Tuesday, September 5, 2023

A Catholic Challenges an Orthodox : Who's Most YEC?


Orthodox Saints on Evolution
Bottom Of The Rabbit Hole, 1 Sept. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYRUcWYJMog


5:22 Did the Orthodox ever condemn Heliocentrism, like Catholics did in 1633?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
11:37 John of Valaam was mentioning birds created on day V.

Now, some birds, and some fish, both of them created on day five, have an innate system of orientation, which they navigate by the stars.

How could this be if the stars, created the day before, were millions of light years away?

But if they were just one light day up, it could very easily be.

Do you have a reason to present stars as millions of light years away? Consistent Heliocentrics do. Geocentrics don't.

Bottom Of The Rabbit Hole
I don't believe stars are millions of light years away.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Good, @bottomoftherabbithole .

Then you should also not believe the methods used to come to such conclusion.

On a certain level of approaches, it involves saying "alpha Centauri is 4 light years away, 61Cygni is 11 light years away, Vega is 24 light years away" - and postulating this matches each of them being the real size of the sun, and of how distance could be then further calculated by apparent size ...

But "alpha Centauri is 4 light years away" is deduced from believing we observe the star from different angles in summer and winter.

Bottom Of The Rabbit Hole
@hglundahl I'm really not sure what you're ultimately getting at here. I don't accept those methods

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Then, @bottomoftherabbithole ... you should also not accept that Earth rotates around itself, rather than the universe around it, or orbits around the Sun, rather than the Sun around the Zodiac.

You should therefore accept that St. Robert Bellarmine in 1616 and the inquisitors in 1633 were right to condemn books by Galileo, and the second time, to require he abjured the error, swore before God to no longer hold the error.

Bottom Of The Rabbit Hole
@hglundahl I'm an enclosed cosmologist. I don't know what kind of trap you think you're setting for me here lol


16:11 It can be noted, the late Rev. Bryan Houghton (who refused to say the new liturgy imposed on most in 1969), compared Evolution to Buddhism.

Saturday, September 2, 2023

Ages or Names Symbolic?


Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Ussher III · Φιλολoγικά / Philologica: Numeric Symbolism in Genesis 5 Patriarchs? · HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Number Symbolism in Genesis 5? · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Ages or Names Symbolic?

My Question
Are Orthodox Jews saying Patriarcal Ages in Genesis 5 and 11 have number symbolism?
https://www.quora.com/Are-Orthodox-Jews-saying-Patriarcal-Ages-in-Genesis-5-and-11-have-number-symbolism


Answer I

Al Berko
Completely Jewish
Aug 27
Technically, they have to. For many different reasons:

  1. Truthfulness: Today’s criteria for the truthfulness of claims are very different from the ancient world - we know sciences and we don’t like to be BS-ed. While the Rabbinic tradition is pretty much literalistic, once they confront reasoning and common sense they resort to Biblical metaphorism.
  2. Gnostic tradition: If you read the Torah back to back unbiasedly, you will very quickly realize how dull, primitive, philosophically and theologically shallow it is, especially after the Exodus story. Rabbis already realized that in the 2nd century BCE, so they adopted the Gnostic approach of presenting the Torah as codes and metaphors of “deep divine secrets”. Philo was probably the first written source of such an approach to the scripture.
  3. Greek numerology: Rabbis loved cracking numbers and numerology (aka Heb. Gematria=”Gamma means three”) and applied it extensively for interpreting the text. Unfortunately, Rabbinic mathematics didn’t develop beyond basic arithmetic.


Practically, most Orthodox skip this part altogether as meaningless. Pre-Abrahamic stories have no Halachic (law-pertaining) value, so they don’t bother the followers of Rabbinic Judaism too much.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Aug 28 2023
Oh, thank you.

That was very enlightening.

“Pre-Abrahamic stories have no Halachic (law-pertaining) value, so they don’t bother the followers of Rabbinic Judaism too much.”

A solution which is not open to Catholics, obviously (II Tim 3:16 and Trent Session IV).

I take it you don’t know of any specific number symbolisms commonly or even less commonly used?

One more … Genesis 14, being Abrahamic, and having Halachic value is strictly taken as historical, right?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Aug 28 2023
“Philo was probably the first written source of such an approach to the scripture.”

Does he give any specific symbolism for the patriarcal ages in Genesis 5 or 11?

Answer II

Yehoshua Feigon
Translator and Language Coach; Kosher Food Manager
Wed 30.VIII.2023
The ages may or may not, but some of the names do. Isaac in Hebrew (יצחק) has an exact numerical value of 208, 8 times the value of the Divine name (26). His son Jacob’s name (יעקב) has a numerical value of precisely 182, 7 times the value of the Divine name. His son Joseph’s name (יוסף) has a numerical value of 156, exactly 6 times the value of the Divine name.

