The Godhead

[lunamoth]

Love is the Unity in a 'fallen' world having the illusion of duality. I agree with Thomas, love is not love without subject and object, lover and beloved. The Trinity expresses this concept of a limitless God in perfect Oneness Who nevertheless loves.

2 c,
luna

 

[JosephM]

Well, does God possess ignorance? Does God possess the hatred seen in the world? Does God possess the lies told on this thread? Does God possess the responsibility for Hurricane Katrina? Does God possess my sins? Were they his... or mine?

Cyberpi,

They are certainly yours to claim if you see them as reality. And if you created them you can believe you possess them. Yet they will all vanish away as nothing. In reality they cannot be possessed as they are created and are not eternal.

All things, both seen and unseen have no existence without God including the reality given to the things that 'you' believe are ignorance, hatred, lies, disasters and sins. These things, people of the world create and desire to possess but they are illusory in nature. God is beyond such things yet in possesion of all. This is a connundrum to the mind but not beyond experiencing.

Love in Christ,
JM

 

[Thomas]

So how there is violence and hate growing stronger... day by day, that is god losing? Or his power drawing away... Fading? Because you say god is love... But if there is no love, then is there no god?

No. Simply that man opts not to love.

St Thomas Aquinas posited (I think - from memory) that no man wills evil, but rather we will a 'lesser good' we pander to our passions and our apetites, and in the end become the victim of them.

As the ancients said 'You become what you think about'

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Path_of_One:

I think this is why I can so easily feel an affinity with Buddhism, but ultimately I can't make the leap away from belief in the One God.

That's where I was with Zen. As a Tradition I love it. As a Way, it simply does not speak to me.

I absolutely believe no religion, including Christianity, will ever really understand God.
It's not the religion, it's man. 'Religion' is 'right relation' – it's the way given by God.

I believe we are in God - this is God's immanence. But because of this immanence we can't possibly grasp Him. And yet, like the fish, we can experience Him. Comprehension impossible, but experience very possible.

And you can know Him. Or not. The choice is yours, the Way is His.

Thomas

 

[JosephM]

So how there is violence and hate growing stronger... day by day, that is god losing? Or his power drawing away... Fading? Because you say god is love... But if there is no love, then is there no god?

No. Simply that man opts not to love.

St Thomas Aquinas posited (I think - from memory) that no man wills evil, but rather we will a 'lesser good' we pander to our passions and our apetites, and in the end become the victim of them.

As the ancients said 'You become what you think about'

Thomas

Thomas,

Are you quoting someone in your first paragraph? I do not see violence and hate growing stronger. And God has nothing to win or lose in the matter.
Love in Christ,
JM

 

[Thomas]

Hi Dondi –

For Jesus sent the Comforter to us after He ascended, so that we could tap into the same Power He had.

Amen.

The only caveat I hold, is I read that last phrase 'into the same Power He is'.
Have you read St Maximus's 'Centuries on Knowledge' – there's a profound teaching on the Trinity there – I think you and Path_of_One would go for it.
('... the whole Father is in the Son and the Spirit wholly... )

This is the theology of kenosis - the 'self-emptying' of God,

He did nothing of His Own Power, though He could have. But He did this to show us how we can be led of this same Spirit also. The miracles were performed in the Power of the Holy Spirit...

Bang on, again ... If He had displayed His own power, that would lead everyone to assume they can save themselves by their own lights – He would have been a gnostic (in the 2nd century sect sense).

The point he was making – as you make yourself – is that ontologically we have nothing – all we have is what the Father gives, given in the freedom to make of it what we will.

The mind-boggler is that He actually had the Power to do as He wills, He is the only truly free person who ever lived – and he chose tolive and die at the hands of others ...

... oh, this goes on and on ...

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Earl –

Yes, I'm being a bit dogmatic about Zen, I know (mea culpa).

I did read your post about God as verb, and was right there with you. Still am. It's a very dynamic thing.

Saying of a Zen master: "Enough talk. Let's sit."
Saying of an old boss: "Less trap. More action."

I think God would approve.

Thomas

 

[path_of_one]

Thomas,

Are you quoting someone in your first paragraph? I do not see violence and hate growing stronger. And God has nothing to win or lose in the matter.
Love in Christ,
JM

Yes, he was quoting and responding to 17th Angel.

 

[path_of_one]

Hi Earl –

Yes, I'm being a bit dogmatic about Zen, I know (mea culpa).

I did read your post about God as verb, and was right there with you. Still am. It's a very dynamic thing.

Saying of a Zen master: "Enough talk. Let's sit."
Saying of an old boss: "Less trap. More action."

I think God would approve.

Thomas

And I concur in my comments on Buddhism. There is a great deal in Buddhism that has impacted my spiritual life, and much I have learned, including meditation techniques and resolution to move beyond illusory perceptions. Where I have always been unable to go is to believe in no-self (anatman) and to see the blowing out of my existence (nirvana) as something desirable.

