Posted on 08/27/2010 11:45:13 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
THX for your kind and Biblical response.
It's as if John Paul II had a ghost writer...
Sorry for the length of the excerpt which follows:
This is why the Christian's relationship to philosophy requires thorough-going discernment. In the New Testament, especially in the Letters of Saint Paul, one thing emerges with great clarity: the opposition between “the wisdom of this world” and the wisdom of God revealed in Jesus Christ. The depth of revealed wisdom disrupts the cycle of our habitual patterns of thought, which are in no way able to express that wisdom in its fullness.
The beginning of the First Letter to the Corinthians poses the dilemma in a radical way. The crucified Son of God is the historic event upon which every attempt of the mind to construct an adequate explanation of the meaning of existence upon merely human argumentation comes to grief. The true key-point, which challenges every philosophy, is Jesus Christ's death on the Cross. It is here that every attempt to reduce the Father's saving plan to purely human logic is doomed to failure. “Where is the one who is wise? Where is the learned? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Cor 1:20), the Apostle asks emphatically. The wisdom of the wise is no longer enough for what God wants to accomplish; what is required is a decisive step towards welcoming something radically new: “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise...; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not to reduce to nothing things that are” (1 Cor 1:27-28). Human wisdom refuses to see in its own weakness the possibility of its strength; yet Saint Paul is quick to affirm: “When I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor 12:10). Man cannot grasp how death could be the source of life and love; yet to reveal the mystery of his saving plan God has chosen precisely that which reason considers “foolishness” and a “scandal”. Adopting the language of the philosophers of his time, Paul comes to the summit of his teaching as he speaks the paradox: “God has chosen in the world... that which is nothing to reduce to nothing things that are” (cf. 1 Cor 1:28). In order to express the gratuitous nature of the love revealed in the Cross of Christ, the Apostle is not afraid to use the most radical language of the philosophers in their thinking about God. Reason cannot eliminate the mystery of love which the Cross represents, while the Cross can give to reason the ultimate answer which it seeks. It is not the wisdom of words, but the Word of Wisdom which Saint Paul offers as the criterion of both truth and salvation.
The wisdom of the Cross, therefore, breaks free of all cultural limitations which seek to contain it and insists upon an openness to the universality of the truth which it bears. What a challenge this is to our reason, and how great the gain for reason if it yields to this wisdom! Of itself, philosophy is able to recognize the human being's ceaselessly self-transcendent orientation towards the truth; and, with the assistance of faith, it is capable of accepting the “foolishness” of the Cross as the authentic critique of those who delude themselves that they possess the truth, when in fact they run it aground on the shoals of a system of their own devising. The preaching of Christ crucified and risen is the reef upon which the link between faith and philosophy can break up, but it is also the reef beyond which the two can set forth upon the boundless ocean of truth. Here we see not only the border between reason and faith, but also the space where the two may meet.
That's an excerpt of "Fides et Ratio" (Faith and Reason), usually the writing of JPII is too cerebral for me but in this encyclical there's a lot that even I can understand without needing a theologian to explain it to me.
I apologize.
From now on, I will tend to my own failings.
Human philosophy has no place in the Truth of God...This is crazy talk...
hat's an excerpt of "Fides et Ratio" (Faith and Reason), usually the writing of JPII is too cerebral for me but in this encyclical there's a lot that even I can understand without needing a theologian to explain it to me.
If you'd dump the philosophical theologians and concentrate on what God says, you wouldn't need to hunt for someone to explain the scriptures to you...
1Co 2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by (our study of fallen human philosophy??? NO, but by) his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
1Co 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
They are not philosophically discerned but spiritually discerned...You might want to ask yourself if that is why you need a reasoning philosopher to explain his version of the scriptures to you...
The only thing human philosophy serves his man. And doctrines of men. It serves to shore up faulty teachings and deceitful workings of men who desire above all, to 'help' God in His plan for mankind. He does not need nor does He desire man's help. And yet, on and on man toils, bringing Him the fruit of their hands. And wait for Him to smile thankfully on them.
You would be well advised to ponder MT 7 21:22 when Jesus plainly states that ones who utter the types of blasphemies, that prideful and presumptuous pagans pronounce, will not be entering eternal salvation.In addition Lk 18 17:18 describes the conduct you must adopt to enter the eternal realm and it appears that you and associates fall far short.
Have you and the associates considered the alternates locations which might suit your needs which have been honed and shaped by the father of all lies?
Your cherry picking bible references in no manner supports your UFO like contentions of completed justification. What bible quote can your sinful pride convolute to justify that presumptuous statement? None, since you merely conjure up prideful interpretations to rationalize your sinfulness. How Satan deceives the weak.
Perhaps some existence with 73 virgins or becoming you own god in a celestial state of UFO ecstasy would be more appropriate.
I certainly forgive you.
Though, honestly and seriously, I rather have folks point out my flaws. I grow that way.
However, I don’t automatically roll over and play dead believing things that aren’t true. A convincing case has to be made.
The issue you were digging at—pride in such a context about such matters—just happens to be mostly off base.
I can understand mystified disbelief of that assertion by a host of RC’s. However, I’m responsible for the truth about myself, not folks’ fantasies and misunderstandings.
Thankfully, The Lord Himself knows the mud I was dug from. And HE KNOWS how intensely HE HAS RUBBED MY FACE IN MY OWN CRUD very enlightenlingly.
Which, BTW, is ONE of the reasons I’m such a generous face mud rubber on behalf of others in need of growth. LOL.
That contains MANY Good points.
THX THX.
GREAT POINTS.
THX. THX.