With regard to the ages themselves: we are told that Abraham passed away early, to spare him seeing the apostasy of his grandson Esau, and we are told that Jacob’s lifespan was reduced by one year for every word of complaint that he made to Pharaoh. I don’t know if this is helpful.


While he didn't allow me to comment, it was in fact very helpful. No, there is no Jewish tradition that we Christian Fundamentalists miss out on, about patriarcal ages having a purely symbolic value.

Tolkien Died Fifty Years Ago


Two questions on quora:

Q I
What evidence is there that J.R.R. Tolkien based his world on Earth?
https://www.quora.com/What-evidence-is-there-that-J-R-R-Tolkien-based-his-world-on-Earth/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
avid reader back when I had better sleep than now
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
From Lord of the Rings, volume I, The Fellowship of the Ring, “Prologue, Concerning Hobbits”

Those days, the Third Age of Middle-earth, are now long past, and the shape of all lands has been changed; but the regions in which Hobbits then lived were doubtless the same as those in which they still linger: the North-West of the Old World, east of the Sea.


The “Old World” means what was known to Europeans without crossing the Atlantic. A k a Europe, Asia and Africa (though not all parts of the latter two were known).

In a letter, he also says that Minas Tirith was about the latitude of Rome, but further West.

Q II
Did J.R.R. Tolkien base his story about dwarves, elves and humans on real history?
https://www.quora.com/Did-J-R-R-Tolkien-base-his-story-about-dwarves-elves-and-humans-on-real-history/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
none/ apprx Masters in Latin (language) & Greek (language), Lund University
2.IX.2023
He based it on recurrent themes in real history.

He did not base a single story on a real event told in its own place and time, or the closest he came to it was the sinking of Númenor as the sinking of Atlantis, everything around that being reconstruction from other events.

Probably he based sinking of Númenor partly on the Flood of Noah as well, though it is a less good match, and therefore conditions in Númenor just before the sinking on what he considered pre-Flood conditions in the light of Genesis 6 and Matthew 24.

Then he based lots of more things on how that would have branched out backwards and forwards, again using unrelated material from the real world. Imagine you took an imaginary war based in part on American Civil War and in Part on World War Two … Hitler and Jefferson Davis were both “on the racist side” and yet very different - how would you handle it? That’s about how little JRRT’s stories resemble real events in their real times, but also how he came to make it so like real events in the succession of moral phases and tactics and things.

Q III
Did J.R.R. Tolkien create multiple languages for Middle-Earth?
https://www.quora.com/Did-J-R-R-Tolkien-create-multiple-languages-for-Middle-Earth/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
none/ apprx Masters in Latin (language) & Greek (language), Lund University
Fri, 8.IX.2023
Nativity of Our Lady
  1. No, he created them for his own pleasure and then he created Middle-Earth for them, along with Aman and Númenor.
  2. No, he never created full languages which one can communicate in without going beyond what he created.
  3. Yes, he created Sindarin and Adûnaic and Khuzdûl separate from Quenya and from Telerin.
  4. Yes, he created them for Middle-Earth, and not for instance for the Little Kingdom of Farmer Giles or for the car ride of Mister Bliss.


So, depending on the points of view, the answer is no or yes.

I find the yes points more significant than the second no point. The first no point is of course vital. He created Middle-Earth for the languages, and not the languages for Middle-Earth. At least this is true for the time when he’s just starting with Goldogrin and Qenya, what later became Sindarin and Quenya.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Fri, 8.IX.2023
Nativity of Our Lady
A little caveat for number 4 - the elves of Father Christmas, at the North Pole, seem to be talking some kind of Eldarin language, akin to Quenya, as well.

Q IV
Did J.R.R. Tolkien have a purpose for creating Middle Earth and writing his stories about it?
https://www.quora.com/Did-J-R-R-Tolkien-have-a-purpose-for-creating-Middle-Earth-and-writing-his-stories-about-it/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
none/ apprx Masters in Latin (language) & Greek (language), Lund University
11.IX.2023
Yes, to enjoy himself and some of the people he liked.

Friends in TCBS, fiancée and later wife Edith.

Even later, children as well as new friends in Inklings circle.

Friday, September 1, 2023

I'd Like a Second Opinion on the Kaph


This is a calculation that Tim Cohen made on "Charles Prince of Wales"



I had thought that prince was nasi or nasiy, something, and actually, in Genesis 34:2 I find this:



No kaph. And sin rather than samekh.



As you can see, other word occurrences don't end in kaph.

