Is Jesus the Word of God?

[ding]

Don't be silly. Happiness leads to success. Belief in God leads to happiness. But it is more like 4 papers I think.

You said "science tells us...", silly me, I thought you actually had something.

I do. You are the one who has nothing.

So what science says? Where?

I already told you what it says, taz.

Success does not lead to happiness. Happiness leads to success.

Being thankful, reflective, meditative, active and performing random acts of kindness creates a happiness advantage. Look it up.

Stop blowing fartsmoke about what science says. Either you have a link or open a window, you must be suffocating from the smell.

No fartsmoke, taz.

Actual science. It's the reason us religious folk have a functional advantage over people like yourself.

 

[Taz]

God hasn't spoken to anyone, that's all written by men. You should up your critical thinking game.

You know this how?

God hasn't yet been proven to exist. Therefore it cannot be quoted.

According to you he hasn't been proven not to exist so how do you know he hasn't communicated with anyone?

Because nobody has proven a god to exist yet. Real communication could be proof. Hearing voices isn't.

They don't have to prove it to you, taz. I am asking YOU, how YOU know God never communicated with man.

How do you know?

Where the proof?

 

[ding]

He speaks to me all the time. But you have to be listening for it. He speaks in a quiet voice. Maybe that's why you can't hear it.

What does he tell you? Blow on your spoonful of soup first so you don't burn yourself?

To do the right thing.

I always make sure my soup isn't too hot, taz.

So you've NEVER done something wrong? EVER? Or does god cherry-pick what he wants you to get right and sometimes lets you do the wrong thing?

Don't be silly. We aren't expected to do perfect things only to be perfect. But since you don't read the good book for wisdom you never got that from it. I did.

So what has god told you to do exactly? "Be good"? That's it?

It depends on the situation, taz.

 

[ding]

You know this how?

God hasn't yet been proven to exist. Therefore it cannot be quoted.

According to you he hasn't been proven not to exist so how do you know he hasn't communicated with anyone?

Because nobody has proven a god to exist yet. Real communication could be proof. Hearing voices isn't.

They don't have to prove it to you, taz. I am asking YOU, how YOU know God never communicated with man.

How do you know?

Where the proof?

Google the happiness advantage.

 

[Taz]

You said "science tells us...", silly me, I thought you actually had something.

I do. You are the one who has nothing.

So what science says? Where?

I already told you what it says, taz.

Success does not lead to happiness. Happiness leads to success.

Being thankful, reflective, meditative, active and performing random acts of kindness creates a happiness advantage. Look it up.

Stop blowing fartsmoke about what science says. Either you have a link or open a window, you must be suffocating from the smell.

No fartsmoke, taz.

Actual science. It's the reason us religious folk have a functional advantage over people like yourself.

You say "actual science", but what science? Where?

 

[ding]

I do. You are the one who has nothing.

So what science says? Where?

I already told you what it says, taz.

Success does not lead to happiness. Happiness leads to success.

Being thankful, reflective, meditative, active and performing random acts of kindness creates a happiness advantage. Look it up.

Stop blowing fartsmoke about what science says. Either you have a link or open a window, you must be suffocating from the smell.

No fartsmoke, taz.

Actual science. It's the reason us religious folk have a functional advantage over people like yourself.

You say "actual science", but what science? Where?

It's not that hard to find. It's like God in that regard.

 

[ding]

It seems that taz is uncomfortable with religious folk having a functional advantage over atheists

 

[ding]

The fact that religion has existed since the beginning of man in overwhelming numbers and in every culture ought to make people stop and recognize that religion provided functional advantages that non-religion did not provide.

 

[ding]

To see it any other way would defy logic, common sense, causality and natural selection.

 

[ding]

The fact that western civilization was built on Judaeo Christian values and has been the most successful civilization in the history of mankind should make people examine the connection.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

 

[ValerieYanez]

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

Yeah

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

Yeah

Yeah...you don't?

 

[ValerieYanez]

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

Yeah

Yeah...you don't?

Yes I know where babies come

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

Yeah

Yeah...you don't?

God made humans.

