetting:
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
The only Begotten Son of God, (I use that)
Eternally Begotten of The Father, Eternally has two meanings to me, from now on is one.
The other is there is never a time when He was not-
Begotten.
God from God, (From God)
Light from Light, (From light and that is how I saw them.)
Who…

So, why can I not say that Jesus at one time was not Begotten? Why can I, or why should I take another definition for that word? If it is so, that begotten is not correctly used, or esoterically used, then I am in error. Jesus was not begotten in the way I understand that.
From though, also is important to me, From God, says to me, Jesus is taken out of God, somehow and NO, I do not mean and have never understood that God The Father is withouit Jesus, because now He is begotten. I did not understand it then that way, and I do not understand it that way now, rather it is just as I have said before and have always hopefully said in my life.
I am trinitarian. I am an working person using muscles to do things, not unemotionally as it seems, but in displacing my emotions in order to work, for you or for someone else. Other times I am a kid, having fun, enjoying myself, including love for love is an enjoyment. Always though, I am a parent of myself, and that parent in me decides how much work and how much play and how much parenting is done, when it is done, and when it is needed. The parent in me controls and monitors the other two constantly. YOU ALL are that way. God is that way. He made us in His image that way. He may have made us in His image other ways also, but He made us for sure in His image, in that way.
Every person I deal with is like that, yet most of them do not think of their everyday life as being that way, they just live tinitarianly, and have known not other existence so it is not normally thought of.
I had to know this, to answer a question ~put to me by God, through…~. Does not that interest you possibly, if of course I am not wrong, nor deluded, nor a lot of things on this issue, which all the people I could find have said to me of this: “Not in your case. In your case it is real.” ~I can’t tell you how shocked the Spiritua…~ I don’t want to talk about me. I don’t. This is not about me, it is about you and seeing if you can understand one more beautiful item about God.
How do you know that as long as I am here, that God is not gifting you? I don’t? He may not be. I don’t know, but for some reason or another, I find myself here, just asking questions, hopefully, and also…

1. Are you trinitarian, as mentioned above?
2. If so, can you now say The Father is not in Jesus, nor is The Holy Spirit?

And for each of them together, if you understand now how you might be Trinitarian also,

1. Can you say that in each of them, the other two do not reside?

I am done for now.
…Katerian/C.

 

[Vico]

I am sorry that both of you think that I am wrong, you and the one obove your last post, and if I am: I am also sorry that I am wrong and will instantly upon understanding, change my position to a not heretical one, if that is the case.
I actually have no revealed knowledged on the issue of Jesus being The Only Begotten Son, that I know of. I am trying to figure that part out, from several direct incidents.
Yet, I am no philosopher nor theolgian, thus do not share your word definitions. Can you tell me what the above means to you. That might be the simplist way for me, if you would care to, using none of your accidental esoteric language, from your background?

To say though that creation is analagous to begetting, is something that I may understand. If I do understand that, then how is my making a daughter a creation in terms of how God seemed to have created all things. I used not my wisdom, to do that. I did not. So, if that is correct, I created nothing but merely used that which is within each of two people and really by an act caught up in many things, one of which is hormonal, (hidden from us), and one of the others is wanting children, (also an unknown as to why), one of which is love, and in all of those not one single act did I create anything such as energy distilation, or order, but just reacted rather than acted, how can procreation by me reasonalbe be called creation by me. I didn’t even get to pick boy or girl, size, health or anything. How can you call that act, analogouse to creation, by me. Creation by me. I Created nothing. I did not even create me.
You also used the word simplicity, and used it in Godhead. How is the Godhead simple to those who God does not need to know of this yet? (I did, so I don’t count.) It is said, maybe mythologically maybe in reality, that even Saint Augustine, could not know God, implying to me even the Godhead. So how can you say that, accurately?
Begotten, the word here being discussed, and I would certainly like to know a little more about this, implies an almost identical copy in all ways, except in person. (And it is what I saw. Each of them in power, form, color, height, was identical to the other one. They were.) I had quite the working knowledge of God, before any of this went down, later my knowledge was beyond better, but not all inclusive I feel. For instance, I of course am not allowed to teach, and I don’t know every single passage in the Bible. All I do now, is live a life that includes all God asks me to include, and all God asks me to do also. They are “family to me now. I live and interact with them as my personal family.”. Yet, this discussion on the Trinity, two questions about that, is not about me, nor my relationship with all of Them, it is about the meaning of Only Begotten Son. Was he created as you are implying I said, but never did and never could without thowing away the Church and throwing away the Bible, in order to do so,? No, I would not and could not say that.
Begetting to me is taking only from yourself, and making another. What is not there, is would He God do it this way or that way. He did it God’s way, I say, the perfect way, other than being another person, He is identical in all ways to God, the one who Begat Him.
…Kate.

