#God The Father

[thomastanker02]

Taken from Devotions with DeMarcus’ YouTube community tab. God bless, Jesus loves you ✝️❤️

@cosmicfunnies @babyimlosingit

[cuties-in-codices]

the father, the son, and the trinity

from the hours of marguerite d'orléans, france, illuminated c. 1430

source: Paris, BnF, Latin 1156 B, fol. 158v, 160r, and 163r

[10yrsyart]

Luke 15:7, "There is more joy in heaven over one lost sinner who repents and returns to God than over ninety-nine others who were righteous and haven't strayed away!"

i was thinking about this verse recently and wondering.. how different it would be if people could see just how important they are to God. so important in fact that the Creator of the universe, an everlasting Being, came down Himself to experience death to set us free from Death. if you were the only human needing redemption, He would have gone through it all just for you.

it's up to you to accept or reject this payment on your behalf. there's no way to pay it yourself, you can never be "good enough" to make it to Heaven. He took on your punishment for you and only His sacrifice absolves you from it. if you reject Him, He will honor that decision, and you'll spend eternity separated from Him and all joy, light, and happiness. not because He's cruel, but because all good things stem from the Lord. there is no life without Jesus Christ.

the experience of the man in this comic is actually based on many testimonies i've listened to. people cried out to Jesus, and either saw or felt His love and were changed. don't wait! you have the entirety of Heaven cheering you on, longing for you to join our family. the hole in your heart can only be filled by the Holy Spirit's Presence. don't reject your opportunity to experience God's wonders forever, in a reality far greater than Earth could ever hope to be.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, so that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)

transcript:

Saint 1: Quick! It's happening!

Man: (sighs)

Demon 1: Things aren't gonna get better, y'know? At least you're not believing in a fairy tale like them.

Demon 2: Reality, not delusion!

Demon 3: Only you can change your life. You're the master of your own destiny!

Man: I've tried everything, but I still feel empty...

Demon 1: Better than being trapped under a bunch of religious rules forever. Is that what you want?

Demon 2: You're worth nothing. You don't deserve any help.

Demon 3: Worthless, worthless~

Man: I'm so sick of this. It's all pointless.. I just want it to stop...

Demon 1: Yes, it's pointless!

Demon 2: Even if you call, no one will answer!

Demon 3: You might as well end it now. There's nothing in your future-

Man: Jesus!

Saint 2: HAH!

Saint 3: Yes!!

Demons (all): NO! No No No No No No No

Man: If you're real, prove it to me! I can't do this. Help me, I need you!

Saint 4: Yeaaaah!

Saint 5: That's right!

Saint 6: I love this part!

Saint 7: WOOOH! YESHUA!

Man: ..Forgive me.

Jesus: (smiles) Welcome home, My son.

Saint 8: He did it!!

Saint 9: Yes!

Saint 10: JESUS!!

Saint 11: Atta boy!

Angel 1: HAH! GOT'M!

Saint 12: Did you see that?!

Saint 13: A new family member!

Angel 2: Hallelujah!

Angel 3: Praise Yah!

Saint 14: Thank You.

Saint 15: I can't wait until he gets here!

Heavenly voices: Our Lord Jehovah! Hallelujah! Praise Yahweh forever! Holy Holy Holy. Yeshua our Savior! Is the Lord God Almighty.

Saint 7: WOOOH! YESHUA!!

God the Father: (smiles)

Man: ...I don't feel empty.

[apenitentialprayer]

Okay, so in the Summa, Saint Thomas Aquinas argues that any one Member of the Trinity could have become Incarnate, and that it was simply that it was most fitting that it was the Son. Thomas gives three explanations for his reasoning:

All things were created in and through the Son, and that gives Him "a certain common agreement with all creatures," and it is the craftsman's sense of duty upon seeing his damaged work that he "restores it when it has fallen into ruin."

That a share of the Divine life is an inheritance given to the human race through the Incarnation; and since an inheritance is given from a parent to a child, it would make sense that the human race be united to God through the Son, the only begotten Child.

Original Sin entered the human race through the eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Given the first sin was an illegitimate seizure of wisdom, it was right that the Wisdom of God Himself become Incarnate in order to be seized by men.

