Thread: God's Name

Originally Posted by Ramil

Well, here's a Comparison of Christian Denominations' Beliefs

Everyone agrees that the Son is fully god, fully man.

Okay, so I asked this of my sister-in-law, who is VERY Catholic/Religious... attends church every Sunday and such... and she looked at me as if I had three heads. She was like "What do you mean, God is called Jesus? Jesus is God's son. They are not the same."

And then what about the Creeds? They don't say anything about God AND Jesus being the same or calling God by the name Jesus.
Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

The Credo

The Apostles Creed

I believe in God the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.

The Nicene Creed

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Okay, so I asked this of my sister-in-law, who is VERY Catholic/Religious... attends church every Sunday and such... and she looked at me as if I had three heads. She was like "What do you mean, God is called Jesus? Jesus is God's son. They are not the same."

This is the matter about the word 'Lord'. It is translated as Господь in Russian -- basically the same as god.

The Nicene Creed in Russian

Веруем во единого Бога Отца, Вседержителя, Творца всех видимых и невидимых.

И во единого Господа Иисуса Христа, Сына Божия единородного, рожденного от Отца, то есть из сущности Отца, Бога от Бога, Света от Света, Бога истинна от Бога истинна, рожденна, не сотворенна, единосущна Отцу, Имже вся быша, яже на небеси и на земли; нас ради человек и нашего ради спасения сшедшего, и воплотившася и вочеловечшася, страдавша и воскресшего в третий день, и восшедшего на небеса, и паки грядущего судити живым и мертвым.

И во Святого Духа.
Глаголющих же о Сыне Божием, яко бысть время, егда не бе, или яко преже неже родитися, не бе, или яко от не сущих бысть, или из иныя ипостаси или сущности глаголющих быти, или превратима или изменяема Сына Божия, сих анафематствует Кафолическая и Апостольская Церковь. Аминь.

And in Latin (I'm not an expert, but see the bold words -- the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father):
Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem, omnium visibilium et invisibilium factorem.

Et in unum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei, natum ex Patre unigenitum, hoc est, de substantia Patris, Deum ex Deo, Lumen ex Lumine, Deum verum, de Deo vero, natum, non factum, unius substantiæ cum Patre, quod Græci dicunt homoousion; per quem, omnia facta, sunt, quæ in cælo et in terra; qui [propter nos homines et] propter nostram salutem descendit, incarnatus est et homo factus est, et passus est; et resurrexit tertia die, et ascendit in cælos; venturus judicare vivos et mortuos.

Et in Spiritum Sanctum.
Eos autem qui dicunt: erat, quando non erat, et antequam nasceretur, non erat, et quod de non exstantibus factus est, vel ex alia, substantia aut essentia, dicentes [creatum, aut] convertibilem et demutabilem Filium Dei, hos anathematizat catholica [et apostolica] ecclesia. Amen.

And then what about the Creeds? They don't say anything about God AND Jesus being the same or calling God by the name Jesus.
Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

But the concept of Trinity says basically that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spririt are one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinity_of_Jesus

So, IF Jesus and God are the same, then why is Jesus seated at the right hand of God? How can you sit next to yourself?

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

So, IF Jesus and God are the same, then why is Jesus seated at the right hand of God? How can you sit next to yourself?

Well, I guess a better question is how could he ever sit as a spirit? So, you know, there's always a canonical interpretation to those things. Like, it's been an allegory to somehow understand things that are beyond our logical grasp blah-blah-blah. Other religions are no better in this respect. In Judaism, for example, you have a very nice little concept of Tzimtzum Tzimtzum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which basically tries to reconcile a logical discrepancy between the monotheistic 'infinite' definition of God and the fact that the humble finite species could exist bearing their own personal responsibility (and thus a potential personal reward or punishment).

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Other religions are no better in this respect.

Buddhism is considered to be perfectly rational in its core. Any comments?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Buddhism is considered to be perfectly rational in its core. Any comments?

Unfortunately, I'm not as familiar with Buddhism as with the other religions. All I know Judaism appears to be very logical thanks to the countless arguments of very smart people over several centuries. Until you dig a bit deeper.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Unfortunately, I'm not as familiar with Buddhism as with the other religions. All I know Judaism appears to be very logical thanks to the countless arguments of very smart people over several centuries. Until you dig a bit deeper.

I feel like the situation with Buddhism is quite opposite. Countless modifications of completely insane people over millenia were unable to overthrow Gautama's rationality.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

So, IF Jesus and God are the same, then why is Jesus seated at the right hand of God? How can you sit next to yourself?

I think that God can empower any number of 'physical' bodies with his essence or here's where the Holy Spirit fits.

Originally Posted by Ramil

I think that God can empower any number of 'physical' bodies with his essence or here's where the Holy Spirit fits.

Could God by any chance create a stone heavy enough so that He won't be able to lift it? It's been known for long time that you can't (and shouldn't) ask logical questions or request for a logical explanation. You should just believe.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Could God by any chance create a stone heavy enough so that He won't be able to lift it?

Tell me, my dear Crocodile, have you ever heard of Schroedinger's cat and the superposition principle?

Originally Posted by Ramil

Tell me, my dear Crocodile, have you ever heard of Schroedinger's cat and the superposition principle?

If you start speaking Quantum Physics to me I'm washing my hands.

If a theory says that a present outcome is extremely unlikely unless things were just so to the nth decimal point, then that is a strong inkling that the theory itself is not refined enough. But that doesn't mean it can't be refined to fit the facts better. It definitely is no reason to chuck the whole theory and state something completely different which has no other argument going for it than "My brain can deal with that more easily".

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Could God by any chance create a stone heavy enough so that He won't be able to lift it?

Heavy Mysteries, one of my favs...

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Heavy Mysteries, one of my favs...

"...Once a week, Father Russell would come in for "Heavy Mystery" time. And you'd save all your weird questions for Father Russell. In fact, you'd make up strange questions. You'd take a whole week thinking up trick questions for Father Russell. "Hey, hey, hey Father! Hey, uh, if God is all-powerful, can he make a rock so big that he himself can't lift it? HA, HA, HEEEEEY! WE GOT HIM NOW! AH, HA, HA!" Or else you'd take a very simple sin and surround it with the most bizarre circumstances you could imagine...to try to, y'know, relieve the guilt in the sin. We'd usually end up with the, uh, statement, "Would that then be a sin then, Father?"

Like, here, this is an example. There was one sin- not receiving communion during Easter time. You had to perform your "Easter duty". You had to receive once between Ash Wednesday and Pentecost Sunday and if you didn't do it, it was a mortal sin. Provided, of course, you had said to yourself, "Hey, I'm not gonna do it this year!" And, uh, there weren't many mortal sins on that, but a lot of guys went to Venial(?) City on Easter duty and so you would ask the priest y'know, you'd..."Hey, Father, hey, uh.." Remember guys would leave their hand up after they got called on, right? And the priest would say, "What are you, the Statue of Liberty, Dunn?" "Oh, sorry Father. Anyways, Father. Suppose that you didn't make your Easter duty...and it's Pentecost Sunday...the last day...and you're on a ship at sea...and the chaplain goes into a coma...but you wanted to receive. And then it's Monday, too late...but then you cross the International Date Line!" "Yes, I'm sure God will take that into account. Sit down, Woozie."