[geocentrism] : Absolute vs probable 2.
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:40:31 +1000
Continued. Part 2 response to Paul. His last paragraph was , What was it Jesus
said -- "These people honour Me with their lips but their hearts are far from
Me "? (Not to be taken as a personal accusation).
hung up on semantics: Not so much on the meaning of words, but their misuse,
specifically in translations of the Bible into venacular. For example, the
english word LOVE is used almost everywhere for charity, or "charitus" Only in
John, do they get it right. More ado about this word later, but your quote from
Jesus gives me a good opportunity to show where I am coming from. "their hearts
are far from Me" You know this is why the Church insisted on Latin with its
original dictionary, not modern updated varieties.
Take the use of "heart" for this discussion. Today everyone takes this word to
associate with emotional feeling. This is not what Jesus was intending to
convey. Elsewhere He showed that "feeling emotion" was transitory.Of use, but
of no real value. In the religious sense, the heart means the "centre" of the
soul.
Thus I would render His phrase this way. "These people honour me with their
lips, but their intentions are not mine." In other words they are liars and
pretenders. Whereas another, may honour Him with their lips, maybe, or even
silently, yet fail due to weakness of will, to do His will. As did Peter, in
fear of pain, and myself in uncontrollable hormone activity. See the technical
details on Biblical mis-uses of Love at the end. (though I doubt the people of
the 15th century or earlier had such misconceptions)
Back to Pauls post.
Its a matter of two faiths.. One faith in God.. The other faith in Man. we can
easily see where that latter faith is leading us today. I contest this idea
that there are two faiths. Well actually there are many faiths but man and
science are not among them. Self confidence is not a faith. Science is not a
faith, it is a disciplined explanation of reality -- incomplete certainly, but
it still dispells a lot of fear.
My goodness Paul, how you wriggle? -- incomplete certainly??? But I get your
meaning. You have faith in your self confidence that is not a faith.
Conviction? Isn't conviction faith? Of course there are many faiths in that
sense you proposed, but the world has two faiths. Those who accept the
supernatural, and those who because of their conviction, there self confidence,
(pride?) will not accept it.
Because you do not accept the dictionary true meaning that a fact is a truth,
an axiom, A fact or a truth is an infallibly true. It can be declared a fact
infallibly, (thats a double superlative) that the three internal angles of a
triangle add up to 180 degrees. If it is drawn on a plane surface. Sorry, that
was a bit mean! No not mean, each plane has its own angles.. Even in a pyramid,
I stick to my case. (whose getting semantic? grin.
That is a fact. That the world turns is an opinion, even a probability but not
yet a proven fact. But it is highly probable. I would have not so many decades
ago agreed with you. More, I would have thought any contrary view insane. Thats
because I believed my teachers when they gave me glossed over facts. The word
theory is rarely used in popular (people consumption) texts. The maths fitted,
so I fell for that being a proof.
would he (Edison) have gambolled his life on it do you think?). He nearly did
.By your definition, he could not have been certain, because there is no
Biblical description of a light bulb. obstropolis, and indicative of sarcasm,
or is it real hate for things God and Bible? No Philip -- I do not hate God or
the Bible. And I'm not being sarcastic. But you were still being obstropolis. A
light bulb has no bearing on theology. He had faith or conviction that he would
find it. God would not come into the equation. I have already shown, that adam
knew the light bulb was unimportant to the salvation of man, but no doubt Satan
knew it was important in mans eventual downfall. Have you not considered that
the appollo mission is akin to the titanic, and it likewise akin to the Tower
of babel?
End of sequence.
Philip.
HERE IS A GOOD STATEMENT ON THE LANGUAGE OF LOVE..
How does the Church define "love".
FR. MORRISON REPLIES First of all, the use of the noun "love" in translations
is of relatively recent usage. In most venerable Catholic Bible in English
translation, the Douay-Rheims (the equivalent of the King James Version for
Protestants), the word "charity" is used, as in 1 John 4:16: "God is charity."
Although "charity" has acquired a more restricted sense in recent English, it
directly represents the Latin "charitas," which itself represents the Greek
"agape." More on that below.
As defined by St. Thomas Aquinas and the Catholic theologians, charity is a
supernatural, infused virtue, by which we love God above everything for His own
sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for God's sake.
Thus, charity is not something that is acquired by our own acts, but is
divinely infused into the soul when one is in a state of sanctifying grace, a
state of sinless (at least not mortally so) friendship with God.
Notice that it is not defined as a "feeling" toward someone, as the word "love"
in English unfortunately connotes. Also notice that the object of charity is
not primarily any human person, but God. Both of these erroneous notions are
rife today in the Church, which seems to put social relationships above God.
No, the object of charity is first of all God Himself. It is only when this
relationship is in order that the second, charity toward neighbor, is even
possible. To make charity toward neighbor primary and God secondary is a
perversion of the Christian religion. For example, see in Matthew 22:37-39 the
stress that Christ Himself places on the former.
Now we can look at the nuances in the Greek that are inaccurately translated
"love" in many modern translations.
agape (charitas) - a reverential, selfless love directed toward God.
philia (amicitia) - a love of a friend, or even of a thing
(philosophia, love of wisdom).
eros (amor) - erotic love.
storge (pietas) - familial love.
Unfortunately, the English word "love" is much too broad to cover the nuances
of the Greek adequately, and its use is very deceptive, as readers think of the
modern connotations of the translated word, not the original.
How does God Himself define the word? St. John's Gospel (14:15) quotes Christ
as giving this definition: "If you love me, keep my commandments." St. John
later emphasizes the same interpretation when he writes in his Second Epistle
(6): "And this is charity: that we walk according to His commandments."
So, here on earth, love is obedience to God's commandments. That turns on its
head a lot of the error one currently hears about love meaning acceptance of
incorrect, irrational, and immoral beliefs. Scripture gives quite the opposite
definition!
Other related posts:
- » [geocentrism] : Absolute vs probable 2.
