God's judgement? - Page 3

Thomas · 05-27-2006, 05:38 PM

Hi Taijasi

I do not think that God defies logic. He may transcend it, inform it, be it ... but He will never defy it. Nor is Love ... illogical.

In fact the Catechism of the Catholic Church says the very same.

But that does not mean that because someone doesn't understand something, it is illogical.

My understanding of what allows us to relate to the 2nd Aspect of the Trinity (or Trimurti) is the very presence of that 2nd Aspect within ourselves.

Catholicism would say all Three in co-operation, and then the Trinity in co-operation with each one of us. This is what sets the Catholic apart from the Protestant, that in our doctrine, God allows man the dignity of co-operating in his own salvation, even though, in reality, our salvation lies in the hands of God alone.

While some would deny the God Immanent, Christ specifically taught it, in all three Persons. He showed us our true relationship to it - that which is already present, or innate,

The Abrahamic Traditions are founded on a God both Immanent and Transcendant, and One, and one with humanity - Genesis 2:7 and St John's Gospel, 'the light that lighteth every man'.

Christ said 'I am not of this world' but the fact is, that He who said it was right there, flesh and blood, food and drink! Look, touch my hands, touch my side. Look I eat fish, just like you do. He is more 'of this world' than any other deity in any other tradition! Such sweet Mystery!

But we need to tread carefully here. I would say that deity is not 'innate' in the sense that we are by nature divine, for were that so we would be coequal and coeternal with God, we would be omniscient and omnipotent - but it is innate in the sense that it is implanted in us from the very foundation of our being. It is an addition to our nature, or rather our nature is so shaped that there is a longing, a calling, and a receptivity.

A fine point, but crucial. The former understanding is pantheistic and not in any sense Abrahamic.

There is something in us that recognises God when we hear Him speak. Something too easily overshadowed by the babble of our own voice ... and oh, how we love to listen to ourselves!

As an aside, it calls into question the meaning of 'transcendance' - if deity is innate to human nature, then we have no need of transcendance, we have no need to transcend that which we are.

In that sense our divinisation - theosis - is not 'ours' by nature, nor even by right, but by invitation. Our nature is shaped towards it.

We were made to know God, but we were not made Gods - and we were made to know God in love, that is the meaning of Christian gnosis, for love is a well deeper than knowing ... love trusts where knowing gropes in the dark ... love just ... loves ... it is the child that jumps into the pareental arms with never a shadow of doubt that we might drop them!

And as we grow older, and wiser, we come to learn how it feels to be dropped, and we learn of ourselves, and we fear to throw ourselves into the arms of God, for fear He will reject us - even though the Word says, more than anything else - fear not!

(Note: Tradition holds that Lucifer fell because he refused to accord to humanity the dignity that God said belongs to man - the angel could not see how such a grossly fallible being could follow the same calling as he, and be so loved by God. Having defied his Creator, he fell, and continues to try and lure man away from God, as if to somehow prove himself right.)

that which is gradually developing - through various degrees or Epiphanies (becoming through the increased manifestation of the Christ within), and finally, that which can be (because it already is, the Covenant, the GLORY of which Christ within us is the HOPE). A Mystery, yes - that Christ could at one & the same time represent two, even all three Aspects of this Trinity, Trimurti, whatever you wanna call it.

Another distinction - 'Christ within' is a universal - it is the same Christ in all, everywhere, so Christ transcends the individual being - and thus, is 'Christ within' part of our nature, or is it a gift? If a part of our nature, how did we ever fall, and having realised we fell, why cannot we simply put ourselves right?

The Christian would say not 'Christ in me' but 'me in Christ' - not the universal in the particular, but the particular in the universal - the real transcendance, which Christianity witnessed in the Ascension, and which Catholicism celebreates in the Assumption.

Again a subtle point, but one on which, I think, all our disputes turn.

And again, a point on which we differ, Christ is not a universal principle, a logos, made manifest, but the Universal Principle - the Logos of all that was, is and ever shall be.

To quote St Paul, 'In him we live and move and have our being', not him living, and moving, and having his being in me.