And these are interesting. But I'm reading Bernard of Clairvaux's sermons for Advent, and in his Six Circumstances for the Coming of the Lord, he suggests another reason: In attempting to become like God, Adam and Eve and the fallen angels attempted to take the birthright of the eternal Son, the true image of the Father. This act of trying to usurp the glory of God's only begotten Son causes the Son to freely give His glory to the attempted usurpers. Bernard places the following monologue in the pre-Incarnate Christ's mouth:

My Father . . . made two noble orders sharing His reason, capable of participating in His beatitude: angels and men. But behold, on My account He has ruined a multitude of His angels and the entire race of men. Therefore, that they may know that I love my Father, He shall receive back through Me what in a certain way He seems to have lost through Me. 'It is on my account this storm has arisen; take me and cast me into the sea' [Jonah 1:12]. All are envious of Me; behold, I come, and will exhibit Myself to them in such a guise as that whoever shall wish may become like Me; whatsoever I shall do they may imitate, so that their envy shall be made good and profitable to them.

So the Son, whose position as Him who is most like the Father is envied, transforms that envy into something good; He shares His nature as the beloved of the Father, and He does so in such a way that our deepest desire to be loved plays a part in that salvation. We, who wanted to be like God, now truly have a way of imitating Him. And that's neat.

[artthatgivesmefeelings]

Jerónimo Jacinto de Espinosa (Spanish, 1600-1667) La misa de San Gregorio, n.d Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid

[ahopefulbromantic]

Broke: pork is forbidden by the Law because of the symbolism related to the cultural significance of pigs in the time and place and society ancient Israelites lived in

Woke: pork is forbidden by the Law because the pigs in that region were sick with a contagious disease and Israelites didn't know about microbes back then so God had to save them somehow

Bespoke: pork is forbidden by the Law because Jesus as a human didn't like the taste of pork so His Father who loved Him very much made sure He will never have to taste it ever

[dramoor]

"Cast away from you that doctrine of devils, that Jesus died to save us from our Father."

~George MacDonald

(Art: Christ the Redeemer, by J. Kirk Richards)

[soaringeaglesingingjoy]

‭1 John 3:1 NLT‬

[1] See how very much our Father loves us, for he calls us his children, and that is what we are! But the people who belong to this world don’t recognize that we are God’s children because they don’t know him.

https://bible.com/bible/116/1jn.3.1.NLT

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

I and the Father are one

22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.

23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.

24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.

25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30 I and my Father are one. — John 10:22-30 | King James Version (KJV) The King James Version Bible is in the public domain. Cross References: Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 27:3; Isaiah 66:22; Jeremiah 23:4; Mark 8:32; Luke 22:67; John 1:19; John 5:36; John 8:47; John 10:4; John 10:14; John 10:21; John 10:37; John 14:28; John 17:21; Acts 3:11; Acts 5:12

Read full chapter

Notes: John 10:22-30 is about Jesus calling his followers to be confident in his care and to listen to his voice. The passage describes Jesus as a shepherd who knows his sheep, leads them, and provides them with eternal life.

[thomastanker02]

Taken from Grace For The Moment by Max Lucado. God bless, Jesus loves you ✝️❤️

@cosmicfunnies @babyimlosingit

[cuties-in-codices]

god burying moses

illustration from a copy of rudolf von ems' 13th c. weltchronik (world chronicle), bavaria, c. 1400-1410

source: Los Angeles, Getty Museum, Ms. 33 (88.MP.70), fol. 112v

[campgender]

When I was a child, I always hated being used in my father’s sermons, shrunk to a symbol to illustrate some larger lesson, flattened out to give other people comfort or instruction or even a laugh. It did some violence to my third dimension; it made it difficult for me to breathe. “That’s not me,” I would think, listening to some fable where a stick figure of myself moved automatically toward a punishing moral. “That has nothing to do with me at all.” If I had a soul, I thought, it was that resistance, which would never let another human being have the last word on me.

This is what it is to write about people who are alive and then, sometimes, people who are dead. To say that his eyes were clear as agates, that his voice was a gravelly baritone, to surround him with the right adjectives and set him into the story—all this is an attempt to fit him in the glass box of a good sentence so everyone can see what he means. But it won’t work, the words can’t hold him, and I am glad.

