|
Post by StAnne on Oct 23, 2010 1:16:44 GMT -5
Perhaps you can first explain to us how it is that God is eternal; and then we can proceed on the intricacies of how the Son is eternally begotten, or eternally caused, of the Father. That would be one of those things that you take on faith and, as such, it is not supported materially nor logically. It sounds like you are hiding under the concept of eternity. It is like using infinity as a hedge against reality. Like claiming that an infinite amount and an infinite amount plus one are the same. If one entity created a second, however far in the past or future (eternal), one had to be there first. If you are claiming both have existed forever there is no creation at all. Perhaps so. But. The Word, the second person of the Trinity was not created. Eternally begotten, or eternally caused. Or as written by St John...In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the was God. "III. When did these come into being? They are above all “When.” But, if I am to speak with something more of boldness—when the Father did. And when did the Father come into being. There never was a time when He was not. And the same thing is true of the Son and the Holy Ghost. Ask me again, and again I will answer you, When was the Son begotten? When the Father was not begotten. And when did the Holy Ghost proceed? When the Son was, not proceeding but, begotten— beyond the sphere of time, and above the grasp of reason; although we cannot set forth that which is above time, if we avoid as we desire any expression which conveys the idea of time. For such expressions as “when” and “before” and “after” and “from the beginning” are not timeless, however much we may force them; unless indeed we were to take the Æon, that interval which is coextensive with the eternal things, and is not divided or measured by any motion, or by the revolution of the sun, as time is measured. How then are They not alike unoriginate, if They are coeternal? Because They are from Him, though not after Him. For that which is unoriginate is eternal, but that which is eternal is not necessarily unoriginate, so long as it may be referred to the Father as its origin. Therefore in respect of Cause They are not unoriginate; but it is evident that the Cause is not necessarily prior to its effects, for the sun is not prior to its light. And yet They are in some sense unoriginate, in respect of time, even though you would scare simple minds with your quibbles, for the Sources of Time are not subject to time." www.newadvent.org/fathers/310229.htm
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Oct 23, 2010 17:24:47 GMT -5
StAnne
Could it be that the Son was the product of the marriage of the Father and the Holy Ghost?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 23, 2010 18:23:27 GMT -5
StAnne Could it be that the Son was the product of the marriage of the Father and the Holy Ghost? No. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons of the same substance who comprise one God. The Son is begotten (or caused) of the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. (Afterthought -- I don't know if you are asking as regards the second person of the Trinity, or if you are rather asking about the incarnate Son. As regards the incarnate Son, the answer to your question would still be "no".)
|
|
|
Post by déjà vu on Oct 23, 2010 20:48:06 GMT -5
I have heard the workers refer to the Holy Spirit as the Mother.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 23, 2010 21:36:02 GMT -5
I have heard the workers refer to the Holy Spirit as the Mother. It isn't biblical. How does the Bible refer to the Holy Spirit? "Holy Spirit: Much More that an Ethereal Life Force The Holy Spirit is not a vague, ethereal life force. He is not impersonal or unthinking. The Holy Spirit is a “person” equal in every way with God, the Father, and God, the Son. The Bible tells us that all the characteristics of God apparent in the Father and the Son are equally apparent in the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is composed of intellect, emotions and will. In 1 Corinthians 2:11, we see an example of the Holy Spirit’s intellect and will: “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” Although the Holy Spirit has all the characteristics of God, He has specific roles and functions in our lives. In John 16:13, we see the Spirit of Truth as our guide: “Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He will shew you things to come.” In John 14:26, we learn that the Holy Spirit is our Counselor and teacher: “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” In Romans 8:26, we learn that the Holy Spirit is there for us in times of weakness and prayer: “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit Himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 23, 2010 23:59:19 GMT -5
StAnne No. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons of the same substance who comprise one God. The Son is begotten (or caused) of the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. And here you are again stating that the father caused the son, requiring that the father was in existence prior to hie causing the son.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 24, 2010 0:03:20 GMT -5
The Word, the second person of the Trinity was not created. Eternally begotten, or eternally caused. Or as written by St John...In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the was God. So now the claim is that Jesus was not created by god? Just caused by god? How is caused different than created? In either case there was for some time one entity who caused/created/begat a second entity.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 24, 2010 0:16:47 GMT -5
StAnne No. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three distinct persons of the same substance who comprise one God. The Son is begotten (or caused) of the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. And here you are again stating that the father caused the son, requiring that the father was in existence prior to hie causing the son. "Therefore in respect of Cause They are not unoriginate; but it is evident that the Cause is not necessarily prior to its effects, for the sun is not prior to its light."