I suppose a Buddhist monk would say that I'm hitting my limit for this lifetime and will eventually reach that understanding and desire.

But I myself cannot negate the experience I've had of God and my own spirit in relationship to that God. I am not myself- that is, I am not what I am in this lifetime. But I am someone, something. I am ultimately a creation of God, and I do believe each one of us is uniquely and lovingly created, with our own purposes in the overall design of the universe. I am acutely aware, after many years of meditating about it, that my self (in terms of my personality, my job, my ethnicity, and so forth) is false. But my Self (the spirit that God created within me, that which is from Him and not from experience or biology) does exist and my spiritual growth is a remembering of who that Self is. A pouring out of self to allow the pouring in of Self and God.

And Thomas, I really like the drop of water returning to the ocean idea- I've heard that before in reference to Hinduism. It's a metaphor that really works for me, because (I know, unlike most Christians) I believe that we all inevitably return to God. I suppose I believe that the spiritual work I do is getting me to be more like a drop of water, and less like a stick or twig- so that I can be fully incorporated into that ocean rather than floating around on the top.

 

[bupanishad2007]

For Silas:

"A person convinced against his will,
Is of the same opinion still!"

 

[earl]

And I concur in my comments on Buddhism. There is a great deal in Buddhism that has impacted my spiritual life, and much I have learned, including meditation techniques and resolution to move beyond illusory perceptions. Where I have always been unable to go is to believe in no-self (anatman) and to see the blowing out of my existence (nirvana) as something desirable.

I suppose a Buddhist monk would say that I'm hitting my limit for this lifetime and will eventually reach that understanding and desire.

But I myself cannot negate the experience I've had of God and my own spirit in relationship to that God. I am not myself- that is, I am not what I am in this lifetime. But I am someone, something. I am ultimately a creation of God, and I do believe each one of us is uniquely and lovingly created, with our own purposes in the overall design of the universe. I am acutely aware, after many years of meditating about it, that my self (in terms of my personality, my job, my ethnicity, and so forth) is false. But my Self (the spirit that God created within me, that which is from Him and not from experience or biology) does exist and my spiritual growth is a remembering of who that Self is. A pouring out of self to allow the pouring in of Self and God.

And Thomas, I really like the drop of water returning to the ocean idea- I've heard that before in reference to Hinduism. It's a metaphor that really works for me, because (I know, unlike most Christians) I believe that we all inevitably return to God. I suppose I believe that the spiritual work I do is getting me to be more like a drop of water, and less like a stick or twig- so that I can be fully incorporated into that ocean rather than floating around on the top.

I just suffered 1 of the 3 marks of existence posited by Buddhists-impermanence. Had a nicely thought out (so I thought) collection of heretical Christo-Buddhist reflections and when I went to post it, it disappeared. Who says computers cannot be zen master teachers? well am not incllined to do that all over again. Wanted to basically say that I agree with you re the journey being about "Self-remembrance." That there is that essential "something" about us. That's why I call myself a heretical Christo-Buddhist. But wanted to also say that ala' Buddhism the journey is probably facilitated by continuously asking ourselves "who or what is the self who is remembering?" The apophatic koan have a good one, earl

 

[Silas]

For Silas:

"A person convinced against his will,
Is of the same opinion still!"

"An opinion rooted in truth, espeically biblical truth, is no longer an opinion but fact."

 

[seattlegal]

Well, this might sound a bit philosophical, but me...

Did man invent 'love'?

I don't think so. But it would seem, from my tradition, and I think we can agree on this, that whatever 'love' is, 'God' is.

Therefore I think love is in the nature of God. God is Love.

But here's a problem ...

Love cannot exist in a vacuum. Love is a meaningless abstract, unless there is someone who loves, and someone who is loved. And when you have a lover and the loved, they are both equally aware of the love they have for the other.

So you have the Lover, the Loved, and the Love between them.

Love is Trinitarian.

+++

God the Father is Himself-in-Himself
(the Ground of Eckhart) – the Is-ness of God (This is where Eckhart is fundamentally not Zen – Buddhism is non-theistic, Eckhart is Absolute God, beyond all and any distinction – Zen sees it as a void, Christianity sees it as a fullness)

God the Son is His awareness of Himself
The Mind of God (eg 'Arche' or 'Logos' or 'Verbum')

God the Holy Spirit – is how God determines Himself.

Without this – without Love as Divine Principle operating over and above any created instance – love is just a chemistry, a necessity of instinct, to which out of sentimentalism we attribute certain fantastic properties.

+++

If God is Love, and the nature of God is not conditional on creation, Creation exists because God loves, not because God loves what exists – that is not necessarily the case – otherwise God is 'obliged' to love me, regardless of what I say or do, which would render God as some obsequious thing, a Uriah Heep-like being ...