Well, this topic about the Trinity deals with internals rather than externals. The relations are eternal not in time. When eternal the action is communication not temporal. Since we experience and think temporally, and speak in temporal terms, those terms are borrowed to describe what is not temporal. That is what I mean by analogous.

Since the Trinity is not a creation we as creatures can not be exactly as god is but rather participate in the divinity through the Holy Mysteries. (The eastern term is Theosis and the western term is deification.)

St. Thomas though that we only grasp what God is not, and how beings stand in relation. (Summa Prologue.) To see the line of reasoning used by St. Thomas for the simplicity of God see this link:

newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm

 

[curtish1947]

Well, this topic about the Trinity deals with internals rather than externals. The relations are eternal not in time. When eternal the action is communication not temporal. Since we experience and think temporally, and speak in temporal terms, those terms are borrowed to describe what is not temporal. That is what I mean by analogous.

Since the Trinity is not a creation we as creatures can not be exactly as god is but rather participate in the divinity through the Holy Mysteries. (The eastern term is Theosis and the western term is deification.)

St. Thomas though that we only grasp what God is not, and how beings stand in relation. (Summa Prologue.) To see the line of reasoning used by St. Thomas for the simplicity of God see this link:

newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm

Not a single request have you granted. I assume you intend to stonewall. Fine, and it is a relief in a way. Wisdom once said, that when she asks twice and she is refused, that when you come to ask of her, she refuses.
…Katerina.

 

[curtish1947]

Not a single request have you granted. I assume you intend to stonewall. Fine, and it is a relief in a way. Wisdom once said, that when she asks twice and she is refused, that when you come to ask of her, she refuses.
…Katerina.

Bye again,
I will not unsubscribe from this thread.
…Kate.

 

[Vico]

Not a single request have you granted. I assume you intend to stonewall. Fine, and it is a relief in a way. Wisdom once said, that when she asks twice and she is refused, that when you come to ask of her, she refuses.
…Katerina.

Certainly I did attempt answer questions you posed. You asked four:

1. Can you tell me what the above means to you. That might be the simplist way for me, if you would care to, using none of your accidental esoteric language, from your background?

• I think I cannot without using the terms I know.

1. How is the Godhead simple to those who God does not need to know of this yet?

• It seems to me that God does not have a need for someone to know. I can understand that God may not seem simple to people.

1. So how can you say that, accurately?

• I provided St. Thomas commentary which give the best answer.

1. Was he created … in order to do so?

• This one was rambling so I could not understand the question.

 

[curtish1947]

Certainly I did attempt answer questions you posed. You asked four:

1. Can you tell me what the above means to you. That might be the simplist way for me, if you would care to, using none of your accidental esoteric language, from your background?

• I think I cannot without using the terms I know.

1. How is the Godhead simple to those who God does not need to know of this yet?

• It seems to me that God does not have a need for someone to know. I can understand that God may not seem simple to people.

1. So how can you say that, accurately?

• I provided St. Thomas commentary which give the best answer.

1. Was he created … in order to do so?

• This one was rambling so I could not understand the question.

Now you have answered. Thank-you. Thank-you again, for you did not have to do so. May I please try to go on, with you, as who I am?

1. On item one, I am sorry, that you cannot translate your terms. I really am. I was hoping that the knowledge within you could be presented to me in other terms. An example of this, happens in my life always. I do that for others, however mistakenly I thought a man once did not do that to me, for reasons of his ignorance on the subject. In three months time, as I came up to speed on something else, I asked him a question again. Amazingly, he just did not have that ability. He was brilliant, but I did not know then, all brilliant people could not change their words, to what I needed them to be.
2. Other than, in my case, I did seem to know, I wouild think in normal cases you would be ever so correct in your…what I hope is mereley a guess or a musing,…statement of: It seems to me…God does not ‘NEED’ for someone to know. I have thought of this much, on issues such as why, and why me? I don’t have a good answer for myself. I do not. Yet, I do have this. When ~Gabriel kept talking, and was finished. I totally and then some, understood the question being posed to me, by God The Father, through Gabriel. I did, and I understood, it’s full impact on me.~ It took me three days to answer that question, if that tells you anything, and maybe it is FREE WILL. Maybe we all have that, and only because God honors His Own Words, even on this tacit, very tacit characteristic of ours, possibly given to us by God, maybe only in that, did He Honor Himself and Honor His Tacit Words on that subject. Maybe only with that, did He cause me to know all I do, so I could answer that question freely. Maybe.
3. The comment I have on three, is not really a comment on three, it is a statement. All saints are only totally accurate, in what God says is true, and usually only say what God told them. Even later, like in Faustina’s case, when she had to rewrite parts of her diary from memory, there is quite a difference. To say that he is without error on all issues, one of which he may not have personal experience with, like Abraham, like Job, and like Paul, always has the possiblity of error, or does have error, in issues such as knowledge of God, when He has not been granted that yet.
   Please try and see my point. It is do you know that he is absolutely correct, AND, do you know that you are absolutely understanding him correctly.
   Please, if there are words left, I will make something clearer to you later.
4. I am sorry that point was rambling. I will reread that. Sorry I cannot find that point now. Maybe that is good, or maybe it is not. I do not know yet.