I rebuke such horrifically inaccurate and arrogantly toned assertions on their transparent face . . .
in the Name of Jesus The Christ.
Know-nothing ignorance has no place outside of the nursery. A complete lack of reading comprehension is pretty useless too: In order to express the gratuitous nature of the love revealed in the Cross of Christ, the Apostle is not afraid to use the most radical language of the philosophers in their thinking about God. Reason cannot eliminate the mystery of love which the Cross represents, while the Cross can give to reason the ultimate answer which it seeks. It is not the wisdom of words, but the Word of Wisdom which Saint Paul offers as the criterion of both truth and salvation.
For goodness sake, read what's actually there.
lol. There's nothing "simple" about that kind of blindness. It's cavernous and deadly.
You wrote: "The Encyclical ('Charity in Truth') was never for sale."
I showed you the book and the book's publishing house and the price tag for that book.
So your disbelief over this book's publication mirrors your disbelief that I have a $7 copy of this book.
All this just goes to illustrate the Roman Catholic apologist's stubborn refusal to see, hear and know the truth.
As God wills.
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." -- 2 Thess. 2:10-12"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
Philosophy and reason itself are subject to the Logos, the Word of Truth, which is our Salvation. John Paul II is here clearly stating that "man is not the measure," and cannot be the measure. Certainly the brilliant and philosophically well-educated Saint Paul knew that HE was not the measure, and never could be....
Where is the one who is wise? Where is the learned? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?Thank you so much, Legatus, for this splendid excerpt from Fides et Ratio!
You and the Semple one exhibit the same characteristics which occasioned her fall from grace and led to the ridicule of her denomination. Don't be a “Soiled Dove” weighted down by the sins of pride and presumption. Jesus came to save you, so REPENT.
All this just goes to illustrate the Roman Catholic apologist’s stubborn refusal to see, hear and know the truth.
THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE MOST SHOCKING AND MYSTIFYING THINGS ON FR, TO ME. I’d have never guessed remotely rational, remotely intelligent “Christians” could be any where near that guilty of such a hideous silliness.
Far too many of the RC’s seem to work hard to prove that assumption of mine wrong seemingly 24/7
Thanks for persisting in displaying so vividly
such brazenly flawed assumptions so relentlessly.
It helps to paint the rabid cliques with a very fitting broad brush for the lurkers.
From where sit, THAT would be the straw dog.
And it's important to distinguish between the proposition "reason errs" and "Man errs in his use of reason."
Most of us have seen the math proof demonstrating that 2 + 2 can equal 5.
I have not. I would like to.
I have seen these, what, advices not to depend on human reason, or that it doesn't apply in this or that sort of instance. But it seems that its inapplicability is alleged when reason seems to lead to a conclusion which is deemed problematic.
If I say "(1)Mary is the mother of Jesus; (2)Jesus is God; (3) Mary is the mother of God," and THEN somebody says that is leaning to my own understanding, or whatever the phrase is, how am to know when I am leaning to my own understanding and when not? What is the 'canon' and how is it applied?
Can anybody explain this? Can it be explained reasonably? These are real questions, I am not thinking three moves ahead. I just don't see how the case goes from your side.
Roamer_1 says, Human reason has it's place, no doubt, but that place is not in trying to discern the things of YHWH.
Is that statement a "thing of YHWH?"
In fact, it is a much more grave error to disbelieve the word of God and to doubt Christ's atoning work on the cross on behalf of His sheep who have been named and numbered by God from before the foundation of the world.
Repent of that disbelief. It's unGodly. Read the Bible and know the truth.
That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work." -- 2 Thess. 2:10-17"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Bible-believing Christians are secure in Paul's teaching that they possess "good hope through grace" in the everlasting love Christ has shown them "from the beginning."
And before we hear from the RC apologists touting Paul's assertion of "tradition," let us remember that this "tradition" encompasses the teaching of Christ and His apostles, and not the fictitious doctrines of men which Rome has spent centuries concocting in contradiction to the word of God.
As Calvin wrote of this verse in his commentary on 2 Thess. 2:14...
Papists, however, act a foolish part in gathering from this that their traditions ought to be observed. They reason, indeed, in this manner — that if it was allowable for Paul to enjoin traditions, it was allowable also for other teachers; and that, if it was a pious thing to observe the former, the latter also ought not less to be observed. Granting them, however, that Paul speaks of precepts belonging to the external government of the Church, I say that they were, nevertheless, not contrived by him, but divinely communicated. For he declares elsewhere, (1 Corinthians 7:35,) that it was not his intention to ensnare consciences, as it was not lawful, either for himself, or for all the Apostles together. They act a still more ridiculous part in making it their aim to pass off, under this, the abominable sink of their own superstitions, as though they were the traditions of Paul. But farewell to these trifles, when we are in possession of Paul’s true meaning. And we may judge in part from this Epistle what traditions he here recommends, for he says — whether by word, that is, discourse, or by epistle. Now, what do these Epistles contain but pure doctrine, which overturns to the very foundation the whole of the Papacy, and every invention that is at variance with the simplicity of the Gospel?"...The context, however, as I have said, requires that it be taken here to mean the whole of that doctrine in which they had been instructed. For the matter treated of is the most important of all — that their faith may remain secure in the midst of a dreadful agitation of the Church.
The core of this thread is the LOVE demanded by Jesus and your failure to exhibit what is demanded by Jesus saddens us all. Your deportment in this existence must reflect the Love of Jesus. Your vitriolic posts, replete with cartoons illustrate the venom of Satan devoid of this love demanded by the Master.
You need to excise the venom of the father of all lies which appears to consume you without abatement. We will all pray that your heart is receptive to the Holy Spirit. God Bless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.