That man can love, a gift of God, palls into insignificance in the face of the truth that he exists and is loved ... the love we can share with another, or the love we can offer God, is as nothing in the face of God's love.

God's Love, and God's Mercy, does not render his Justice invalid – mercy without justice is obsequiousness again ...

+++

The above is the necessary pre-existing and metaphysical principle by which 'love' can be conceived as Divine or Holy. Without it, without a notion of love 'in' God before everything else, love becomes contingent, whereas any Divine Quality must necessarily be Absolute.

Thomas

Phillipians 4:12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

I just suffered 1 of the 3 marks of existence posited by Buddhists-impermanence. Had a nicely thought out (so I thought) collection of heretical Christo-Buddhist reflections and when I went to post it, it disappeared. Who says computers cannot be zen master teachers? well am not incllined to do that all over again. Wanted to basically say that I agree with you re the journey being about "Self-remembrance." That there is that essential "something" about us. That's why I call myself a heretical Christo-Buddhist. But wanted to also say that ala' Buddhism the journey is probably facilitated by continuously asking ourselves "who or what is the self who is remembering?" The apophatic koan have a good one, earl

John 14:25 “These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

 

[Saltmeister]

Re: The Godhead - an aside

Perhaps the One does not become two once more but if it is desired it only need think its a drop once more. Because it was always a part of the ocean in the first place. There is nothing but the ocean. Perhaps the drop is only an illusion in your mind.

To me, I would say the drop is not an illusion, but an experience of God.

It's a nice analogy in the sense that you can't find the drop when it "once again" becomes part of the ocean. It means you can't dismantle or manipulate the ocean (God) in order to isolate the drop. The drop of water was just something that the ocean was willing to share with you (your relationship with God). You just can't manipulate the ocean into sharing the exact same thing everytime you want it.

It's not that the ocean (God) is changing, but that your relationship with the ocean is changing. So when you dig into the ocean with your cup, you get a different drop of water. Time has moved on.

I would also think of myself as a "smaller ocean." I am a sea that shares water with the ocean. In fact, I live inside that ocean (God). God is my home.

No literal Satan, but yes, a literal God.

I'm not stuck in dualism, is all. Our culture and Christianity tends to put us into a dualistic mind-set. Good vs. evil. God vs. Satan. Humanity vs. Nature. Man vs. Woman. And on and on.

Methinks the existence of Satan doesn't have to be part of a dualism. Moreover, since Satan is an angel, I would think of him as one of many "cosmic agents" (or archons, as in Gnostic cosmology) that are in opposition to God. So Satan is not purely evil as in being the source of evil, but one of many sources (angels) of opposition to God.

Evil certainly exists. Sin exists. But it doesn't have to exist and there are things we can do about it.

Do angels exist? I think of it this way:

Humans beings themselves have the creative capacity to think up malign thoughts and behaviours. The cosmic agents in the spiritual realms (God and the angels) are simply transendent beings vying for possession and ownership of the hearts and souls of human beings. Each religion is simply one of many spiritual realms in which these cosmic agents operate. Angels are there not to tempt human beings to do evil, but to claim us as their own. Christianity, therefore, is about who belongs to God (through Christ). So there is this sentiment that "whoever believes in Christ" belongs to God.

So the issue with angels and God is this -- where do we belong? Where do we fit in? With whom do we share our eternity? Do we share eternity with an angel or with God?

Now my views would probably be heretical to both fundamentalist Buddhists & to dogmatic Chrisitians, but wanted to correct a possible misperception in this.

I didn't know fundamentalist Buddhism even existed. I thought fundamentalism didn't exist in Buddhism. You can be wrong about Buddhism, just as you can get the wrong answers in a science, engineering or maths exam, but does that make you a heretic? I think it only means you're a F/E/E+/D/D+ student in Buddhism. You failed to get past particular levels of enlightenment. Bad student. Naughty. You didn't study diligently in class.

Heretic in Christianity? Maybe that's another misconception (ironically). If you're wrong about Christianity, the same reasoning could apply -- you're not a heretic. You're just a bad student of Jesus Christ.

 

[path_of_one]

Re: The Godhead - an aside

Methinks the existence of Satan doesn't have to be part of a dualism. Moreover, since Satan is an angel, I would think of him as one of many "cosmic agents" (or archons, as in Gnostic cosmology) that are in opposition to God. So Satan is not purely evil as in being the source of evil, but one of many sources (angels) of opposition to God.

I was trying to keep it simple. My views on Satan are actually a bit more complex. I think that the mainstream view of Satan as the origin of evil, the anti-God, etc. is incorrect, or at least it is not beneficial to my spiritual growth.

I do believe Satan exists, in three formats. But those "Satans" are not the same Satan that Christians believe in, as a rule.

