Another vicious, inaccurate, and contradictory New York Times attack on Pope Benedict

catholicculture.org ^ | July 2, 2010 | Phil Lawler

[Alamo-Girl]

Once more.

Humility, not pride:

O LORD our Lord, how excellent [is] thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens.

Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.

When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all [things] under his feet: All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, [and whatsoever] passeth through the paths of the seas.

O LORD our Lord, how excellent [is] thy name in all the earth! - Psalms 8

To God be the glory, not man, never man.

[kosta50]

Of course, neither the theology of original sin in its Augustinian version, or immaculate conception of Mary is spelled out with any precision in the Holy Scripture. Both are supported by it but not uniquely mandated by it

Right, they are a result, or rather a consequence, of an ambigiuous verse (Rom 5:12) which can be correctly read in two different ways. So, right there goes the idea that the scriptures inherently have a clear meaning (even in the original language).

The original language allows us to see the meaning in relation to other possible meanings. For example, both "ordain" (τάσσω) and "prepare" (ἑτοιμάζω) are used in the original New Testament

I didn't follow the discussion you had with Dr. E vis-a-vis Eph 2:10. But I would like observe that the same προετοιμάζω which in KJV Eph 2:10 reads as "before ordained" is translated in Rom 9:23 as "afore prepared".

What we have here is an example of two different English words, with distinctly different meaning ("ordain" carries the weight of a decree; "prepared" doesn't.), created by the translation out of one and the same word in the original.

[Alamo-Girl]

Again, I must bring the words of God to bear. They just keep surfacing within me.

Truly, if we refuse to humble ourselves, He will humble us:

And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. - Matthew 3:9

And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, [and] to prove thee, to know what [was] in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no. – Deut 8:2

For the day of the LORD of hosts [shall be] upon every [one that is] proud and lofty, and upon every [one that is] lifted up; and he shall be brought low: - Isaiah 2:12

And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, [saying, It is] the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. – Acts 12:21-23

And again,

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. – 2 Cor 12:7-10

To God be the glory, not man, never man.

[kosta50]

I've not seen you hold back before, nor has the reception of your ideas seemed to make you shy about expressing them.

I am not holding back, I just don't want to get bogged down in another time-consuming marathon discussion with half a dozen or more individuals at this time. I just don't have the time right now.

Suffice it to say that no matter how much you try you will never make a quilt look like something made out of one piece. It will always be something stitched together.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

"And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory" -- Romans 9:23

Same thing as "ordain." God "prepared unto glory" those vessels He had created to display His mercy.

Men spend a lot of time and effort trying to divest God of His choices and give that ability to men.

Paul tells us clearly God has created one man to illustrate His mercy and one man to illustrate His judgment. For no reason in themselves (or salvation would be reward and not mercy,) but only for His own good pleasure, God gives the former eyes to see, ears to hear, a heart of flesh and a renewed mind to know the things of God, to repent and believe to the saving of his soul.

The latter God leaves to his own devices which is exactly where all men want to be unless and until they've been reborn by the Holy Spirit which is God's choice, not men's.

I realize this is jarring to free-will synergists who've bought the line that men are captains of their own fate. Thankfully, that is not true, or we'd all go down with the ship.

"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" -- 1 Corinthians 4:7

[shibumi]

"Suffice it to say that no matter how much you try you will never make a quilt look like something made out of one piece. It will always be something stitched together."

And with that, dear brother, you have hit on what makes the Body of Scripture so miraculous.

That a document of so many parts, from so many authors shows the guidance of a single Divine Hand in its construction. That it should tell a story so simple on the literal level that a child can understand it, yet contain so many levels of meaning, up to and including hyperdimensional formulae and the source of mystical inspiration.

No other effort of combined writing could have been so successful and compelling, nor told a story that withstands the test of time, heresy, apostasy and simple human error.

No matter how it may be patched together, or how many people try to pick out inaccuracies in subtle translation, the story of Divine Love for mankind and the ultimate sacrifice to achieve redemption shines through.

I know it kind of bugs you that so many people can derive this inspiration from something you view as cobbled together and defective, but you are viewing it through the eyes of an adult.

In your attempt to deny the truth of the story, you have provided a living example of the truth of Christ's words in Matthew 18:3 Unless you change in heart and become as little children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

There's plenty of room for you here on the playground, brother.

[Alamo-Girl]

Well and truly said, dear brother in Christ!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

That a document of so many parts, from so many authors shows the guidance of a single Divine Hand in its construction. That it should tell a story so simple on the literal level that a child can understand it, yet contain so many levels of meaning, up to and including hyperdimensional formulae and the source of mystical inspiration.

No other effort of combined writing could have been so successful and compelling, nor told a story that withstands the test of time, heresy, apostasy and simple human error.

No matter how it may be patched together, or how many people try to pick out inaccuracies in subtle translation, the story of Divine Love for mankind and the ultimate sacrifice to achieve redemption shines through.

AMEN!

As my husband reminds me, Christianity is the only faith that actually brings with it true contentment and peace of mind because Christ accomplished for us what we cannot do for ourselves.

If this is made known to us by a "quilt," then it is a quilt whose compilation is a unified whole, capable of covering all of Christ's flock and bringing them to a saving faith.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol. My choice has been made. It’s pretty clear. I can’t help it if you missed it. Or why.