This, to me, is the Union not only of self with Self, but of all humanity, as one, in God, for 'no man is an island, complete unto himself' which all traditions recognise, to a greater or lesser degree.

Thomas

Quahom1 · 05-27-2006, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by taijasi

I believe I know more than a few religious scholars who would get a real kick outta that statement. I sure did!

But that is the point. I don't care about "scholars" opinions. I'm only concerned for me and mine (collectively).

"Scholars" tried to advise Job...for the lot of good that did them.

There is a point where intellect fails, and faith excels...

Hope you find that point (as you previously implied).

v/r

Q

taijasi · 05-27-2006, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

Another distinction - 'Christ within' is a universal - it is the same Christ in all, everywhere, so Christ transcends the individual being - and thus, is 'Christ within' part of our nature, or is it a gift? If a part of our nature, how did we ever fall, and having realised we fell, why cannot we simply put ourselves right?

The Christian would say not 'Christ in me' but 'me in Christ' - not the universal in the particular, but the particular in the universal - the real transcendance, which Christianity witnessed in the Ascension, and which Catholicism celebreates in the Assumption.

Again a subtle point, but one on which, I think, all our disputes turn.

I do not feel a need to choose between these, as if they were not compatible ... as if it has to be "either, or." There is verily a "Christ in me," a "Christ in you," a Christ in my brother's heart - every heart. This I do not depend upon dogma or doctrine to tell me. Nor is my knowledge soemthing intellectual only, or even primarily. This ... just is.

The us in Christ, however, points to our wholeness in Christ, which certainly cannot, and could not, be recognized - or actualized without "Him." For me, that Him is something so Universal ... that God would like each and every one of us to share in it (and not some preordained, limited NUMBER). And so the Christ in us grows and matures, and the Omega of this process is made clear in Ephesians 4:13.

The Christ within of which I speak is part of our inherent makeup and is God-given (let me be clear: God-provided, "GOD-GIFTED" if you prefer). I do not walk around and feel that this is missing from some, present within others. I experience (communing with) people for whom Christ is a slumbering presence ... quite literally, asleep. Within others, this same "Spirit" has begun to awaken ... and these people - the many millions, have begun to come to their Wholeness in Christ, a wholeness which each of us can come to, as did Christ Jesus.

As for why we fell ... we did so because God sent us forth. Christ within is a dormant Christ, and awakens through the slow, natural process of evocation in our human relationships, through our coming to terms with the world around us, and through the increasingly conscious choice to live to benefit others, rather than for self alone. We can begin to awaken spiritually by turning to Father God, or to Christ the Son ... yet for us to begin our spiritual pilgrimage already fully conscious of our Union with Deity - would be to deny us Free Will, the choice to return to the Father with the fruits of our Journey.

We would be as the Angels in this case, and we would not be man. `Man' comes from Manas, Sanskrit for Mind. This sets us apart from the animals, and we are also distinguished from the angels in that for us, mind is the crux (key word) of our evolution. I believe that truly, we only come to our completion in Christ ... as you point out. Yet first, we must face and overcome those elements - both internal & external - which separate and divide us from God ... within or upon the several battlegrounds of our mortal, human consciousness. This is true both collectively and individually, accomplished not in one defining moment, but in all moments ... and only makes proper sense in Light of the words, "I die daily."

So the fall is God's GIFT, whereby we may come to develop and exercise (sic) the power and potential of the Christ within, and of the Divine Spark of Godhood (which always seeks to Identify with what is Holy and Pure, to make Whole rather than to cleave, save where ignorance & illusion veil the Truth). And so the material world itself, the very flesh and blood in which Spirit has been clothed, our emotional and rational principles, our Intellectual Soul, and our every human relationship ... all these are God's Gifts. Adversity itself, is one of God's Greatest Gifts, for were it not for this challenge and this opportunity, our Free Will would never be tested, the meterstick of our progress could not exist, and Ephesians 4:13 would be empty, unnecessary words.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

And again, a point on which we differ, Christ is not a universal principle, a logos, made manifest, but the Universal Principle - the Logos of all that was, is and ever shall be.