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 24, 2010 0:38:16 GMT -5
The Word, the second person of the Trinity was not created. Eternally begotten, or eternally caused. Or as written by St John...In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the was God. So now the claim is that Jesus was not created by god? Just caused by god? How is caused different than created? In either case there was for some time one entity who caused/created/begat a second entity. You are the one who claimed 'created'. I have never written created. From the Nicene Creed-- begotten not made. Created would be made. "9. They who have said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not very God, or not with the Father the One and only God, or not truly immortal because changeable, are proved wrong by the most plain and unanimous voice of divine testimonies; as, for instance, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” For it is plain that we are to take the Word of God to be the only Son of God, of whom it is afterwards said, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” on account of that birth of His incarnation, which was wrought in time of the Virgin. But herein is declared, not only that He is God, but also that He is of the same substance with the Father; because, after saying, “And the Word was God,” it is said also, “The same was in the beginning with God: all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made.” Not simply “all things;” but only all things that were made, that is; the whole creature. From which it appears clearly, that He Himself was not made, by whom all things were made. And if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. For all substance that is not God is creature; and all that is not creature is God. And if the Son is not of the same substance with the Father, then He is a substance that was made: and if He is a substance that was made, then all things were not made by Him; but “all things were made by Him,” therefore He is of one and the same substance with the Father. And so He is not only God, but also very God. And the same John most expressly affirms this in his epistle: “For we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we may know the true God, and that we may be in His true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.” 1 Jn 5:20 www.newadvent.org/fathers/130101.htm
|
|
|
Post by reply on Oct 24, 2010 0:57:04 GMT -5
The Word, the second person of the Trinity was not created. Eternally begotten, or eternally caused. Or as written by St John...In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the was God. So now the claim is that Jesus was not created by god? Just caused by god? How is caused different than created? In either case there was for some time one entity who caused/created/begat a second entity. Rational, who or what created the first entity?
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Oct 24, 2010 1:54:39 GMT -5
St. Anne, Believe it or not, the workers (and some of the friends) are discussing the Holy Trinity as a family unit. God is the father, and the head of the household. Jesus is the Son, like the child of the family. The Holy Spirit is the mother, who cares for everyone.
God is God! Christ is God! The Holy Spirit is God! The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons, and each of these persons is equal to the whole being of God. The only difference between them is the relationship that they choose to have with each other. The uniqueness of the Father is the way he relates to the Son and the Holy Spirit. The uniqueness of the Son is the way he relates as the Son. The uniqueness of the Holy Spirit is the way he relates as Spirit.
Sheesh! Mommy, daddy, and baby boy....!!!
Anyway, my thoughts and I welcome yours, quizzer
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Oct 24, 2010 9:51:52 GMT -5
I have heard the workers refer to the Holy Spirit as the Mother. It isn't biblical. How does the Bible refer to the Holy Spirit? But the Bible does refer to the Spirit with feminine pronouns, so it's a logical leap.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 24, 2010 9:51:52 GMT -5
When I've heard the workers speak of the Holy Spirit as "mother" I took that to mean as a "Comforter" the Holy Spirit is in kind as to a mother to their children...they are the comforter, they are the ministering parent...or used to be much that way!