Let me change the subject, but only slightly, I am transgendered. Although looking trough old posts of mine, that should be in there, you may not want to converse with me ever again, even though the above is true and I have to accept what the Spiritual Director said. The hardest part for the Spiritual Director, at first, and maybe even after The Holy Spirit convinced him, that indeed what I am about to reveal to you is true, first imagine to yourself, how much I would have to know, to answer this question: Will you marry me?
Yes, heresy was brought up, before. Yes, a lot of things were. Yet he gave me a fleece type of test, and it came back as it should come back, if it were God and if it were true, FLAWLESSLY and in all ways.
I would love/like to continue this, but understand totally if you would not like to, or feel I am wrong enough never to be trusted in anything I say, or have said so far. If you choose not to go away, could you not find a bridge, a translator between you and I.
…Katerina/Curtis.

 

[curtish1947]

Now you have answered. Thank-you. Thank-you again, for you did not have to do so. May I please try to go on, with you, as who I am?

1. On item one, I am sorry, that you cannot translate your terms. I really am. I was hoping that the knowledge within you could be presented to me in other terms. An example of this, happens in my life always. I do that for others, however mistakenly I thought a man once did not do that to me, for reasons of his ignorance on the subject. In three months time, as I came up to speed on something else, I asked him a question again. Amazingly, he just did not have that ability. He was brilliant, but I did not know then, all brilliant people could not change their words, to what I needed them to be.
2. Other than, in my case, I did seem to know, I wouild think in normal cases you would be ever so correct in your…what I hope is mereley a guess or a musing,…statement of: It seems to me…God does not ‘NEED’ for someone to know. I have thought of this much, on issues such as why, and why me? I don’t have a good answer for myself. I do not. Yet, I do have this. When ~Gabriel kept talking, and was finished. I totally and then some, understood the question being posed to me, by God The Father, through Gabriel. I did, and I understood, it’s full impact on me.~ It took me three days to answer that question, if that tells you anything, and maybe it is FREE WILL. Maybe we all have that, and only because God honors His Own Words, even on this tacit, very tacit characteristic of ours, possibly given to us by God, maybe only in that, did He Honor Himself and Honor His Tacit Words on that subject. Maybe only with that, did He cause me to know all I do, so I could answer that question freely. Maybe.
3. The comment I have on three, is not really a comment on three, it is a statement. All saints are only totally accurate, in what God says is true, and usually only say what God told them. Even later, like in Faustina’s case, when she had to rewrite parts of her diary from memory, there is quite a difference. To say that he is without error on all issues, one of which he may not have personal experience with, like Abraham, like Job, and like Paul, always has the possiblity of error, or does have error, in issues such as knowledge of God, when He has not been granted that yet.
   Please try and see my point. It is do you know that he is absolutely correct, AND, do you know that you are absolutely understanding him correctly.
   Please, if there are words left, I will make something clearer to you later.
4. I am sorry that point was rambling. I will reread that. Sorry I cannot find that point now. Maybe that is good, or maybe it is not. I do not know yet.

Let me change the subject, but only slightly, I am transgendered. Although looking trough old posts of mine, that should be in there, you may not want to converse with me ever again, even though the above is true and I have to accept what the Spiritual Director said. The hardest part for the Spiritual Director, at first, and maybe even after The Holy Spirit convinced him, that indeed what I am about to reveal to you is true, first imagine to yourself, how much I would have to know, to answer this question: Will you marry me?
Yes, heresy was brought up, before. Yes, a lot of things were. Yet he gave me a fleece type of test, and it came back as it should come back, if it were God and if it were true, FLAWLESSLY and in all ways.
I would love/like to continue this, but understand totally if you would not like to, or feel I am wrong enough never to be trusted in anything I say, or have said so far. If you choose not to go away, could you not find a bridge, a translator between you and I.
…Katerina/Curtis.