To quote St Paul, 'In him we live and move and have our being', not him living, and moving, and having his being in me.

This, to me, is the Union not only of self with Self, but of all humanity, as one, in God, for 'no man is an island, complete unto himself' which all traditions recognise, to a greater or lesser degree.

I believe we've said the same thing here. If not, the problem is with the barriers created by intellect, which can only ever divide, while Christ alone is capable of resolving ... producing Harmony from notes which might otherwise be disparate.

The intellect would divide this very aspect of our Being from the Greater Whole of which both are parts. The Spirit in `Essence' - as you say (from Latin esse, `to be') - knows not these divisions ... or, knowing them, it recognizes the illusion. If you would define man's essential being as penetrating no deeper into Divinity, into Godhead/Godhood than manas (mind), then I will indeed disagree. This is the illusion. You have just said so yourself, directly above!

But while mind, emotions and body are but the reflection in the world of our fullest potential in Christ (Ephesians 4:13) ... even that, even the fullness of which Paul speaks, is yet itself a reflection, an extension of the Nous, the Esse, the Transcendent Spark ... Liebniz' Monad. Since we know that Almighty God is a living FIRE, we may picture this as sparks (60 billion of them, in fact), dancing within a flame. They seem to wink in and wink out in but a fraction of a second, yes, the winking of an eye. A thousand years? Far, far longer. But not for God.

The spark cannot exist without the Parent Flame. Only from it's own point of view, immersed in matter, does the separation from God seem complete, or overwhelming - as also spark from spark. And that is the Mystery (as you say) of things ... that we can both know and not know, both contain (sic) a Spark of the Divine, yet recognize & accept it not (even deny it, dispute it, wrangle with words). None of this ... changes things as they are.

And it still doesn't get to the OP and real topic at hand, Divine Judgment - and how this factors in for women and children.

taijasi

taijasi · 05-27-2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quahom1

There is a point where intellect fails, and faith excels...

Hope you find that point (as you previously implied).

For me, faith and intellect are the twin effects of shining the Lamp, revealing the Way. What remains - is to become this Way. The becoming is in the treading. I am not asked to leap, just to cross the Bridge which was revealed ... to walk across it to the other shore.

Somewhere along the way, as the Mystic, I would happily lose my self, and find my Self - and enter into Peace.

Love & LIght,

taijasi

Thomas · 05-27-2006, 09:31 PM

hi taijasi -

The us in Christ, however, points to our wholeness in Christ, which certainly cannot, and could not, be recognized - or actualized without "Him." For me, that Him is something so Universal ... that God would like each and every one of us to share in it..."
Agreed. I have never said other than this, and nor does the Catholic Faith.

(and not some preordained, limited NUMBER).
Not our doctrine.

And so the Christ in us grows and matures, and the Omega of this process is made clear in Ephesians 4:13.
Subtle, and seductive, but wrong - you are confusing, or confounding, or seeking to possess, Christ as yourself. It is not the Christ in us that grows, it is we who grow in Him who is before all ... which had you studied the text a little closer, you would understand:

"But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ ... And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;... "

(and some, as the poet said, 'also serve, who only stand and wait' although, in truth, no-one is a passenger in Christ ... we might not see the service, but that does not mean none is offered.)

"... For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ ..."
This talks of the different charisms given to the Church, for the work it is tasked to do in the world, and is a point often missed. God is available to all, as all who love do so in God, for God is love, and I have stated again and again, quoting doctrine to the effect that no-one is excluded but at his own will - but there are those who are called are called to serve, and that service is to witness and to be witnessed in the world ... and that is what the Church is ... does it ever occur to the Christian that to be reviled by the world is to fulfill the prophecy of Christ - John 7:7; 15:18 ... (and, my dear friend, you cannot deny you have reviled his church loudly, and often)?

Answer: Yes. It has been observed often, in this world of Political Correctness, that the only remaining group one is allowed to insult with impunity would appear to be the Catholics - somehow we are exempt from the protection of the PC view. Which bothers me not a jot.

"Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:"

It is not Christ who grows in us, it is we who grow in Him. Furthermore this unity is not 'me in him' but 'we in him' and until my every brother and sister is united in Him, then the work is not yet done. It is my fervent hope and prayer that not a single one be lost ...