But perhaps the key is "modern Israeli Hebrew" being different from Biblical ...?

Thursday, August 31, 2023

Reviewing a Holds (Not So Much) Worth, Video


The Cost of Escaping Reality
Brian Holdsworth, 26 Aug 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DB9E_EUiC0


2:19 we're escaping our real lives in pursuit of something more exciting and more seductive

This kind of analysis has very long been popular with shrinks.

My atheist granny, who died in 1993 used to harrass ma and me over Christianity, discussions on theology, prayer, reading the Bible being "verklighetsflygt" = "escape from reality" ...

Before you make this kind of analysis, would you mind telling me, when a real part of someone's life means "an escape from his real life" ...?

Are Renaissance fairs evil because the participants escape the real life in XXth / XXIst CC.?

4:02 Antithesis to love is "narcissism"?

Is this a word from Catholic moral theology?

I mean, I can't recall finding it either in the Prima Secundae or the Secunda Secundae ...

Can you at least trace it to St. Alfons Maria Liguori?

I can't claim having read him as moral theologian, just The Glories of Mary.

4:24 I was tempted to go to St. Augustine ... when I recalled it could be Chesterton. Indeed.

“Let us suppose we are confronted with a desperate thing – say Pimlico. If we think what is really best for Pimlico we shall find the thread of thought leads to the throne of the mystic and the arbitrary. It is not enough for a man to disapprove of Pimlico; in that case he will merely cut his throat or move to Chelsea. Nor, certainly, is it enough for a man to approve of Pimlico; for then it will remain Pimlico, which would be awful. The only way out of it seems to be for somebody to love Pimlico; to love it with a transcendental tie and without any earthly reason. If there arose a man who loved Pimlico, then Pimlico would rise into ivory towers and golden pinnacles… If men loved Pimlico as mothers love children, arbitrarily, because it is theirs, Pimlico in a year or two might be fairer than Florence. Some readers will say that this is mere fantasy. I answer that this is the actual history of mankind. This, as a fact, is how cities did grow great. Go back to the darkest roots of civilization and you will find them knotted round some sacred stone or encircling some sacred well. People first paid honour to a spot and afterwards gained glory for it. Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her.”


Note, he did not say loving Pimlico for what it is, but loving Pimlico arbitrarily - and the very next phrase suggests loving Pimlico as Pimlico can be shown in a Sims game.

"The area has over 350 Grade II listed buildings and several Grade II* listed churches."

"In the mid-1930s Pimlico saw a second wave of development with the construction of Dolphin Square, a self-contained "city" of 1,250 up-market flats built on the site formerly occupied by Cubitt's building works. Completed in 1937, it quickly became popular with MPs and public servants. It was home to fascist Oswald Mosley until his arrest in 1940, and the headquarters of the Free French for much of the Second World War."


It seems that some people took Chesty's advice to love Pimlico. Perhaps Chesterton meant morally : "Pimlico is the setting of the 1940 version of Gaslight."

4:40 And before that effort bears fruit, the love will very certainly be described by some as "escape from reality" ...

4:48 I think Chesterton actually did mean love in the sense of infatuation.

As to "intending the good of someone" ... it is possible that by "desperate" Chesterton meant the Peabody Estates of Pimlico:

"Through the late nineteenth century, Pimlico saw the construction of several Peabody Estates, charitable housing projects designed to provide affordable, quality homes."

It could very well have been those that made Chesterton say:

"Let us suppose we are confronted with a desperate thing – say Pimlico."

5:06 While the duty of parents is well described, you forget that some hormones of bonding are involved in making them in a sense infatuated with their children. Not sexually, but still, they are very far from being purely objective observers with no escape from reality.

Indeed, they arguably manage to raise their children better above their natural tendencies the more they are escaping from reality while doing so.

5:41 The majority of people who play with Sims are in fact teens or tweens who so far do NOT have parental responsibilities.

And the more one takes away from them the right to "escape reality" the less likely they are to succeed in acquiring such or similar responsibilities.

Noah had three sons around the age of 500 ... how come? Perhaps his earlier children had died, from not escaping the realities of sth like the Mahabharata war - or perhaps someone had consistently stamped him as "escaping from reality" so he didn't get a wife to when he was 500. From when his father begat him or his son his grandson, we can at least gather, it was not like puberty back then took 500 years to achieve.

5:58 "real relations"

Are you speaking of teens' and tweens' "real" relations to those older than themselves?

Have you considered, with an aging society, older people willing to give advice compete in greater and greater numbers for fewer people willing to hear it?

In other words, the older generation are less and less a real support, and more and more a real competition about the relations that could have gone into for instance getting a wife or a husband ...