Assuming we never talk again, I thought I would end with this. There is more. Much more, but it seems we both are like those, who were spread by God, because they refused to do so. That was at the tower of Babylon, the command was in the blessing of God to them which included, filling the earth.
…Kate.

 

[curtish1947]

Hi,
I can’t sleep tonight, and I don’t know why. I guess I am fretting over this. I guess I am wondering how you will take my disclosure. I guess I am hoping we can stay on topic. In that light:

Are you trinitarian in the way mentioned?
That is a request of mine.

Did Job know later what happened with God, after seeing Him?
That is involved in knowing something about God.

Does an encounter with God, change people?
That is important.
Did Faustina change?
Did Theresa Liseaux change?
Did Mother Theresa change?

Please do not avoid these questions. I did read your request on the Simplicity of God. It is flawed, in at least one place. Let me explain: One day, in Medjugorje, Jesus pops, (for the lack of better words) into me. Step by step this occurred.

1. Think of the end to Silent Night. (Came as a command. I thought of my end to that. So Tender and Mild. That is not the end, it is mine then and for reasons that if anything told me something about God. He knows each of us so well, that He speaks to us, in our own language and our own interpretation of this language we supposedly share.)
2. ~Tender and Mild, then entered me. I lost two thirds of my physical strength. I saw a vision of sorts, it was a doughnut of slight light, with a pleasant black hole. Around the outside it was black also. There were two triangles of light in the lower left side of the inside of the doughnut. I stared and stared. I thought if I stared long enough I could figure out what this was. It ended. The lights were back on. At some point in all of this, I said: “I can match you.” I then matched Tender and Mild, point for point, inch for inch, I did until I knew that if I continued I would die. I became afraid. It ended. “Who are you? No answer came forth. Great! This thing will not talk to me. Could this inside of me have carried the cross?” Yes, and then some. “Could this inside of me, be in a human body for 29 years and not let anyone know He was God?” Yes and then some. At this point I was not sure if I could stand. This happened to me in Saint James Church in Medjugorje, from a strong calling to go there against my will, that came twice. I am there to get a gift. Mary is the giver of the gift. That was found out, after my first refusal to go there, on what appeared to me to be blind-faith, but was more.~
   The point about God having hands and feet and a body, but not in the classic human sense like the human body of Jesus, looks to be true even in ourselves, for I learned that there, when Jesus The Christ entered me totally, and let me know precisely who He is in Essence. Now remember, this was and is all submitted to The Catholic Church, there is even a priest in Mount Angel Abbey who has been given all this and may still have a copy of this. Also, when this was all submitted to The Spiritual Director assigned to me, he ran of all things, (I did not know this was even possible, to test God.), a fleece type of test. The results of that have to be like in Deuteronomy 18:20, totally correct in timing and in content. The results were, but it took me six more years or more, to finally understand how those results were totally correct.
   Back to the point. When I tried to match what turned out to be Jesus in Tenderness and Mildness, before failing at this my shoulders brushed the walls of the tunnel though which I found myself trying to match Him. Please remember, I did not know then it was Jesus. Later on my next attempt, I was so startled at the vision for the depths of Jesus’s Tenderness and Mildness, that my feet went out, to stop myslelf in mid flight, so to speak. When I was allowed the third time after another month or so, in feelings, my hands I used to feel and touch the depths, (Almost, as He was still larger in Tenderness and Mildness that what I was experiencing then.), of His Tenderness and Mildness.
   That is the same mode and way, upon which I tried after being told not to touch God, in His Total Essence, that I used slowly hoping this kind of touching was allowed. It was not. None of these things I could do, did I know were not normal. I just did, in my city desert experience. I forgot to mention that while going through this, I was very much in a desert experience, but in a town or a small city as you like. Later, after a point, each of these things put into me, to understand God, I was asked to pass on. The first one by Mary, and I did not know as I said before, that any of these things were in me.
   When I had to look up much of what happened, in Catholicism, my experience matched a one-time event with God in most to all ways. Also though, only the description in Catholicism of The Beatific Vision matched what was presented to me, in Medjugorje at the behest of Mary.

I will end here, as I am tired.
…Kate.

I will now unsubscribe from this thread, as I am sure you all will not want to hear another word form me.
…Katerina.