"That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, [even] Christ."

If you believe anything of Ephesians, believe this:

"[There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all."

That is why I love the Church, because all her faults, which the world is oh, so quick and so gleeful to point out, are my faults ...

Thomas

lunamoth · 05-27-2006, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

If you believe anything of Ephesians, believe this:

"[There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all."

That is why I love the Church, because all her faults, which the world is oh, so quick and so gleeful to point out, are my faults ...

Thomas

Thomas this post is so beautiful that it almost brings me to tears. Thank you!

lunamoth

AletheiaRivers · 05-27-2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

One of the things that usually annoys others is the Christian view that God 'always and everywhere' tries to communicate His being to humanity ...

I certainly don't mean it to be annoying to non-Christians (which most might consider me anyway).

Quote:

Thus we have not a Trinitarian Godhead, but a triune modality of three aspects of the one deity Paramatman - moreover a pantheistic doctrine, and a purely cosmological representation.

I understand that there is a difference between modalism and social trinitarianism. However, I sometimes wonder if we (humans) over-emphasize the differences. I dunno. I find myself thinking in modalist terms (cosmologically) from time to time. Neo-Platonic emanationist cosmology fascinates me. The Trinity is a mystery. Why do we try so hard to explain it and to tell other cultures that intuit it (however incompletely) that they are wrong?

Quote:

You have it. Our deiform nature is written in our souls ... and such knowledge would be impossible, were not God to make Himself known in us.

That was my main thought. Thanks for summing it up so beautifully.

Quote:

It should be needless to say that none of these triads has the slightest resemblance to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity embodies much more than the notion of "threeness," and beyond their "threeness" these triads have nothing in common with it.

Perhaps I'm just too synchrestic in my thought processes. Comparative religion and mythology is in my blood. I just can't agree with the above statement at this point in time. Even if all other triads do nothing but imperfectly point towards the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, then they do in fact have something to do with it. They could be thought of as a finger pointing at the finger that points at the moon.

Quote:

If I were pushed to provide a Hindu near-equivalence, I would rather the triune 'sit-chat-ananda' - 'being - consciousness - bliss' - but such is a personal opinion only, and 'a long mile' short of the Trinity.

A long mile short, possibly, but not completely off the map.

I told you I have reservations and hesitations about becoming Catholic. My insistence on free thinking is one of them.

taijasi · 05-28-2006, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

does it ever occur to the Christian that to be reviled by the world is to fulfill the prophecy of Christ - John 7:7; 15:18 ... (and, my dear friend, you cannot deny you have reviled his church loudly, and often)?

Well now, when the shoe is on the other foot ... it seems to bother you after all. You would scorn a Prophet in recent history - directly (HPB) ... yet if I suggest that Christ spoke truth regarding His "other folds" which He sought to make one - it is I who am told, "There is but ONE, mother Church." And I am told that I have somehow misconstrued His teachings!

Failed to apply them, to the best of my ability, I would gladly admit. Wait a sec, WHAT was the subject of this thread again? God's judgment? Ahhh, why bother ... you have handled it for him. NO Thomas, however well respected you may be by various folks at CR, however well praised, however often ... you have attacked specific persons - where I only suggest that doctrine is in error. You charge fraudulence, then return to here to speak grandiloquently and paternalistically ... quick to tell me where I ERR by failing to match my mind to yours.

Yet, I do not even seek to BLAST you, or those who would insist on a narrow interpretation ... instead, I attempt to draw parallels, to suggest that there IS as yet more than one fold, and that - while indeed, Mother Church (Roman Catholicism) may be sacred to you, & to many, there are still other interpretations of Christ's words. But you leave NO room for differences of opinion. You mistake your OWN path, and your own calling - for that of every other man. You do, I admit, force me to fall back upon my own inner certainty and conviction in accepting that Christ in you differs not from Christ in me.