When those busibodies are being fled, it's a boon for them if they can pretend those fleeing them are in fact hurting themselves.

6:29 When it comes to the phone, I think it is distracting without offering what's normally referred to as "escape from reality" - I'm actually considered escapist by some for my refusal to get one.

7:36 Scrolling on your phone is not "virtual reality" ... your mistransferring what you did with what people playing Sims do ... not that I ever did.

Andy Presby
@andypresby6537
I’m not sure he is. Stretching his point? Maybe. But people approach all forms of entertainment for diverse reasons. This applies to video games or scrolling social media or playing a board game; anything we do for fun. One reason we might’ve chosen to do it is to distract ourselves from something else.

The thing about Brian’s video though that bothers me is that he seems to treat escape as purely an evil to be avoided. He is, though not in a simplistic way, perhaps unintentionally adding a voice to the chorus that says “phone bad. Make phone go away and all will be good.” I think (as I’ve said in another comment) that there is a lot more nuance to it and it’s a nuanced conversation we desperately need to have. I’m very glad he made this video but I want him to talk more about it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl
@andypresby6537 "he seems to treat escape as purely an evil to be avoided."

Indeed.

But even so, there is a very big difference between reading LWW in French (Edmund is getting back from the White Witch), a thing that clearly is "virtual" or "secondary" reality as opposed to primary reality, and scrolling the youtube feed and finding your comment, which as an interaction with me actually is part of primary reality and real business.

@andypresby6537 "One reason we might’ve chosen to do it is to distract ourselves from something else."

In my case, working on my internet production is a very welcome distraction from people who, denying that I do any work, pretend to look after how I am.

Distraction is not always the same as escape from reality, not that that per se is bad either.


9:25 I've never recommended anyone to walk around with ear phones ... may have sth to do with inadequate opportunities for healthier escapism ...

9:38 Being inattentive to the world around is a physiological need.

If it takes forms like walking with head phones it is because that need is not respected when they are sitting at home or in the bus or whatever. When you sit, you usually can avoid needing to quickly move - unless it's in enemy territory.

10:56 I begin to worry about your attitude to a Man who spent nights in prayer, removing Himself for hours on row from the world around Him. In case you are not aware, prayer usually does involve alpha state. Which certainly does lower your attention to the world around you.

11:35 "smartphones and social media"

I never access my social media on smartphones.

I don't even own one.

What your superstitious friend said about smartphones may well be worth saying, but he showed his superstition by adding social media to them. Why are you even friends with someone who's into the superstition of psychology?

Would you be friends with a pythic medium?

11:50 Being startled is not necessarily anxiogenic.

A man I admire far more than shrinks was once startled by discovering himself to be trying to open his door with a cork-screw - before putting it to its proper use. I think you cited him in a Pimlico / Rome connexion.

11:58 There is a kind of getting startled that actually can be anxiogenic.

Getting startled by grown up people who absolutely exact your attention to them, because they "know" (from a man like your psychologist friend) that you need to attend to them. Not that they need your attention. You could arrange so they didn't. But their pov is that you need it, for instance in order to come back to the real world.

Here is the witness of someone who at the age of thirty (or past) did escape from such people:

I Ruined My Life
Cinzia DuBois, 25 Aug 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g5HkfUrna0


12:08 "that's what sleep is for"

And prayer?

And reading?

And music?

And doing cross word puzzles and sudokus?

And comfort foods, including sweet coffee or tea and small amounts of alcohol?*

Or just sleep?

If you push someone out of all moments of escapism except sleep, you may end up not respecting sleep either. I've dealt with both types.

Or rather, not been able to deal with them. How does a homeless person compete with the fashionable shrinks in his neighbourhood for attention about how to treat him?

Especially if some don't want him to be charismatic when presenting his blogs?

* And Gregorian and Eastern rite liturgic music ...

12:27 Did you say we are created for this world?

If you said adapted, you might just be an Evolutionist Atheist ... I thought I heard created. A k a made ... let's check with the Penny Catechism ...

2. Why did God make you?
God made me to know him, love him and serve him in this world, and to be happy with him for ever in the next.


Knowing God, loving God, serving God, all three depend on looking away from this world, in which His presence is not immediately known or visible to the senses.

There is a reason why my atheist granny called Christianity "escape from reality" ...

12:47 Oh, indeed.

But God has not refused either to be or to provide refuge ... what road would you rather take to holiness ...
  • Calvin says you need to fairly and squarely face how evil and utterly unworthy you are
  • Thérèse of Lisieux preferred to look away from herself and unto the Babe Jesus - and the Holy Face in Gethsemaneh.


Who of these do you think went justified when quitting the meditation for a chore?