No. Humans invented gods.

Who made you? Yourself?

Uh...you don't know where babies come from?

Yeah

Yeah...you don't?

From God

 

[EGR one]

Your ignorance is proof of nothing. You blather on about how evil the God that you do not believe exists is. What next, a rant on the evil Santa Claus and his lawlessness for breaking into people's homes? Or perhaps we can learn that there really is no egg laying Easter bunny.

So you’re comparing your god to Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?Good for you.

Not hardly, but nice try anyway. Here is the $64,000 question. Why would you, and other obnoxious atheists, feel that it is somehow your duty to ascribe evil attributes to an entity that you do not believe exists?

I'm simply trying to understand why seemingly somewhat intelligent people believe in all the bullshit spewed out by the bible? I originally came here to see if believers had anything real to based their beliefs on, it turns out they don't, it's all just wishful thinking and fantasy. Now I'm more astonished that you folks so strongly believe these fairy tales that don't even make sense. The evil that I talk about is in the bible, I'm not ascribing anything to anyone on my own, that's done by the people who wrote the bible who said that god mass drowned on purpose everyone except Noah and his posse.

Is a lion evil? How about wolves and other predators? They kill without remorse, often in a very cruel way. Killing, even the killing of human beings, is only evil when the intent is evil. However, that is not really the question. Does the created have a right to question, or criticize, the motives of its creator?

Algebra doesn't make sense to a six year old, and neither ballet or opera make much sense to me. The Almighty God is so far beyond our feeble intelligence level that attempting to figure out why he does things is arrogant futility. One statement makes that clear to the most casual observer. "I am, I always have been, and I always will be." We are completely incapable of figuring out how that could possibly be.

God hasn't spoken to anyone, that's all written by men. You should up your critical thinking game.

Wow! You know that for certain? Someone just made it all up. Well, hell, your argument is complete, so why are you still here. Everything you know is written by men. Did that figure into your critical thinking, or are you incapable of critical thinking?

The God of the Bible exists, or the God of the Bible does not exist. There is no in between answer. If the God of the Bible exists, then the Bible is his word. Your opinion that he is evil, has to be based on the concept that he does exist. Otherwise, you are just another idiot who delights in insulting people you do not even know. Not a very nice personal characteristic.

 

[EGR one]

Not hardly, but nice try anyway. Here is the $64,000 question. Why would you, and other obnoxious atheists, feel that it is somehow your duty to ascribe evil attributes to an entity that you do not believe exists?

I'm simply trying to understand why seemingly somewhat intelligent people believe in all the bullshit spewed out by the bible? I originally came here to see if believers had anything real to based their beliefs on, it turns out they don't, it's all just wishful thinking and fantasy. Now I'm more astonished that you folks so strongly believe these fairy tales that don't even make sense. The evil that I talk about is in the bible, I'm not ascribing anything to anyone on my own, that's done by the people who wrote the bible who said that god mass drowned on purpose everyone except Noah and his posse.

Is a lion evil? How about wolves and other predators? They kill without remorse, often in a very cruel way. Killing, even the killing of human beings, is only evil when the intent is evil. However, that is not really the question. Does the created have a right to question, or criticize, the motives of its creator?

Algebra doesn't make sense to a six year old, and neither ballet or opera make much sense to me. The Almighty God is so far beyond our feeble intelligence level that attempting to figure out why he does things is arrogant futility. One statement makes that clear to the most casual observer. "I am, I always have been, and I always will be." We are completely incapable of figuring out how that could possibly be.

God hasn't spoken to anyone, that's all written by men. You should up your critical thinking game.

You know this how?

God hasn't yet been proven to exist. Therefore it cannot be quoted.

False Logic. God has yet to be proven to not exist. And, since the God in question is the God of the Bible, it can certainly be quoted, not to prove his existence, but to indicate why we are here.

 

[hobelim]

You claim to have a standard for what good is. You claim to adhere to the moral teachings of the bible. Why then do you violate the first commandment of God religiously as some sort of sign of love and devotion? How can you have the audacity to claim to be adhering to any standard? You worship another man, and you judge the sexual lives of others as sinful? Hello?