I do not think you are really interested in discussing the possibilities at all. And I have no hestitation in saying, that while I, too, do wish you well on your journey in days and weeks ahead ... I will not miss your repeated, constant insistence that Mother Church is perfect, unassailable, and the only consecrated vessel for Christ's ministry and expression in the world today. Because Thomas, this is just dead wrong on ALL THREE COUNTS.

If our friend Dan Brown's "fictitious" novel were just that (borrowed or otherwise from another popular work) ... if his ideas - about Opus Dei, about the Catholic Church, and Christianity itself - were pure fluff ... if all this was no more than a passing fancy ... then I must ask, why so much sweating, why the gnashing of teeth, why the rush to defend the institution? Why not simply smile, and watch it all fade away?

I do not want to see Christianity wither and fail, I do not want to find myself saying, 50 years from now, that G. K. Chesterton's words are still true ... and that Her Spirit of Brotherly Love is still too difficult for the masses to make practical. If that comes to pass, then I'm afraid that the Thief shall be forgotten ever sooner than before.

What I would like to see is the differences of Catholicism, Protestantism, and Eastern Orthodoxy reconciled ... and a Union of the Churches formed, wherein every faith, every sect or denomination is willing to make sacrifices, acquiesences and agreements. Perhaps this Ecumenism may spread to various branches of the other Abrahamic Traditions, and even to the so, so-different Hinduism, Buddhism, Janism, Sikhism, etc. From out of the many points of commonality, I DO THINK Christ's religion can and will emerge. It does not necessarily have to be other than Christianity. But that is up to us. Not to a papal bull, not to s/he who can scripture-pick the fastest, loudest, or most cunning.

Wherever the Spirit of Christ is enthroned in human hearts, NO MATTER WHAT the outer creeds might be, wherever this occurs ... there is to be found Christ, and there is Christ's Religion. Him who cannot see this, knows neither Christ, nor religion.

I have nothing more to say ...

Taijasi

juantoo3 · 05-28-2006, 12:24 AM

Kindest regards, Tai!

I am pleased to see a thread wherein we share some agreement.

Quote:

juantoo3, I do agree with your sentiment regarding our tendency to slip up in the moment. It happens to us all. Few of us really mean it, deep down. Even those who do, the "wolves" of whom you speak, are in my book - people just like you and me. DEEPER DOWN than their errors, even if/when repeated, they are GOOD AT HEART. Either that, or St. Paul was dead wrong when he spoke of Christ in (them), the Hope of Glory.

In some way, (an esoteric way, perhaps?) I can agree with you in your application. But there is an alternative interpretation, quite plain on its face, that is being grossly overlooked. This is why I suggested the quote from Herbert’s “Dune.” The wolf was also a very real adversary, not just a struggle inside the mind. Baron Harkonnen was a very real opponent to Paul Atreides. I bring this up to make my point, the plain interpretation of these epic struggles is not of men against other men. It is quite literally the clash of the Titans, the epic struggle of good against evil. Christ, in spirit or fact, was not present in the progeny of Lucifer, that is the point. And even Paul was aware of this.

Now, the problem remains of whether or not the struggles of the historical texts of the Old Testament are factual in any extent, that much I can grant, although I do lean towards them being, for the most part, accurate. Even if these stories can be shown definitively to be mythos, we know from example that mythos does not necessarily equate with falsehood. To wit; Troy. Further, mythos serves the purpose of conveying a lesson. The lesson clearly conveyed is the battle of good over evil, that good is intended to dominate. All is lost, all effort futile, if evil prevails.

Quote:

The thing is, it doesn't take God, or even Christ, to recognize that potential. And how we respond to those around us, or in our midst, is up to us. It is not ours to judge them; that responsibility rests only with God. Amazing how we sometimes forget ...

IF we were speaking of mere men doing battle against mere men, there is validity to what you have to say. But we are not speaking of the Axis powers versus the Allied powers, nor are we speaking of Rome doing battle with Carthage. We are speaking of G-d doing battle with ****an, of the heavenly host doing battle with the fallen angels. True, ours is not to judge other men. But we are also called to heed G-d, and do what He commands of us. How can we judge Satan, when he is already condemned? To second-guess G-d, is to inadvertently side with our own enemy, and as the stories unfold in the later chapters it is made apparent that this does in fact occur to Israel’s detriment.