Oh, wait, absorbed in real life chores leaves no room for meditation ... what was St. Thomas saying about why porc (meat) signifies impurity?

I think you can look up in Leviticus that the pig is not a ruminant ...

"The animal that chews the cud and has a divided hoof, is clean in signification. Because division of the hoof is a figure of the two Testaments: or of the Father and Son: or of the two natures in Christ: of the distinction of good and evil. While chewing the cud signifies meditation on the Scriptures and a sound understanding thereof; and whoever lacks either of these is spiritually unclean."


I think ruminants do escape from surrounding realities while ruminating ....

13:38 Taking up one's cross is one thing, but He also gave an example of praying, which is escapism.

Between Martha and Mary, who was escapist?

Who was holier?

Theo Fessenden Debate


Catholic Apologetics
"primary duty of charity does not lie in toleration of false ideas" St. Pius X

Theo Fessenden
Studied Catholic and evangelical theologies.
On Aug 25 2023 answered
Do you know why the Bible has zero errors?
https://catholicapologetics.quora.com/Do-you-know-why-the-Bible-has-zero-errors-1
Thus:
First, recall that the Bible did not define the Church, rather Jesus founded His Church, and that Church later defined the Bible. We know the Bible is inerrant because the Church Jesus founded says so (including what does and what does not belong in it) however, this does not mean it has zero errors.

When we Catholic Christians say the Bible is inerrant, we mean in terms of teaching spiritual and moral truth when understood as guided by The Holy Spirit.

If by "zero errors," you're speaking in terms of Fundamentalist literalism, that is not the case. The Bible is not without practical errors. Its writers were inspired by The Holy Spirit. They were not possessed by it.

Note: Jesus never promised us a New Testament. He never charged anyone to write anything: not its various components or other things which didn't make the cut.

He did appoint Apostles and He empowered them. He did send them The Holy Spirit to further empower and guide the Church in all truth (as He promised). It is by this power He gave to the Church that all Christians have the scriptures we do today. It also is through this same power He gave His Church that we may properly understand them.

Further, The Bible is not a single book, but a library comprised of many writings of various kinds of literature. Some components contain various literature types within themselves.

Biblical literature types include:

  • Religious History: Interpretation of actual historic events in light of revelation [e.g. The books of Kings, The Gospels, The Acts of the Apostles]
  • Apocalyptic Literature: Intentionally disguised, politically charged narratives, often with some prophetic content — can include political prophesy disguised as latter-day prophesy. [e.g. parts of Daniel, The Apocalypse of John]
  • Poetry and Idiom: Poetic content may include idiom, metaphor, simile, allegory, analogy, hyperbole, parables and more. [e.g. The Song of Solomon, the gospels' parables]
  • Songs and Hymns: used in worship and as teaching devices, these may have multiple poetic elements. [e.g. Psalms, the preamble to the Gospel attributed to John]
  • Wisdom Literature: Didactic proverbs whose sometimes complementary, sometimes contradictory meanings provoke the reader to seek and find balance and wisdom. [e.g Proverbs, The Wisdom of Sirach]
  • Sacred Mythology: ancient stories of origins and early heroes whose histories include mythology, but whose stories represent spiritual truths, especially regarding the natures of humanity and God, and their relationship [e.g. the Creation myths of Genesis, parts of the books of Judges, parts of the books of the Maccabees]
  • Prophetic Narratives: Often highly-stylized and symbolic inspired messages intended to admonish, teach, and/or encourage. The prophet speaks with divine authority as directly inspired by The Holy Spirit. Prophesies range in styles from the literally pragmatic to the overtly enigmatic. [e.g. Ezekiel, Joel, eschatology narratives of the Gospels]
  • Didactic / Pious Folk Tales: stories intended as morality tales or teaching fables. Their fictional characters (even when representing actual beings) represent models of how we should (and often should not) live our lives and contemplate right and wrong. [e.g. Job, Tobit, gospel parables.
  • General Didactic Narratives: straight-up moral and practical teaching [e.g. Deuteronomy Leviticus, The sermon on the mount, other parts of the Gospels]
  • General Epistles: Often didactic, corrective and dogmatic letters sent by Church Fathers to the Church at large [e.g. 2 Peter, James]
  • Community Epistles: Often corrective and edifice-building letters sent by Church Fathers to guide particular communities through spiritual and/or physical crises [e.g. Hebrews, Romans, 1 & 2 Thessalonians]
  • Private Epistles: "House keeping" and administrative correspondence from a Church father to an individual. e.g. 1 & 2 Timothy, Philemon]


We believe all are inspired [See Timothy 3:16,17.]. Yet as you should see, their content needs to be understood in historical context and in their intended purposes. Much is not literal.