The first being that I believe exists is the Jewish Satan, who is an angel that is under God's directive to test us and provide opportunities for spiritual growth. From what I've gathered in studying what angels are in Judaism, angels were messengers of God and did not have free will, which is one of the main differences between them and us. So there are no "fallen" angels, because they don't have the capacity to do this. However, there are angels with what is to us unsavory jobs, like testing our faith and taking us when it is time to die. We are supposed to struggle against such tests, which really are the ways that we can grow into stronger spiritual beings.

The second group of beings I believe exist are what Christians often classify as demons. These are evil spirits. Just as human beings have free will, I do believe a variety of (non-angelic) spiritual beings have free will. These can choose to go against God and, just like people who are against God and self-centered, attempt to create a following.

Third, there is the evil that people do, which I believe itself becomes an independent force. That is, I don't believe in evil personified as Satan (in the regular Christian sense), but I do believe that evil goes beyond humans' limited time and space events. Evil, as a force, is set in motion and maintained by those beings with free will that choose to serve self rather than God, who do not choose love. It then has a kind of inertia to it that pulls people in farther, though it can be struggled against and successfully overcome (with God).

So, it is not that I have no ideas about who/what Satan is. But I don't believe that Satan exists in the way that many Christian denominations think he does. I think that viewpoint gives it far more power than it actually has, and negates human responsibility.

Humans beings themselves have the creative capacity to think up malign thoughts and behaviours. The cosmic agents in the spiritual realms (God and the angels) are simply transendent beings vying for possession and ownership of the hearts and souls of human beings. Each religion is simply one of many spiritual realms in which these cosmic agents operate.

I agree that other spiritual beings (some, though not all, of them) wish to possess our worship.

Ultimately, I don't think it matters what they want. I believe everyone returns to God. There is no real battle going on here, in terms of some being "won" by others. I think God wins them all, in the end. I don't think beings that did not create us can ultimately possess us, though they can influence us and make us miserable if we let them.

I don't think spiritual beings are as powerful as people often believe they are. Yes, they have power, but we have Christ. That is the blessing of being a follower of Christ- there isn't really a contest. You don't have to worry about battling against these beings directly, but rather just look in the right direction (to Christ), and the Spirit will take your side.

My experience with spiritual beings is that, aside from angels (which are messengers of God) the rest (nature, place, etc.) are much like people. They are just different kinds of people. Some are nice, some are not so nice. Some choose God, some don't. But none are really a threat to God at all.

I suppose you could say that I believe all will belong to God eventually through His grace. I believe in the absolute supremacy of God, over all other beings. Now, it may take a long long time for some to decide they want to acknowledge God and to embrace Him, but time is of no consequence to God, who exists in an eternal state.

Angels are there not to tempt human beings to do evil, but to claim us as their own.

I don't believe angels attempt to possess us at all. I believe they are messengers of God.

So the issue with angels and God is this -- where do we belong? Where do we fit in? With whom do we share our eternity? Do we share eternity with an angel or with God?

I believe we belong as part of the One. Each of us is a uniquely created part, but nevertheless we are also part of God's immanence. We aren't God, yet we exist in God. Whether or not we realize this makes a big difference to us, and it makes a difference for God primarily because He wants us to have peace and joy and to experience Love.

We share our eternity with all other created beings- everything. I don't think it's an either/or proposition.

Heretic in Christianity? Maybe that's another misconception (ironically). If you're wrong about Christianity, the same reasoning could apply -- you're not a heretic. You're just a bad student of Jesus Christ.

I disagree. Christianity is not the same thing as being a student (or follower) of Jesus Christ.

Christianity is organized religion (for better or worse). Following Jesus Christ is action.

By definition, I am a heretic. My beliefs are not aligned with mainstream Christian churches.

That does not preclude me from being a dedicated follower of Jesus Christ.

 

[mee]

"An opinion rooted in truth, espeically biblical truth, is no longer an opinion but fact."

very true indeed ,i like that.

 

[Dor]

The view the Bible gives is that God has ALWAYS been a Triune God. He didnt manifest in different modes at different times (Modalism), but again has always been the Uncreated Creator God who inhabits Eternity. He is form EVERLATING TO EVERLASTING. He simple IS! In Eternity Past, there was God and Him alone: Father, Son, and Spirit. God was not bored or in need of anything or anyone. He was completely self-suffient and compeltly fulfilled within Himself. He is infinte and had infinite things to do. Not to mention, He had the Love of the 3 seperate persons within the Godhead in which to fellowship. That is all we Know of the Godhead as far as explaining this mystery of how ONE God could have 3 seperate persons and still remain ONE. Thats why He's God and we're not. We're left to be in awe of this God and fall postrate and worship Him!

Isnt He amazing!!

Dang Silas you must think this is the Christianity board seems everyone else forgets that.