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 24, 2010 18:34:19 GMT -5
It isn't biblical. How does the Bible refer to the Holy Spirit? But the Bible does refer to the Spirit with feminine pronouns, so it's a logical leap. Are you referring to languages that require grammatical gender assignment? Wiki "If by "gender" is meant grammatical gender, the gender of "Holy Spirit" varies according to the language used. Thus the grammatical gender of the word "spirit" is masculine in Latin ("spiritus") and in Latin-derived languages, as also, for instance, in the German language ("Geist"), while in the Semitic languages such as Hebrew ("רוח"), Aramaic and its descendant Syriac, it is feminine, and in Greek it is neuter ("πνεῦμα"). When grammatical gender in a particular language is confused with physical gender, the Holy Spirit is thought of, within that language, as male, female or neither." There is also this: "The Hebrew word for "spirit" (ruach) is feminine in Genesis 1:2. But the gender of a word in Greek or Hebrew has nothing to do with gender identity." www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Spirit-gender.htmlOr...if you're referring to something different than that...pls show us where.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Oct 24, 2010 18:54:10 GMT -5
StAnne, I didn't realize there was any contention about this. Thought it was generally accepted that several Spirit references were with female pronouns.
It isn't a battle that means anything to me, so unless it's important to you, I won't pursue it. I don't believe the Spirit is really female any more than God is really male.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 24, 2010 19:00:07 GMT -5
St. Anne, Believe it or not, the workers (and some of the friends) are discussing the Holy Trinity as a family unit. God is the father, and the head of the household. Jesus is the Son, like the child of the family. The Holy Spirit is the mother, who cares for everyone. God is God! Christ is God! The Holy Spirit is God! The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons, and each of these persons is equal to the whole being of God. The only difference between them is the relationship that they choose to have with each other. The uniqueness of the Father is the way he relates to the Son and the Holy Spirit. The uniqueness of the Son is the way he relates as the Son. The uniqueness of the Holy Spirit is the way he relates as Spirit. Sheesh! Mommy, daddy, and baby boy....!!! Anyway, my thoughts and I welcome yours, quizzer They are having difficulty formulating their theology, aren't they. If they follow Scripture, how can they so blatantly go against all of the references to the Holy Spirit as "He" and "Himself"? "Masculine imagery and revelation is not without significance, however. A second time that God was specifically said to be revealed via a physical image was when Jesus was asked to show the Father to the disciples in John chapter 14. He responds in verse 8 by saying, “The person who has seen me has seen the Father!" Paul makes it clear that Jesus was the exact image of God in Colossians 1:15 calling Jesus "the image of the invisible God." This verse is couched in a section that demonstrates Christ's superiority over all creation. Most ancient religions believed in a pantheon - both gods and goddesses - that were worthy of worship. But one of Judeo-Christianity's distinctives is its belief in a supreme Creator. Masculine language better relates this relationship of creator to creation. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within . . . As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself. Paul echoes this idea in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 when he refers to the creation order as a template for church order. In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself, and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity." www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Spirit-gender.htmlLet's take this one step further. Let's look at Luke 1... 35 And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. Would it be fitting for the Holy Spirit (as the Lord and Giver of Life) to be thought of as feminine? That Mary would have conceived by the power of a feminine Holy Spirit? Perhaps the 2x2 need to seek the guiding of the Holy Spirit, instead of relying on the terribly inaccurate interpretation of the Holy Spirit as female. The church has a spiritual mother. The Blessed Mother. Jesus gave her to the church and to all of us when he gave her to the Apostle John. Jn 20 26 When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son." 27 Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother." And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 24, 2010 19:01:33 GMT -5
StAnne, I didn't realize there was any contention about this. Thought it was generally accepted that several Spirit references were with female pronouns. It isn't a battle that means anything to me, so unless it's important to you, I won't pursue it. I don't believe the Spirit is really female any more than God is really male. Reply #48 may explain more. It isn't even from a Catholic site. And... From the gotquestions link... "Masculine imagery and revelation is not without significance, however. A second time that God was specifically said to be revealed via a physical image was when Jesus was asked to show the Father to the disciples in John chapter 14. He responds in verse 8 by saying, “The person who has seen me has seen the Father!" Paul makes it clear that Jesus was the exact image of God in Colossians 1:15 calling Jesus "the image of the invisible God." This verse is couched in a section that demonstrates Christ's superiority over all creation."