Asked:

Do you know why the Bible has zero errors?


I answered him
more than once, and am giving the order in which they get answered back, not the order in which they were given.

I

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
What exactly do you mean by “mythology” here?

// Sacred Mythology: ancient stories of origins and early heroes whose histories include mythology, but whose stories represent spiritual truths, especially regarding the natures of humanity and God, and their relationship [e.g. the Creation myths of Genesis, parts of the books of Judges, parts of the books of the Maccabees] //


Do you hold there is such a genre as “myth” with the characteristic of non-factuality?

II

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Mon 28.VIII.2023
The Bible is not without practical errors. Its writers were inspired by The Holy Spirit. They were not possessed by it.

Are Magisterial Definitions without errors in faith and morals? Are Popes and Council Fathes possessed by the Holy Spirit?

The point you seem to make is, hagiographers retained freewill and were therefore free to err.

Fine, but God was free to make sure the ones who did when they did were not taken for hagiographers.

Popes and Council Fathers also retain freewill and are free to err. God is free to make sure that such errors are not taken for magisterium, including by showing Popes to be non-Popes, Councils to be non-Councils.

Theo Fessenden
Mon 28.VIII.2023
I'm not sure what you're saying, but that isn't what I am saying.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
My point is: a man does not have to be possessed by the Holy Spirit to be totally preserved from uttering an untrue word, by the same Holy Spirit.

It is not as if the Holy Spirit were “inspiration” in the way artists speak of “inspiration” - and it is clearly as if the Holy Spirit Himself spoke. Qui locutus est per prophetas.

My point is: if you can see how this works when it comes to infallible magisterium, like the Protestants can, how come you can’t see how it worked for the Hagiographers.

Theo Fessenden
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
I am defending the inerrancy of scripture.

Are you claiming every word of scripture is literal?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Wed 30.VIII.2023
Unless otherwise obviously marked, yes.

And by obviously, I mean things like hyperbolic remarks in the form of absurd commands, taken at face value.

III

Francis Marsden
Aug 25 2023
You will make the literalistic Fundamentalists froth with apoplexy. But well written!

Theo Fessenden
Aug 25 2023
Better they catch their breath than pluck out or cut off whatever body part causes them to sin. I've yet to meet a literalist who has done so, regardless of Jesus' apparently explicit instruction.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Mon 28.VIII.2023
Metaphor and error are two different things.

Theo Fessenden
Mon 28.VIII.2023
Yes, we know.

I think you're misunderstanding the answer.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
What am I misunderstanding about this? Here:

// If by "zero errors," you're speaking in terms of Fundamentalist literalism, that is not the case. The Bible is not without practical errors. //


I take objection to this, and I find the Chicago Declaration in Biblical Inerrance MOSTLY compatible with Trent Session IV.

Theo Fessenden
Tue 29.VIII.2023
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
Read my answer. Clearly it all is not literal. In practical terns, the cosmos from Creation to humanity was not made in 1,008 hours. There are no floodgates in the sky. There never were.

Take all the exception you like.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Wed 30.VIII.2023
"In practical terns, the cosmos from Creation to humanity was not made in 1,008 hours."

6 * 24 = 144 hours - where do the 1,008 come from?

"There are no floodgates in the sky. There never were."

Yes, the division between Oxygen layers of the atmosphere and Hydrogen layers of the High Atmosphere. When the division was eliminated, it was like gates opening. Brown gas + lightnings = water.

Theo Fessenden
Wed 30.VIII.2023
Ah. So you're a literalist. Got it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Wed 30.VIII.2023
Sure, that’s what inerrancy entails.

Theo Fessenden
Wed 30.VIII.2023
No. My brother, that is not what inerrancy means… And that's the central point of my answer.

You demonstrate its truth yourself. You haven't plucked out your right eye because (as you say) it's "obvious" to you that it isn't to be taken literally. Yet you embrace a pseudoscience nonsense explanation for there to be (or have been?) literal floodgates opening in the sky, because that is obvious to you. Of course they were/are literal only to the extent that you're able to envisage. Your floodgates do not have actual gates that lift away or swing open. So it's obvious to you that at some point they aren't literal floodgates. Your description has

  • no physical infrastructure,
  • no actual water channels, gates and sluices,
  • no dammed up watercourse or multi-trillion-ton dammed-up physical body of liquid water suspended above all the world (unless you claim a an atmospheric inversion can do that. And no, it cannot.),
  • no mechanism to raise or lower the gates and
  • no physical remnants of these watercourses, gates, sluices and dam(s) to be found on earth or in the sky—even though no text says they fell to earth or vanished.