Quote:

As for Siva ... God the Destroyer ... you are correct, I did raise this - and I attempted to show a parallel with God the Father. But neither lens for understanding/interpreting the Divine has anything to do with vengeance and wrath. Justice that resorts to these human conceptions has nothing to do with Divine Balance, with the inexorable, perfect LAW of which Christ spoke.

I agree this has nothing to do with vengeance and wrath, that is the inordinate focus placed here by others who do not see or understand. Again, it is the battle between good and evil, of powers and principalities beyond our vision and understanding.

Quote:

Only if we conceive of God Almighty with the pettinesses of an overgrown, stubborn, willful human personality (pure EGO) - would me make the mistake of casting Him as a tyrant.

Agreed. Yet, does not a loving Father desire to protect His own?

Quote:

Destruction IS Love, to Love is to Destroy. That statement is not unequivocal, or absolute - it does not represent the only way to Love, nor does it mean that ALL destruction is right, or an expression of Love. Again, we tend to apply HUMAN conceptions and understandings to Deity ...

While I am not sure I understand or follow, surely then you must admit that destroying those that have harmful intent toward your creation is fitting in this light?

Quote:

And one further note. That wolf at the gate - does he dwell within your heart, or outside of it? If you say - outside, and that Christ abides within, then I agree ... this I was saying above. Yet at what point does our own perfection (necessary, after all, in order for Christ to abide within us eternally and without fail) break down? At what point are we willing to admit - that the wolf is part of us too? WHEN are we willing and able to accept that All Humanity is ONE?

Again, I can agree if we are speaking of mere humans towards mere humans. The scale is tipped radically when we are speaking of heavenly forces doing battle over Creation. This too leads into our choices, which side do we choose to side with? Good, or Evil? Do we side with the Heavenly Father who created us, or do we side with the interloper who has designs on usurping Creation? To blur the lines and make the choice more difficult raises interesting questions of its own. For who would attempt such a thing, to cast the Creator as a tyrant? Shall we give Satan and his equal due? Shall we befriend our destroyer, our adversary, because of a heart that does not understand? Shall we let our emotions override our common sense?

Quote:

True, we must each fight the fight, face the fears, confront the dweller - within our own lives ... and yes, in this regard, it is a personal battle, and is nobody's business except our own. THAT'S why it's not our business to go 'round judging others, much less entire nations of people. Ours is to love and to forgive, and until we have perfected this practice, we call upon God & Christ to show us again - how to go about it.

Agreed, towards other humans. Shall we love the Devil? Shall we forgive ****an? Shall we have compassion for Evil? Shall we tolerate the Fallen Ones? Shall we invite them into our lives, wholesale and without concession, to co-rule with G-d and His? All persons should rightly be treated with the dignity and respect accorded all humans. When it comes to spirit, and the battle of good and evil, there is a line. I have chosen which side I wish to stand on. I can forgive a moment of evil, perhaps even a gross moment of evil, from another human, as you are correct, we all make mistakes.

But to forgive evil (spirit) personified, is not only impossible, it will invite disaster into one’s life.

THAT is the lesson of the epic battles of the Old Testament. Any other lesson learned is in addition, and certainly the Bible is rich enough to hold multiple meanings. But first and foremost is overcome against the wicked one.

Shalom.

Thomas · 05-28-2006, 12:54 AM

I told you I have reservations and hesitations about becoming Catholic. My insistence on free thinking is one of them.

Then stay away from the other denominations! Have you seen the range of thought in Catholic theology? (Okay, I'm being light-hearted.)

I don't see it as telling other cultures that they're wrong, but rather illuminating the treasures they have, revealing to them the truth of themselves as that truth was revealed to us ... that is the mission of the Church. Trinitarian Doctrine is not a 'bolt-on' to Christian Revelation, it is implicitly and explicitly stated.

If I see Christian Doctrine as fuller, or more complete, or more detailed, or more whatever than other doctrines, I make no apology for that... I had it once, and lost it, and now I've got it back, I'll not lose it again.

