Catholic Mystery

[Quahom1]

a mystery of itself: to worship?

seems to read what Jesus said (per bible),

Mark 10: 17

And as he is going forth into the way, one having run and having kneeled to him, was questioning him, `Good teacher, what may I do, that life age-during I may inherit?'


18 And Jesus said to him, `Why me dost thou call good? no one [is] good except One -- God;

19the commands thou hast known: Thou mayest not commit adultery, Thou mayest do no murder, Thou mayest not steal, Thou mayest not bear false witness, Thou mayest not defraud, Honour thy father and mother.'


Seems Jesus told the people what to do, and homage is not within the 'injil' (re-statement of the 'laws')

He taught forgiveness, in which when someone does something wrong 'to you' how to forgive........... but do folk observe what was said/written?

DO folk read?

Or do they follow others (incorporations) over and above what the teachers (prophets) had shared?

a mystery

I read just fine. I can write too. And I can think. I'm quite certain I am capable of insulting as well...but mamma gave me manners for a reason...

 

[Bishadi]

I read just fine. I can write too. And I can think. I'm quite certain I am capable of insulting as well...but mamma gave me manners for a reason...

what manners created this statement?

"Worship is demanded, and rightfully so. Right now... "

It wasn't from reading what Jesus said, but it does show you can right as witness. It is kind of insulting.

What manners of integrity does it hold too?

 

[Quahom1]

what manners created this statement?

"Worship is demanded, and rightfully so. Right now... "

It wasn't from reading what Jesus said, but it does show you can right as witness. It is kind of insulting.

What manners of integrity does it hold too?

Well let's see. There is your thoughts on the matter, in which God isn't much to do about anything. And then there is my thoughts on the matter, in which God is everything...

decisions decisions...

I opt for door number two!

 

[Bishadi]

Well let's see. There is your thoughts on the matter, in which God isn't much to do about anything. And then there is my thoughts on the matter, in which God is everything...

hang on, be honest. that rendition is pretty much reversed

God 'is everything' (nature/existence itself) and it seems you perhaps think he is on a thrown with a magic wand (controlling everything)

it seems to honor all that is as God (the garden) then it is easy to comprehend his presence at all times. such as to know God is 'everything' of existence at the same time, then each would know not even ONE lie is OK as it is doing it to HIM.

Then as you suggest God is doing everything, then please show an example of what HE is doing right NOW. Show exactly what HIS part is?

Be sure to share what part He is doing and what parts He is not doing.

You know my answer; its all HIM from the beginning to the ending, left/right, back and forth.............. nothing 'is' without existance (God).

But others suggest Heaven is there, not here....Hell is there, not here.

 

[soleil10]

I can accept that, as long as we do not fall into the error of assuming that God 'needs', which people often do.

It takes two to experience love. Gods needs love. He has all the power, the knowledge, all the wealth but he cannot have love by Himself. We are his objects of love. He created the whole creation out of love and to experience true and pure love in return from his children.[/quote]

Consider this: something undertaken with a purpose is undertaken according to an end, but as there is no beginning and no end in God, then there is no purpose ...

God has an eternal purpose. I do not see the logic in what you are saying.

Isaiah 46:11 From the east I summon a bird of prey;
from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose.
What I have said, that will I bring about;
what I have planned, that will I do.

Because He can. Why should He not?

I am sorry but this is a very disappointing answer about a random God

 

[soleil10]

The Son incorporates our human nature into His divine nature by hypostatic union accomplished through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
I don't know what the 'limit' of that is for an earthbound creature, but I do know that His mercy, and His gifts, are without measure and according to the evidence of the saints, it's more than we can possibly imagine.

Well, by extension what flows from above permeates down, so those closer to God are visible in their graces (for those who have the eyes to see) and as God gives Himself to them, as Sons and Daughters of God, they give themselves to us.
We are, however, all One Body — this is the Doctrine of the Mystical Body.
This is another aspect of 'tradition' that the modern world is almost entirely ignorant of; it doesn't understand, and in its ignorant assumptions, is not interested in understanding.
Today, for example, everybody wants to be a celebrity. Everybody wants their 15 minutes of fame. That's not what God wants, it's not what the great traditions teach. People at some point will have to get it into their heads that 'progress' is heading up a blind alley.

In Genesis, God gave man 3 blessings to fulfill. Fulfilling these 3 blessings is the divine life as individual, families and the whole humanity. There was no need for a Messiah or even religion until the fall happened.

The providence to restore man and return to God is to fulfill these 3 blessings. God does not change his word or purpose.
Adam and Eve multiplied fallen children. In Adam all men died. Jesus came as the second sinless Adam for that original purpose in Genesis

Some people have trouble with the idea of a God who has no need of anything, and argue a degree of necessity or determination. Eventually this ends up as self-justification.

Two points to consider:
1: If God did have to create a creation ... it needn't have been this one.
2: Accepting that ... if God did have to populate this creation ... it needn't have included me.

I find that thought 'grounding' — any thought of 'need' or 'necessity' or 'requirement' or 'creative imperative' is all fluff, because that can all happen without you and I in it.