Whatever explanations you might toss at the wall, in your opinion they obviously stick.

Why stop there?

  • Why not decide for yourself what obviously is and what obviously is not Holy Scripture? The Bible's Table of Contents is not part of any of the texts. Jesus Himself never mentions a New Testament. He never tells us what belongs in the canon of His own time while on His earthly mission. Nothing in either covenant tells us that.
  • Why not make your own Bible? You could even write your own new text and clarify everything so nobody need disagree again. By your standard you are free to make The Gospel of Hans-Georg be Holy Scripture should you desire


Please consider:

  • Was all of creation made (including humanity) in 144 hours? (Thank you again for pointing out the weird number I had there before—I have no idea where that came from.)?
  • Is the Earth literally stationary a flat circle?
  • Is the sky (the heavens) God's literal throne upon which He sits and the earth His literal footstool?
  • Does the sun move about the Earth as scriptures literally describe. Did it once simply stop moving for a while as per scripture?


To me, all of the above obviously are not literally the case. They each represent factors in stories about moral, spiritual and even historical truths, but in light of revelation about God's relationship with His people and His creation. They are not paleontology or astro physics lessons.

So long as you recognize that you are not meant to literally chop off your hand and pluck out your eye, you're simply agreeing with me except you make yourself your own magisterium. The result is that the Bible means to you whatever you want it to mean—and you "take issue" with anything that contradicts your personal take. Your trust is in yourself.

To you there is no doctrine, no reason, no physical fact of God's own Creation or tenet of The Church Jesus founded contradicting your own private interpretation of scripture which you cannot ignore or explain away if it doesn't suit you. In the end, it's not about any authority other than your own. You deem you follow scripture, but in actuality it simply follows you according to your personal preference and whimsy..

Yet according to Scripture, truth is not what is "obvious to you." In fact what is obvious to you may lead you to death. [1] Rather, the Church is the foundation and pillar of truth. [2]

May God bless you with all good gifts He would lavish upon you. May the face of Jesus shine upon you. May the Holy Spirit lead you into the Church which Jesus founded and to which He promised all truth. May He hold you in the midst of His fold that you too may run and finish the race and gain the imperishable prize. [3] By His grace may we live with Him and in Him in the fellowship of the saints forever and ever.

. .

Footnotes

[1] Proverbs 14:12 NABRE - Sometimes a way seems right,but the - Biblics
[2] 1 Timothy 3:15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. | New American Bible, revised edition (NABRE) | Download The Bible App Now
[3] 1 Corinthians 9:24-27 Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win. Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crow | New American Bible, revised edition (NABRE) | Download The Bible App Now

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Wed 30.VIII.2023
Would you mind telling me where you get it from the CHURCH defined 144 hours to be non-literal?

I hold to Trent Session IV.

If something is such that the Church tenuit atque tenet it, or is consensus of all Church Fathers, you can safely ask me to take that.

Theo Fessenden
31.VIII.2023
At this time the Church has no official teaching on what we must believe about our origins in terms of ira tú al history. The Church does assert that faith and genuine scientific discovery cannot contradict one another. Thus, for example, the continuous unbroken record of tree ring analyses proves beyond any doubt that trees were here at least 13,000 years ago. The earth is far older than the literal 6000 years delineated in scripture. We therefore know that if our literal interpretation denies this proven truth, then the literal is not the correct interpretation.

Catholics should weigh the evidence for the universe’s age by examining biblical and scientific evidence. “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth” (Catechism of the Catholic Church 159).


and

The Catholic Church has always taught that “no real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits. . . . If nevertheless there is a disagreement . . . it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’; and that, for this reason, rather than trying to provide a scientific exposition of nature, they sometimes describe and treat these matters either in a somewhat figurative language or as the common manner of speech those times required” (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus 18).


and

“Methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are” (CCC 159). The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.


See also: [1], [2]

Footnotes

[1] https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1115&context=claritas
[2] https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/10/28/pope-francis-comments-on-evolution-and-the-catholic-church

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Thur 31.VIII.2023
“The Church does assert that faith and genuine scientific discovery cannot contradict one another.”

Key word “genuine” …

“Thus, for example, the continuous unbroken record of tree ring analyses proves beyond any doubt that trees were here at least 13,000 years ago.”

I’d be happy to take a debate on that one.

I’m an amateur on the question, and according to your credentials, so are you:

Former Writer: Science, IT and Engineering. at Att Bell Labs
Studied Information Technology & Management at DeSales University

IT and Engineering = NOT tree rings.
IT and Management = NOT tree rings.