[D-fendr]

I didn’t miss your choice.

And.... Q.E.D. yet again.

thanks for your replies.

[betty boop]

That a document of so many parts, from so many authors shows the guidance of a single Divine Hand in its construction. That it should tell a story so simple on the literal level that a child can understand it, yet contain so many levels of meaning, up to and including hyperdimensional formulae and the source of mystical inspiration.

Plus no part of it contradicts any other part. The Holy Scriptures are amazingly correlated, wholly congruent, and mutually reinforcing.

This is not accidental. Though there were many "pens," all were used by "a single Divine Hand."

Thank you ever so much, dear brother in Christ, for your wonderful insights!

[Alamo-Girl]

This is not accidental. Though there were many "pens," all were used by "a single Divine Hand."

Amen!!!

Thank you for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!

[TXnMA]

Outstanding posts! Thank you!!

(A-G & bb: FReepMail for you...)

[kosta50]

Same thing as "ordain

Ordain and prepare are not synonyms. The former carries the weight of a binding decree. But if we are to create concordance by s t r e t c h i n g the meaning than anything can be made smooth. It is still a human decision that alters the original text.

Your argument reminds me of Sara Palin latest gaff. She coined a word "refudiate" the way our G W coined "misunderestimate." (I guess both "used to could" speak proper English!). Instead of admitting the misspoke, because eh obviously either tried to say repudiate or refuse, her comeback was that English is a 'living" language, so i guess we can all jump right in an start creating neologisms as we see fit!

It's simple, KJV made a mistake: it translated one and the same word with two different words and meanings, and thereby altered the supposedly inspired choice of the author. The plain fact is: hetoimazo does not mean ordain.

[TXnMA]

"The spiritual eye, however seeks meaning."

I hope we agree that is the purpose of this discussion.

"Since Christ chose each one of us, each one of us is the center of the Created world."

1. We begin with a serious semantic problem:
   • To me, (and to many other believer / observers) the term, "center" refers to a single, unique point.

   • To you, (if I understand you correctly) there are as many "centers of the Created world" as there are Christ-chosen believers. I have attempted to illustrate the two views in the graphic which follows...

2. You begin by defining me in terms that I deem to be most unfair, unrealistic, and inaccurate:

   "The disease you have is called scientism: a superstitious belief that the methods of natural sciences are solely capable of informing man of the truth. "

   • You depict me -- a fellow Believer -- as "diseased". Is that your version of Christian (Christ-like) charity?

   • Although I freely admit to being a retired scientist, (physical chemist) I denounce the "superstition of 'scientism' of which you accuse me.

   • Alamo-girl and betty boop have both read my (quite lengthy) testimony of the "Damascus road encounter" wherein God redirected me from (misconstrued by me) pursuit of a divinity degree -- toward a personal lifetime calling to be a physical scientist and witness for Him through study of His Creation. If they feel so led, they can testify to the accuracy / inaccuracy of your (mis)characterization of me...

3. I'm not at all sure I understand your concept of "the Created world". Do you mean this world (Earth)? Please enlighten us...

---

The large, gray circle, with its unique "THE Center" point accurately depicts my viewpoint.

I have attempted to illustrate what I understand your viewpoint to be by depcting "believer-centers" as multiple yellow circles.

Of course, if I have undertood you correctly, that would constitute many millions (?billions?) of such "centers" since the advent of our Lord -- strewn about a volume extending out to the backside of the moon, and "strung out" across space-time like a jet contrail following their convoluted path of motion through space-time... [I "gave up" on trying to illustrate THAT on a 2-D screen...] ;-)

Oh, BTW, where would God, our Father and Creator, fit in that diagram?

~~~~~~~~~~

Please pardon my mental density -- but your concept defies any definition of "the center" I have ever encountered... And, please pardon the delayed response; I do have a life beyond FR... '-)

[TXnMA]

Incoming! ‘-)

[stfassisi]

It's simple, KJV made a mistake: it translated one and the same word with two different words and meanings, and thereby altered the supposedly inspired choice of the author. The plain fact is: hetoimazo does not mean ordain.

Thus making it obvious that SOLO KJV is not the inspired word of God in many cases- that often leads to error

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Are you asking me to choose? How do recommend I go about doing that?

You pick one or the other.

Got that? And the choice will all be yours.

At the same time, that choice will all be part of the plan of God which He ordained for His creation from before the foundation of the world.

That's what Scripture teaches. Do we understand perfectly?

No. One day, but not now. And yet that incomplete understanding gives men a tremendous sense of comfort and confidence in the future because we know Romans 8:28 is true. "For we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."

I pity those who miss this Christian assurance God has given His children and affirmed through Christ.

"For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." -- Acts 17:28

Now, getting back to your "demonstration." You maintained you could prove free will. And you have failed.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Pray for ears to hear the meaning of those words. So far, you’re missing it.

[D-fendr]

You maintained you could prove free will.

What is this the third or fourth time? No, I asked you a question:

If Free Will was demonstrated to be true, would you accept it?

The point of course was for you to demonstrate it by answering the question. Which you obliged.

You pick one or the other. Got that? And the choice will all be yours.

Got it. And thanks again for the demonstration.

But, it seems, your answer to the question is "No."

thanks for your reply.