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 25, 2010 9:06:02 GMT -5
"Therefore in respect of Cause They are not unoriginate; but it is evident that the Cause is not necessarily prior to its effects, for the sun is not prior to its light." I do not know the meaning of unoriginate so it is difficult to parse this phrase. It seems like you are saying that it is not required that the sun exists prior to it emitting light.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Oct 25, 2010 12:52:10 GMT -5
StAnne, do you associate the Spirit with Wisdom? This figure is clearly feminine, right? Or is there a fourth part to the Trinity?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Oct 25, 2010 13:15:36 GMT -5
StAnne, do you associate the Spirit with Wisdom? This figure is clearly feminine, right? Or is there a fourth part to the Trinity? Now THAT'S an interesting question!!
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 25, 2010 13:35:57 GMT -5
StAnne, do you associate the Spirit with Wisdom? This figure is clearly feminine, right? Or is there a fourth part to the Trinity? Now THAT'S an interesting question!! It's SO interesting in fact that by the explanation in the link, the purpose of the "female spirit" is to lead you to follow Torah, further stating that "if we reject Torah then we do not have the Spirit in us." www.abrahamic-faith.com/Simon/pdfs/Is%20the%20Holy%20Spirit%20masculine%20or%20feminine.pdfSo. emy. Would you entertain accepting the female spirit to reject Christ and follow the female spirit to Torah?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 25, 2010 13:46:47 GMT -5
StAnne, do you associate the Spirit with Wisdom? This figure is clearly feminine, right? Or is there a fourth part to the Trinity? Wiki "If by "gender" is meant grammatical gender, the gender of "Holy Spirit" varies according to the language used. Thus the grammatical gender of the word "spirit" is masculine in Latin ("spiritus") and in Latin-derived languages, as also, for instance, in the German language ("Geist"), while in the Semitic languages such as Hebrew ("רוח"), Aramaic and its descendant Syriac, it is feminine, and in Greek it is neuter ("πνεῦμα"). When grammatical gender in a particular language is confused with physical gender, the Holy Spirit is thought of, within that language, as male, female or neither." There is also this: "The Hebrew word for "spirit" (ruach) is feminine in Genesis 1:2. But the gender of a word in Greek or Hebrew has nothing to do with gender identity." www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Spirit-gender.html"Masculine imagery and revelation is not without significance, however. A second time that God was specifically said to be revealed via a physical image was when Jesus was asked to show the Father to the disciples in John chapter 14. He responds in verse 8 by saying, “The person who has seen me has seen the Father!" Paul makes it clear that Jesus was the exact image of God in Colossians 1:15 calling Jesus "the image of the invisible God." This verse is couched in a section that demonstrates Christ's superiority over all creation. Most ancient religions believed in a pantheon - both gods and goddesses - that were worthy of worship. But one of Judeo-Christianity's distinctives is its belief in a supreme Creator. Masculine language better relates this relationship of creator to creation. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within . . . As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself. Paul echoes this idea in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 when he refers to the creation order as a template for church order. In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself, and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity." www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Spirit-gender.htmlLet's take this one step further. Let's look at Luke 1... 35 And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. Would it be fitting for the Holy Spirit (as the Lord and Giver of Life) to be thought of as feminine? That Mary would have conceived by the power of a feminine Holy Spirit?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Oct 25, 2010 14:29:28 GMT -5
I don't understand your question. I was thinking of Proverbs 1:20 Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets: ; 7:4 Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call understanding thy kinswoman: ; 8:1 Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? ; 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Oct 25, 2010 15:01:49 GMT -5
I don't understand your question. I was thinking of Proverbs 1:20 Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets: ; 7:4 Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call understanding thy kinswoman: ; 8:1 Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? ; 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:Look at dc's original statement and question on Wisdom. If I understand correctly, the connection is being made that the Holy Spirit is female and/or is the Spirit of Wisdom (female), and is there a 4th in the "Trinity". The association with the Spirit and Wisdom should not be viewed in the feminine sense just because it is feminine in the gramatical Hebrew, as explained above. It gets quite convoluted. If I have misunderstood dc then I am quite open to correction. dc wrote:
|
|