The facts are: He did create this one with us in it for a purpose. I do not see the point of questioning God on what he did not do or could have done. To project a God that do not need us and who is on throne somewhere doing his own thing while repeating "God so love the world that he sent...." is contradictory

God wanted to dwell in Adam's original family. God wanted to dwell in men and women's hearts and be the center of their love. But Satan invaded the first family.

The purpose of biblical history is to return humanity under God's dominion, starting with one man, one family etc....

 

[Thomas]

It takes two to experience love.

Yes. Father and Son. Love is, in fact, Trinitarian.

My point is that love must exist in God before it can manifest as a divine quality in the cosmos. If God was not Trinity, then there would be no such thing as 'love', nor, indeed, there would be no cosmos.

God has an eternal purpose. I do not see the logic in what you are saying.

I am saying your logic suggests God is deficient in Himself and dependent on man. I rather argue that man is dependent on God.

I am sorry but this is a very disappointing answer about a random God

Then you don't understand. God can, because He is Free to do as He wills. But He is not 'random', as that is a condition according to chance or disorder or ignorance of causation. Neither chance nor disorder nor causation apply to God, who is before all.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

There was no need for a Messiah or even religion until the fall happened.

Only because 'Messiah' and 'religion' re-establish that which was lost.

However, I would argue that Christ is necessary, even for the perfect Adam, because Adam was created a 'living soul', he would still need the grace of the 'quickening spirit' (1 Corinthians 15:45). A living soul is a natural creature, the quickening spirit a supernatural one.

The facts are: He did create this one with us in it for a purpose.

Yes, to know Him ... but God does not need us to know Himself, that is another fact.

I do not see the point of questioning God on what he did not do or could have done.

The point is to prevent us making erroneous assumptions.

To project a God that do not need us and who is on throne somewhere doing his own thing while repeating "God so love the world that he sent...." is contradictory

Not really. What is more contradictory is a God who is not perfect, who is incomplete, who is deficient, and who dependent upon a lesser creature for His fullness.

Thomas

 

[soleil10]

Only because 'Messiah' and 'religion' re-establish that which was lost.
However, I would argue that Christ is necessary, even for the perfect Adam, because Adam was created a 'living soul', he would still need the grace of the 'quickening spirit' (1 Corinthians 15:45). A living soul is a natural creature, the quickening spirit a supernatural one.

1 Corinthians 15:45 confirms that we died spiritually at the fall and another Adam (Messiah) is needed. This verse was not written in Genesis before the fall.

Romans 5:14 (King James Version):Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Yes, to know Him ... but God does not need us to know Himself, that is another fact.

I do not remember ever saying that God needs us to know who he is. I am sure he know who he is.

The point is to prevent us making erroneous assumptions.

I am not trying to make assumptions. I just repeated God's plan for humankind which is clearly stated in Genesis.

Not really. What is more contradictory is a God who is not perfect, who is incomplete, who is deficient, and who dependent upon a lesser creature for His fullness.Thomas

I never said that God was deficient or imperfect. I just stated that the law of love requires 2 parties for love to flow. God can spend eternity saying to himself, I am good and perfect and I love myself but instead, He chose to create the whole cosmos with everything in it and with men and women at the center as his children from whom he expected to grow and be returned his love. This is who He is. I am not trying to make Him less or unattainable by creating a different God.

At one time God was so upset that He regretted having created man. It is there. I am not trying to be sentimental.

The divine is not just a spiritual relationship of monks with God in a monastery, It is building ideal families, societies and countries centered on God.

Be fruitful, multiply and dominate the earth

Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden. Jesus came as the second Adam. God's will and the purpose for his creation are unchanging and absolute.

The whole providence in the Bible is to recreate what Adam and Eve lost in the garden.

If God just wanted Jesus to be killed, he did not have to spend 4000 years preparing a people and a sinless lineage for his coming. He could just have sent him earlier to a faithless group of people.

 

[TheKhan]

　.. The Son was sent by the Father and there could be no other outcome than the Cross. Only through death canHe overcome death. ..

.. If God just wanted Jesus to be killed, he did not have to spend 4000 years preparing a people and a sinless lineage for his coming. He could just have sent him earlier to a faithless group of people. ..

While I disagree with most of what Soleil says, and agree with Thomas 99%
(except for blaming Hollywood my hometown.. and this).

If I understood correctly I must disagree that Jesus was sent to be killed. To show us that death could be overcome by Him.

While there was no other outcome than the Cross, probably due to how it is and was, I`ve never believed that the Cross ever had to happen. I believe it was more like "well Son, You did what You could now its time to come Home, but before You do that, make sure You rub it in their faces, so that eventually they might figure out that its wrong to kill people next time You come around, Amen".

Glorification of the crucifixion has always only been an major excuse and justification on all our behalf for causing tragedy on apocalyptic scale. Kind of like an addict in denial.


TK

p.s. By all means please keep going with the "Holy Spirit" topic. That`s one big mystery that I`ve never really understood at heart or do not understand the definition.

 

[soleil10]

While I disagree with most of what Soleil says, and agree with Thomas 99%(except for blaming Hollywood my hometown.. and this).

If I understood correctly I must disagree that Jesus was sent to be killed. To show us that death could be overcome by Him.

While there was no other outcome than the Cross, probably due to how it is and was, I`ve never believed that the Cross ever had to happen.

TK, That is what I wrote. The Cross was not the initial will.