You wrote, “Tom, OK – so, in a dream, you were told that God “is not a dictation machine.” That’s exactly what the Church teaches. You also assert that “only [you] could say” that this is the case? Hmm… I appreciate that you feel inspired to assert this fact about God, and inspired to evangelize about this, but… “only [you] can say” this?Hmm. That’s… odd.”
That is not even close to what I wrote, what I wrote was that I was told that “only I could say it”, I wasn’t told what the “it” was. The comment that I made about God NOT being like a big dictation machine in the sky was to point out that what I was to say wasn’t even told to me but that what I would say could only be said by me, God knows why and I have to trust God to see me thru.
You then wrote, “No – we know that God isn’t constrained by His sacraments and His doctrines; we know that God works by His own devices. However, that doesn’t mean that “we are telling God … how God can do things” – it means that we are affirming the ways that God has told us about how He does things! And, we know this through the teaching of the Apostles!”
What your answer affirms is that you are saying that God can only work the way or ways that you or whoever has figured out God has told you that God works, what if God wishes to do something that isn’t confined to what you or whoever has figured out?
You then wrote, “Yes, Jesus is God. Yes, God is a Trinity. But, you cannot assert special revelation about the nature of God, since we know God through His public revelation.”
I can and will assert what I feel led by God to assert, there were plenty in Jesus’s Day that didn’t care for what He asserted and they, pretty much, told Him to cease and desist, did He? By the way, what did I assert about the “nature of God” that you disagree with? Not only is it God’s Plan but ALL of creation is God’s.
You also wrote, “I’d like to offer you the opportunity to reflect on these statements: yes, Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist, Jesus (the second person of the Trinity) and the Father (the first person of the Trinity) are distinct; but, it’s not a personal revelation from the Holy Spirit to you – God revealed this to us all through Public Revelation and the Apostolic Teaching that is the Deposit of the Faith.”
You are wrong, it was a “personal revelation from the Holy Spirit to” me that the Catholic Eucharist Is Jesus, I was taught about the Eucharist and I believed it but I did not “know” until the Holy Spirit revealed this to me, the words (know and believe) do NOT mean the same thing, even one who fervently believes does not “know”.
You wrote, “Yes, salvation is from God. The means of salvation, however, are not static: the means vary, and the Church has taught us what these various means are. Are you asserting that the Church has not taught us this? Or that the Church is unable to teach us this? Or that your private revelation trumps what the Church has taught us?”
I am saying that Salvation is a “gift from God” and that no one can earn it.
You wrote, “Yes. However, this doesn’t address our current debate, which is the means by which salvation is attained! The fact that the Church is able to definitively declare some in heaven, and the fact that the Church never declares that certain individuals are in hell, isn’t relevant to this discussion!”
Definitely something to “ponder”.
You wrote, "Ouch…! No, Jesus didn’t give up his divine attributes! Rather, he set them aside, in order to fully embrace his human nature! In heaven, Jesus now has ‘regained all His Omni’s’!!! "
Set them aside, gave them up voluntarily when He became One of us, merely semantics, what I was simply trying to point out is that Jesus was not Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Omniscient when Incarnated and apparently even after the Resurrection, He still wan’t Omniscient since when He was asked when He was coming back, He replied, “I don’t know, the Angels in heaven don’t know, only the Father knows”; concerning the present, I don’t know one way or the other if He knows when He’ll be back.