For starters, the further back you go, as with the other now usually lignine based dating method (written records on paper or papyrus, though there were other writing supports), the fewer samples survive and the shorter they are and the less sure the fitting together of them are.

“The earth is far older than the literal 6000 years delineated in scripture.”

  • Scripture and post-Acts history … Masoretic history by itself would give c. 4000 years
  • I use a LXX based Biblical history, Christ born 5199 after Creation, as the old Christmas proclamation said.


“We therefore know that if our literal interpretation denies this proven truth, then the literal is not the correct interpretation.”

Or we know that if our literal interpretation has to be the correct one, as per being the one which the Church tenuit et tenet, which has the consensus of the Church Fathers, then this cannot be a proven truth.

“Catholics should weigh the evidence for the universe’s age by examining biblical and scientific evidence.”

But I do.

“The Catholic Church has always taught that “no real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits.” “

That’s why I am against scientists going beyond their limits. Note, I agree the Bible is not a scientific text book. But nowhere in Providentissimus Deus does it say that the Bible is not in fact inerrant when it touches on science, nor that the age of the earth can have no bearing on salvation.

Just two, three possible bearings:

  • If Adam lived way further back than 7000 years ago, Genesis 3 is not historically certain, and God could have said something other to the serpent than the recorded Proto-Gospel. Utterly false.
  • If Adam had biological pedigree to non-humans, he grew up as a feral child. Utterly false.
  • If Adam did not individually exist, the punishments for original sin are not for a voluntary act, but for a social coincidence of acts, which is per se willed by no single individual, and does not directly proceed from free will. Utterly false.


“The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are”

That’s a very good description of a scientist finding his way into Young Earth Creationism.

It’s also a very bad description of the consensus against YEC, fabricated among other things by Carnegie’s funding of institutes of higher learning. He was biassed against Christian Orthodoxy.


More may come ... meanwhile, note, his writing position included, while his studies did not include science ... he's not the guy to pick on me for writing on subjects outside my field of studies ...

Theo Fessenden
31.VIII.2023
Enough nonsense.

Pseudoscience removed.

We're done.

Any further from you also will be removed.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
1.IX.2023
Glad my comments are already saved, Mr. Cancel Culture!

Or were you removing your pseudo-science of 13000 years “recorded” in tree-rings?

Theo Fessenden Debate
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2023/08/theo-fessenden-debate.html


Theo Fessenden
1.IX.2023
There's no debate. I care not one bit about whatever you post under your own auspices.

This is not a platform for pseudoscience. You are done here.


In other words, a Catholic doing "pseudo-science" for the faith is unwelcome, one who does actual pseudo-science against the faith is thrown out ... nice for a forum called Catholic Apologetics ...

Sunday, August 27, 2023

Unity of the Christian Religion : Catholicism


Q
If Christianity is the true religion, shouldn't there be one denomination? Looks like either all have to be true, or are they all false? Does each individual person decide what is true?
https://www.quora.com/If-Christianity-is-the-true-religion-shouldnt-there-be-one-denomination-Looks-like-either-all-have-to-be-true-or-are-they-all-false-Does-each-individual-person-decide-what-is-true/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl


Hans-Georg Lundahl
Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?
5 years ago
“If Christianity is the true religion, shouldn't there be one denomination?”

There is one, Catholicism.

There should also be fake denominations, as prophecied and as warned against. There are.

“Looks like either all have to be true, or are they all false?”

Not really, since the Catholic and three or four similar ones claiming with some realism to continue the apostolic Church without a break are in a hugely better position than any denomination either openly admitting at starting at Reformation (1500 years c. after Christ) or pretending a continuity but with very little and very illread documentation (some Protestants consider their own Baptist denomination as a survival from Apostolic times rather than a branch of Protestantism, but it seems to me they wiggle very broadly with actual history as per a more normal reading of the documents and summaries°

“Does each individual person decide what is true?”

No, Catholicism and its 3 or 4 “twins” (Orthodox, one or two denominations of Monophysite - one can consider Copts and Armenians as different, Nestorians) all claim that the individual has to obey the visible Church in what it requires of all its members.

Protestants claim one must always obey the Bible (which if taken literally according to Matthew 28 precisely precludes Protestantism), and while Protestant denominations started out attacking each other as un-Biblical (and they were right about each other!) they now tend to politely presume, if a matter is not agreed on between Protestants, then either option is Biblical and it is judgemental to say otherwise.

This of course means, if a Catholic comes to debate with Protestants, he heavily risks being stamped as judgemental.

Only very liberal Protestants, the type who would be Catholics or Orthodox if they took Christianity a bit more seriously, would really and truly say “oh, you decide for yourself what is true”. Lately, they have come to dominate Protestantism.