What a joker.

Either you are making a deliberate demonstration of defiance and hatred for God or you are extremely confused.

Either way what you are involved in is wholly immoral and is what leads to chaos and anarchy, bringing entire nations under the condemnation of God. Undiluted. With an illusion of liberty and the mockery of justice for all.

You worship and eat the work of human hands for spiritual life, mislead others to do the same, desecrate the teachings of Jesus, and perjure yourself in the name of God on a daily basis.

And think you are on your way to paradise and that you have chosen "the better portion"... Damn.

There aren't enough eucharists in the world to make up for what you lack in brains.

You are at enmity with yourself and with reality. You openly profess to be seeking eternal life by doing exactly what scripture openly teaches results in death. That is not a spiritual struggle. That is a mental illness.

So you have become a devout catholic, after rejecting it as false, and plan to take it to the grave this time. Brilliant! Obstinate stupidity has to be of some value to God whatever you do or whatever you call him. Thats the ticket!

As anyone with eyes can plainly see, you have your reward already.

No. I claim that there is a standard of good and that the Bible contains moral teachings. I don't claim to be a saint. Far from it I am a sinner.

But putting that aside loving Jesus does not violate those standards. I have not judged anyone either. I leave that for you to do, humanist.

I didn't say that you claimed to be a saint. You claim to be saved.

You say that you seek eternal life with Jesus and God yet you do the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches leads to that life. You're a dead man walking dude. Snap out of it.

I'm doing you a favor by making you look at yourself. If you feel judged its because you don't like what you have been made to see. Thats not me judging you, that you being convicted by your own conscience.

Somewhere along the line between what you want to do and what you actually do you made a wrong turn in your mind and got stuck in nowhere land keeping your hopes and expectations for receiving a pat on the back from God for doing what is right unfulfilled. For some mysterious reason you were diverted into compulsively doing what is wrong.

If you really wanted to know what it is like to live forever, be true to yourself, change course, get out of your grave, do what is right and start living now.

Wrong again, humanist. You do not know catholic belief. We aren't Protestant.

We don't know anyone's fate except the saints we know about.

I didn't read the rest because you started from a position of error.

Humanist? Is that a bad thing? Were you trying to put me down by calling me a humanist? Really? lol.. You value blind acceptance of dogma over rational thinking? Is that what you think is the better portion?

Damn..

You catholics lie about the dumbest things. Of course you read the rest of the post. Now go to confession and then immediately get down on your knees and practice idolatry to show God just how sorry you are for your sins.

Not at all. I am merely revealing what you are since you try so hard to disguise it.

No idoltry here, humanist.

Catholics love rational thought. It is humanists like yourself that are overly emotional.

The better portion leads to peace through storms.

Catholics love rational thought? lol...


How rational is it to go to confession in front of a priest to ask God to forgive you for having impure thoughts about sister mary elizabeth and then immediately get down on your knees and practice idolatry to show God just how sorry you are for your sins?

How rational is it to say you worship one God in three persons?

How rational is it to seek spiritual life from God by eating a lifeless matzo made by human hands?

How rational is it for you to claim to love rational thought?



Take your time.....

 

[ding]

No. I claim that there is a standard of good and that the Bible contains moral teachings. I don't claim to be a saint. Far from it I am a sinner.

But putting that aside loving Jesus does not violate those standards. I have not judged anyone either. I leave that for you to do, humanist.

I didn't say that you claimed to be a saint. You claim to be saved.

You say that you seek eternal life with Jesus and God yet you do the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches leads to that life. You're a dead man walking dude. Snap out of it.

I'm doing you a favor by making you look at yourself. If you feel judged its because you don't like what you have been made to see. Thats not me judging you, that you being convicted by your own conscience.

Somewhere along the line between what you want to do and what you actually do you made a wrong turn in your mind and got stuck in nowhere land keeping your hopes and expectations for receiving a pat on the back from God for doing what is right unfulfilled. For some mysterious reason you were diverted into compulsively doing what is wrong.