The desire to describe voice, gesture, skin color, is a desire to eat, take over, make into part of the pattern. I am happy every time to see a writer fail at this. I am happy every time to see real personhood resist our tricks. I am happy to see bodies insist that they are not shut up in this book, they are elsewhere. The tomb is empty, rejoice, he is not here.

from Priestdaddy by Patricia Lockwood

[apenitentialprayer]

Maybe I should be asking an Orthodox person this, but I do not understand the hubbub with the Filioque. To me it is hair splitting, could you explain why it would not be hairsplitting? Or if there is an aspect I am missing as to why it was the final straw for a schism?

Okay, ah, I think there are two aspects that need to be addressed here. The first deals with the simple fact of its inclusion in the Creed, and I'm going to come off as a traitor here, so let me clarify my personal position; I believe the filioque best represents the reality of the Spirit's procession, but I think it was bad that the Western Church inserted it into the Nicene Creed.

As Henri de Lubac talks about in The Christian Faith, the Church allows for many theologies, spiritualities, customs, and liturgical traditions to coexist; "from one country to another and from one century to another there are many differences in emphasis." What connects all these elaborations and practices of the Christian faith is that they are all anchored in that faith, as revealed by God and distilled in the Creed. That faith is the unity of all Christians everywhere.

And what convinced me that the inclusion of the filioque was not a good move actually came from another Catholic thinker, Karl Rahner, who wrote "the inevitable pluralism met with in theology cannot and must not cause the unity of the creed of faith to disappear from the Church, even in its verbal expression." Except.... that's exactly what the Western Church did. It took the Creed as articulated by two separate ecumenical councils, and unilaterally added words to it. And while there are historical reasons for that inclusion, and while I think the theology behind its inclusion is true, I think modifying what was meant to be the unifying symbol of the Christian faith was not a good move. And I can see why the filioque inclusion seems like a rupture from the Orthodox tradition. Because... we have caused the unity of the creed of faith in its verbal expression to disappear.

And I think that's a bigger problem than the content of the filioque clause itself, to be honest. But, as far as the content goes, let's talk about that, too.

In the Orthodox perspective, the three Persons of the Trinity share a common nature, and there's a kind of symmetry where the traits of any given Person is either held in common by all three, or is reserved for one of Them. So, for example, the state of being uncreated and eternal are traits shared by all Persons in the Trinity, as is the fact that They are almighty and infinite. Those are traits derived from their divine nature. But in terms of traits distinctive to Their individual Personhoods, well: the Father is seen as the Source of the other two, while the Son is the only begotten Member of the Trinity, and the Spirit is the only spirated Member. An Orthodox Christian may argue that the filioque ruins this symmetry of Persons; if the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, the distribution of Personal traits is no longer equal (two Persons have a trait that one Person does not have). This can be seen as a kind of ontological inferiority on the Spirit's end.

From the perspective of the Roman Church and Her western descendants, the articulation of the Trinity doesn't really involve this "common to All or particular to One" logic. Instead, we tend to use a sacramental logic that assumes that how the Persons of the Trinity operate within Their creation also tells us something about how They relate to each other from all eternity. So, the Father sends the Son into the world (John 17:1-4); hence the Father begets the Son. But the Father sends the Holy Spirit to the disciples "in [Christ's] name" (John 14:16-17, 26). So, the Father sends the Spirit, but the Son is somehow involved. The Holy Spirit is believed to still have one origin, but this one origin is the joint act of Father and Son. Part of this may have to do with different starting assumptions. Eastern Christians tend to start their thinking on the Trinity as Three existing in Unity, while Western Christians tend to start their thinking on the Trinity with One existing in Multiplicity.

But this is a super complicated subject, so if someone wants to correct me about either of the perspectives I tried to lay out, please feel free to do so.

[artthatgivesmefeelings]

Jusepe de Ribera (Spanish, 1591-1652) The Trinity, 1635 “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished,’ and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:30). - The Bible

"It is finished" indicates he has consumed the cup of God's wrath, and through his sacrifice, the bridge between God and sinful man had been established.

[idylls-of-the-divine-romance]

Thinking about Jesus calling God “Father.” How Jesus — in his human nature — only knows what it means for One to be a Loving Father because he had a loving father. 

[anastpaul]

(via Our Morning Offering – 24 November – Holy God, We Praise Thy Name – AnaStpaul)