I'm not saying the other triunes do not have a correspondence with the Trinity, simply that they are not the equal of it. Trinitarian Doctrine tries to fathom the mystery of God in his Godness. The Principle from which everything flows, and towards which we grow in the fullness of our humanity, not in escaping it.

Theology has not stopped. In the text of Vatican II and later pronouncements, the Magisterium has raised issues it asks theologians to address. We are invited to think freely, but that does not open the door to invention or fantasy, nor to contradiction or subversion - but that what we say must be firmly founded in the Tradition that was handed down by God to His chosen apostles, and to them alone the power and authority of its transmission on to His children in the Spirit - that is the meaning of Pentecost that we celebrate next week.

I offer a homily of Fr Connelly, he says it better than I:
http://torch.op.org/preaching/sermon/960

Or as John Paul II said in Fides et Ratio ... in fact do take a look:

"Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves...

.. Moreover, a cursory glance at ancient history shows clearly how in different parts of the world, with their different cultures, there arise at the same time the fundamental questions which pervade human life: Who am I? Where have I come from and where am I going? Why is there evil? What is there after this life? These are the questions which we find in the sacred writings of Israel, as also in the Veda and the Avesta; we find them in the writings of Confucius and Lao-Tze, and in the preaching of Tirthankara and Buddha; they appear in the poetry of Homer and in the tragedies of Euripides and Sophocles, as they do in the philosophical writings of Plato and Aristotle. They are questions which have their common source in the quest for meaning which has always compelled the human heart. In fact, the answer given to these questions decides the direction which people seek to give to their lives."
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/jo...-ratio_en.html

We seek no more than to shed a light upon each person's journey ... but at times that calls for a firm discrimination between what is true, and what is false, for wherever one stands, one cannot ignore that error abounds...

Thomas

Thomas · 05-28-2006, 01:37 AM

I meant to post this a while ago ...

It is evident, from the dawn of time until today, that no man, no matter how illumined, ever escapes the times in which he finds himself, but rather seeks to express his belief according to the times...

Only one voice speaks in eternity.

The story of the Old Testament is a story of the development of a salvation history. The Book of Numbers, for example, is properly entitled 'In the Desert' in the Jewish texts and is on of the Pentateuch, the five Books of the Law as given to Moses.

"For Jews, the Torah was traditionally accepted as the literal word of God as told to Moses. For many, it is neither exactly history, nor theology, nor legal and ritual guide, but something beyond all three. It is the primary guide to the relationship between God and man, and the whole meaning and purpose of that relationship, a living document that unfolds over the generations and millennia."

The key to understanding of the texts is in the term 'unfolding'.

This has a two-fold meaning. In Jewish and Christian traditions, the belief is that Revelation can be likened to a well that never runs dry, that is, the more one studes, the more one plumbs the meaning of the text, the Word whose depth is infinite.

The second is the unfolding in time, or in succession (the other is in the immediacy or simultaneity of the Eternal Word), of the data of Divine Revelation, and this is manifest in and as Salvation History.

The story of man's salvation is one of resistance and the call to co-operation, which culminates in the ultimate act of co-operation, that of God become man 'that man might become God' (Irenaeus).

The point of this is that Scripture should be interpreted not only as the Revealed Word of God, but the development of its understanding and right reception.

As a 'chosen people', the lived history of the Jews is inextricably linked with the historical actuality, and not all of it makes pleasant reading. As I said, it is a story of resistance and co-operation.

So how do these tales of war talk of the relationship of God and man? We can view them in two ways.

The first is the ways of men - the way of resistance. The conduct of the Jews, in war and peace, is not essentially different from the conduct of their neighbours, and by every modern standard is distasteful. Has God abandoned the world today? No. Is the world of today better then, than yesterday? No.

Consider the fact that more people are enslaved to the wants of the 'first world' today than were ever held in slavery before - a first world, by the way, which considers itself 'Christian' ...

Consider the fact of poison gas, of atomic, biological and chemical weapons, of Chernobyl and Bohpal...

Consider aerial bombardment and the gas chambers, purges and persecutions - more Christians have died as witness to the faith in the last 100 or so years than in all recorded history combined ...