If you really wanted to know what it is like to live forever, be true to yourself, change course, get out of your grave, do what is right and start living now.

Wrong again, humanist. You do not know catholic belief. We aren't Protestant.

We don't know anyone's fate except the saints we know about.

I didn't read the rest because you started from a position of error.

Humanist? Is that a bad thing? Were you trying to put me down by calling me a humanist? Really? lol.. You value blind acceptance of dogma over rational thinking? Is that what you think is the better portion?

Damn..

You catholics lie about the dumbest things. Of course you read the rest of the post. Now go to confession and then immediately get down on your knees and practice idolatry to show God just how sorry you are for your sins.

Not at all. I am merely revealing what you are since you try so hard to disguise it.

No idoltry here, humanist.

Catholics love rational thought. It is humanists like yourself that are overly emotional.

The better portion leads to peace through storms.

Catholics love rational thought? lol...


How rational is it to go to confession in front of a priest to ask God to forgive you for having impure thoughts about sister mary elizabeth and then immediately get down on your knees and practice idolatry to show God just how sorry you are for your sins?

How rational is it to say you worship one God in three persons?

How rational is it to seek spiritual life from God by eating a lifeless matzo made by human hands?

How rational is it for you to claim to love rational thought?



Take your time.....

I don't need to take my time. There is a practical application of confessing one's sins out loud to another person. It releases the power that sin holds over us.

Perfectly logical.

Additionally, confessing one's sins is the first step in progressing as a human being. One cannot fix what one does not admit is broken.

Perfectly logical.

 

[ding]

How rational is it to say you worship one God in three persons?

PART ONE
THE PROFESSION OF FAITH

SECTION TWO
THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH

CHAPTER ONE
I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER

ARTICLE I
"I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH"

Paragraph 2. The Father

I. "IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT"

232 Christians are baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"53 Before receiving the sacrament, they respond to a three-part question when asked to confess the Father, the Son and the Spirit: "I do." "The faith of all Christians rests on the Trinity."54

233 Christians are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: not in their names,55 for there is only one God, the almighty Father, his only Son and the Holy Spirit: the Most Holy Trinity.

234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the "hierarchy of the truths of faith".56 The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men "and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin".57

235 This paragraph expounds briefly (I) how the mystery of the Blessed Trinity was revealed, (II) how the Church has articulated the doctrine of the faith regarding this mystery, and (III) how, by the divine missions of the Son and the Holy Spirit, God the Father fulfills the "plan of his loving goodness" of creation, redemption and sanctification.

236 The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology (theologia) and economy (oikonomia). "Theology" refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and "economy" to all the works by which God reveals himself and communicates his life. Through the oikonomia the theologia is revealed to us; but conversely, the theologia illuminates the whole oikonomia. God's works reveal who he is in himself; the mystery of his inmost being enlightens our understanding of all his works. So it is, analogously, among human persons. A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better we know a person, the better we understand his actions.

237 The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God".58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.

II. THE REVELATION OF GOD AS TRINITY

The Father revealed by the Son

238 Many religions invoke God as "Father". The deity is often considered the "father of gods and of men". In Israel, God is called "Father" inasmuch as he is Creator of the world.59 Even more, God is Father because of the covenant and the gift of the law to Israel, "his first-born son".60 God is also called the Father of the king of Israel. Most especially he is "the Father of the poor", of the orphaned and the widowed, who are under his loving protection.61

239 By calling God "Father", the language of faith indicates two main things: that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; and that he is at the same time goodness and loving care for all his children. God's parental tenderness can also be expressed by the image of motherhood,62 which emphasizes God's immanence, the intimacy between Creator and creature. The language of faith thus draws on the human experience of parents, who are in a way the first representatives of God for man. But this experience also tells us that human parents are fallible and can disfigure the face of fatherhood and motherhood. We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard:63 no one is father as God is Father.

240 Jesus revealed that God is Father in an unheard-of sense: he is Father not only in being Creator; he is eternally Father in relation to his only Son, who is eternally Son only in relation to his Father: "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."64

241 For this reason the apostles confess Jesus to be the Word: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"; as "the image of the invisible God"; as the "radiance of the glory of God and the very stamp of his nature".65

242 Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325) that the Son is "consubstantial" with the Father, that is, one only God with him.66 The second ecumenical council, held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed "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".67

The Father and the Son revealed by the Spirit

243 Before his Passover, Jesus announced the sending of "another Paraclete" (Advocate), the Holy Spirit. At work since creation, having previously "spoken through the prophets", the Spirit will now be with and in the disciples, to teach them and guide them "into all the truth".68 The Holy Spirit is thus revealed as another divine person with Jesus and the Father.

244 The eternal origin of the Holy Spirit is revealed in his mission in time. The Spirit is sent to the apostles and to the Church both by the Father in the name of the Son, and by the Son in person, once he had returned to the Father.69 The sending of the person of the Spirit after Jesus' glorification70 reveals in its fullness the mystery of the Holy Trinity.

245 The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was confessed by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father."71By this confession, the Church recognizes the Father as "the source and origin of the whole divinity".72 But the eternal origin of the Spirit is not unconnected with the Son's origin: "The Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, is God, one and equal with the Father and the Son, of the same substance and also of the same nature. . . Yet he is not called the Spirit of the Father alone,. . . but the Spirit of both the Father and the Son."73 The Creed of the Church from the Council of Constantinople confesses: "With the Father and the Son, he is worshipped and glorified."74

246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75

247 The affirmation of the filioque does not appear in the Creed confessed in 381 at Constantinople. But Pope St. Leo I, following an ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, had already confessed it dogmatically in 447,76 even before Rome, in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, came to recognize and receive the Symbol of 381. The use of this formula in the Creed was gradually admitted into the Latin liturgy (between the eighth and eleventh centuries). The introduction of the filioque into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed by the Latin liturgy constitutes moreover, even today, a point of disagreement with the Orthodox Churches.

248 At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he "who proceeds from the Father", it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.77 The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, "legitimately and with good reason",78 for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle",79 is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.80 This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.

III. THE HOLY TRINITY IN THE TEACHING OF THE FAITH

The formation of the Trinitarian dogma

249 From the beginning, the revealed truth of the Holy Trinity has been at the very root of the Church's living faith, principally by means of Baptism. It finds its expression in the rule of baptismal faith, formulated in the preaching, catechesis and prayer of the Church. Such formulations are already found in the apostolic writings, such as this salutation taken up in the Eucharistic liturgy: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."81

250 During the first centuries the Church sought to clarify her Trinitarian faith, both to deepen her own understanding of the faith and to defend it against the errors that were deforming it. This clarification was the work of the early councils, aided by the theological work of the Church Fathers and sustained by the Christian people's sense of the faith.

251 In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: "substance", "person" or "hypostasis", "relation" and so on. In doing this, she did not submit the faith to human wisdom, but gave a new and unprecedented meaning to these terms, which from then on would be used to signify an ineffable mystery, "infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand".82

252 The Church uses (I) the term "substance" (rendered also at times by "essence" or "nature") to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term "person" or "hypostasis" to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term "relation" to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

The dogma of the Holy Trinity

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".83 The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87 They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.

255 The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: "In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance."89 Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."90 "Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son."91

256 St. Gregory of Nazianzus, also called "the Theologian", entrusts this summary of Trinitarian faith to the catechumens of Constantinople:

Above all guard for me this great deposit of faith for which I live and fight, which I want to take with me as a companion, and which makes me bear all evils and despise all pleasures: I mean the profession of faith in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. I entrust it to you today. By it I am soon going to plunge you into water and raise you up from it. I give it to you as the companion and patron of your whole life. I give you but one divinity and power, existing one in three, and containing the three in a distinct way. Divinity without disparity of substance or nature, without superior degree that raises up or inferior degree that casts down. . . the infinite co-naturality of three infinites. Each person considered in himself is entirely God. . . the three considered together. . . I have not even begun to think of unity when the Trinity bathes me in its splendor. I have not even begun to think of the Trinity when unity grasps me. . .92

 

[ding]

^ perfectly logical