Consider the revolution and purges of Soviet Russia, of China, the dead heaped at the feet of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot ...

... all this leaves history gasping at the scale of its devastation.

Remember that, and we start to put the horrors of yesterday in perspective.

The second is in the way of God - the way of co-operation.

When we tasted of the fruit of the Tree of Duality, we came to know separation from God, a privation of beatitude, and its extreme form ... death, and man has learnt to visit this bitter harvest upon his neighbour time and again, and his imagination and his inventiveness knows no bounds ...

If there is any virtue in such knowledge it lies in the understanding that this is not what God wills, but rather what man wills, and too often in His name.

Is the Bible wrong then? No. Is it right?

Yes, when read the right way.

When read by the light of Tradition in the Holy Spirit we can discern another layer of meaning to the text, this does not alter the literal, but illuminates it; we see it in a truer light, and sometimes that insight obliges us to say that even though we were wrong, we were not abandoned; that our hard-heartedness reaps nothing but tragedy, and raises the cry 'why hast thou forsaken me?' when in that very moment He seeks to snatch us into His embrace.

Are such acts justified then?

Here Islam can teach us a lesson.

The army of Islam returned victorious from battle, and the prophet said, "You have returned from a smaller jihad (battle), and now it is incumbent upon you to perform your greater jihad." When asked what could be a greater jihad the Prophet said: "The battle with ones' nafs (ego)."

In time man will come to understand that peace, as a Spiritual State, is not the absence or war, of turmoil, of unrest. Peace is another place altogether, not so much a Presence within oneself, as oneself within the Presence. It is a long road, and a long way still to go, but we are not alone:

Jesus said: "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." John 14:27

Without that Spiritual Peace, then man will ever cry 'Space, give me space to live and breathe!' which in our time became the dreadful 'lebensraum' of National Socialism.

We will never make room for God in our hearts by clearing our neighbour from his lands...

But on the other hand, consider more the devout man, in this case the Canticle of Simeon, who when presented with the infant Jesus said:

"Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word in peace.
Because my eyes have seen Thy salvation
Which thou has prepared before the face of all peoples:
A light to the revelation of the Gentiles and the glory of Thy people Israel."
Luke 2:29–32
Commonly called the 'Nunc Dimittis' from the opening of the Latin text:
"Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine"

In fact the songs (canticles) of Zachary and Mary form, with Simeon, a trilogy.

http://www.newadvent.org/bible/luk001.htm#68

http://www.newadvent.org/bible/luk001.htm#46

http://www.newadvent.org/bible/luk002.htm#29

That is repeated every day in the monastic Office of the Hours.

Thomas

AletheiaRivers · 05-28-2006, 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aletheia

I told you I have reservations and hesitations about becoming Catholic. My insistence on free thinking is one of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas

Then stay away from the other denominations! Have you seen the range of thought in Catholic theology?

Oh yeah, I know. It's what drew me to Catholicism in the first place.

Thanks for your thoughts Thomas. They are greatly appreciated, as always. I'll leave my response at that so as not to derail the thread further.

mee · 05-28-2006, 02:34 PM

Jehovah will soon use his powerful Son to wipe wickedness off the earth. (2 Timothy 3:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8; Revelation 19:11-16)
Jehovah, who has the right to appoint judges, chose Jesus as a Judge meeting His standards.
The Father judges no one at all, but he has committed all the judging to the Son." (John 5:22)
Jesus role goes beyond normal kind of judging, for he is judge of the living and of the dead. (Acts 10:42; 2 Timothy 4:1) Paul once said "[God] has set a day in which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man [Jesus] whom he has appointed, and he has furnished a guarantee to all men in that he has resurrected him."—Acts 17:31; Psalm 72:2-7.
the judgeing will take place after "the tribulation" mentioned at Matthew 24:29, 30 breaks out and the Son of man (Jesus)‘arrives in his glory.’ (Compare Mark 13:24-26.) Then, with the entire wicked system at its end, Jesus will hold court and render and execute judgment.—John 5:30; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10.

taijasi · 05-29-2006, 01:19 AM

Quote: