EXCHANGE WITH AN ANTI-CATHOLIC APOLOGIST ON THE BIBLE AND PRIVATE INTERPRETATION, Part 5

The Descent of the Holy Spirit by El Greco

*******

Gerry Soliman said...

Dear Fr. Abe,

This will be my last post here for this topic. In my judgment, the way you use capital letters in most of your sentences imply more that just emphasis, it is aggression. Plus there are personal attacks and childish accusations you made which are really unfit for a priest to do.

As to your issue of adding words to your statement, you are free to think whatever you want. But really, I was acting in good faith. It's a lapse in judgment on my part to have added those two words thinking it was still favorable to your position. But you are making me admit that I was untrustworthy in doing so. Well, the burden of proof belongs to you since now you are the one accusing me.

Oh yeah, you said something when I asked if it changed your position:

[YES, IT DID CHANGE. YOU MADE IF APPEAR AS IF IM STATING THAT AN INDIVIDUAL IS NOT GIFTED TO GIVE THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF TRADITION AND HISTORY.]

Actually Fr. Abe, and in case you don't know, I will refer you to your CCC #85:

"The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church ALONE (capitalization mine). Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ." This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

I'm sorry I didn't know you were going against your CCC.

Well now, I guess you'll be making an article about our discussion.

Shaking the dust off my feet.

Gerry

January 22, 2010 9:07 PM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

RESPONSE TO GERRY SOLIMAN

[Dear Fr. Abe,]

Dear Bro. Gerry,

[This will be my last post here for this topic.]

O really? Very well then, this will be my last post on this exchange as well.

[ In my judgment, the way you use capital letters in most of your sentences imply more that just emphasis, it is aggression.]

In my private interpretation and judgment on the text of our exchange the use of capital letters gives emphasis to my point. In person, my voice is booming and in raised pitch when I am exchanging or debating a matter of faith to those who oppose our Catholic Faith. It is but proper for me to express my points with emphasis and on some matters to truly manifest my own manner of expressing things that is to express the words in much louder manner. The lawyers are doing that as well as Apologists in discourses and even in their lectures, how much more in an exchange.

If ever you find it aggressive, then let it be so. It is but proper because you have violated my position because of your ADDITION and INSERTION. Whether in Election Results or in Statement of Accounts submitted to an Accountant or in Debates, INSERTION and ADDITION is unacceptable. In Philippine election there is the Hello Garci incident and in our exchange that is your Hello Gerry.

Your act of ADDING and INSERTING on my statement plus the refusal to be responsible for it and instead pointing fingers at me are what I consider ACTS OF AGRESSION.

[Plus there are personal attacks and childish accusations you made which are really unfit for a priest to do.]

I read and re-read the exchanges and none of them are really unfit for a priest to do:

1. I told you that insisting Private Interpretation on the Prophecy of Scriptures is SATANIC because Private Interpretation was REJECTED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. This is not childish but a strong conviction rooted in Scripture.

2. I told you that your insistence that Private Interpretation is Essential for human interpretation and mental process doesn’t hold water because God used so many human persons to proclaim and record His Word yet none of them were allowed to make use of Private Interpretation.

3. Your formula ONLY ONE OF TWO ROUTES is full of loopholes yet you cling to them as if they are objective truths with full force of authority. You are arguing for Private Interpretation yet when your ‘ONLY ONE OF TWO ROUTES’ were refuted you treat them as AUTHORITATIVE INTERPRETATION. It is easier for you to defend your TWO ROUTES rather than the decision of the Holy Spirit to reject Private Interpretation.

4. You have fallen into contradictions and illogical positions because your definition of Private Interpretation is too private that even the Dictionary doesn’t provide. Your view of what Private Interpretation is obviously contrary to the way chosen by the Holy Spirit and the way the word private is understood by the civilization of the world. In fact, when you were asked to differentiate the various kinds of interpretation you answered in your so-called DIALOGUES but when examined they are NOT Dialogues at all but MONOLOGUES. It seems to me that you are refusing to answer categorically my invitation to differentiate the terms, but in order to save face you decided to answer in form of Dialogues... Socratic style. Unfortunately for you, Socratic argumentation can only be effective if the terms are properly defined. Definition of terms is one of the major strengths of Socratic argumentation which you are refusing to do. Instead you resorted to self-style dialogues which are in actuality monologues; by doing so you have betrayed the weakness of your reasoning.

[As to your issue of adding words to your statement, you are free to think whatever you want.]

Of course I interpreted it as offensive, improper and unjust. Do you expect me to praise you for that? It never entered my mind to say: THANK YOU for inserting and adding to my statement. On the contrary, I felt abused.

[But really, I was acting in good faith.]

Really? How nice of you. Do I have to congratulate you for that?

I wanted to believe that you acted in good faith, Gerry. That is why I was expecting you to take responsibility for that: “Pasencia na Fr. Abe, I was suppose to put it in my statement but I typed wrongly so it appeared in your statement instead” or “Sorry father, it was simply a mistake”, etc. Accepting your mistake and be responsible for it could have ended it right there and then.

Instead, you pointed your finger at me and expressing words as if it was my fault because I used Sola Scriptura in earlier argument. Then when you were pressed you insisted on the honesty of your intentions. To tell you frankly, Intentions are good but we look at ACTIONS because intentions are invisible. FAITH IS PROVEN GOOD WHEN IT IS PUT TO ACTION BECAUSE FAITH WITHOUT ACTION IS USELESS. Thus, by committing the uncalled for INSERTION and ADDITION you have given me enough reasons to question the integrity of your intention. Besides, you are a veteran apologist whose task is truly to refute the Catholic Church. Thus, I have reasons and many reasons for that, to be weary of your untoward actions.

APOLOGETICS IS SWORDFIGHTING IN VERBAL FORM. It is a fight, it is a war. However, we agreed that what we shall do is an honourable duel. By committing foul actions you made the other side extra careful and be prepared for a new kind of confrontation. It changed the colour and atmosphere of the exchange.

[It's a lapse in judgment on my part to have added those two words thinking it was still favorable to your position.]

FAVORABLE OR NOT THEY ARE NOT TO BE DONE. We are not in Bereans Forum we are in a more formal setting. Each of our statement is being scrutinized to the core. There is no way to escape here. In Bereans, one can hide and use a guerrilla warfare but we are in man to man combat Gerry. That is why I expected you to be gentlemanly in your actions.

[But you are making me admit that I was untrustworthy in doing so.]

HA, HA, HA... OF COURSE, FOUL ACTIONS MAKE YOU UNTRUSTWORTHY. You mean to say, those acts are NORMAL for you. You are revealing too much of yourself if you will insist on that. Stop acting as if you are the offended party here. It doesn’t suit you.

[ Well, the burden of proof belongs to you since now you are the one accusing me.]

I ACCUSED YOU OF ADDING AND INSERTING ON MY STATEMENT. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN WITH PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE. YOU HAVE ADMITTED YOUR ADDITION. SO, MY ACCUSATION IS PROVEN BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT.

I consider you untrustworthy or rather DISHONEST, which i based in your word ‘HONEST’, you are excusing yourself from responsibility on your own undeniable actions. It reminds me of Adam. When asked if he sinned pointed to Eve and Eve, for her part, pointed to the Serpent. Alibis do not help, they are merely sinking the doers into the mud of their own actions covered with lies.

[Oh yeah, you said something when I asked if it changed your position:

***[YES, IT DID CHANGE. YOU MADE IF APPEAR AS IF IM STATING THAT AN INDIVIDUAL IS NOT GIFTED TO GIVE THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF TRADITION AND HISTORY.]***

Actually Fr. Abe, and in case you don't know, I will refer you to your CCC #85:

"The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church ALONE (capitalization mine). Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ." This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

HA, HA, HA... YOU SEE I AM RIGHT NOT TO TRUST YOU AND MY FEAR IS CONFIRMED. INDEED, YOU HAVE HIDDEN INTENTIONS IN INSERTING THOSE WORDS. YOU WANT TO PIN ME ON THE WALL WITH THOSE WORDS. NOT SO GERRY, NOT SO! HE, HE, HE...

Let me check the concerned provisions of the CCC:

1. That CCC#85 that you have quoted is PRECEDED by CCC#84 which states the following:

CCC#84 The apostles entrusted the "Sacred deposit" of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the WHOLE of the Church. "By adhering to [this heritage] the ENTIRE holy PEOPLE, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing and professing the faith that has been handed on, there should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful."46

Footnote 45: 45 DV 10 § 1; cf. 1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:12-14 (Vulg.).

1 Tim 6:20 [English Standard Version] "O Timothy, guard THE DEPOSIT entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called "knowledge,"

2 Tim 1:12-14 which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me. Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard THE GOOD DEPOSIT entrusted to you.

Footnote no. 46: 46 DV 10 § 1; cf. Acts 2:42 (Greek); Pius XII, apostolic constitution, Munificentissimus Deus, 1 November 1950:AAS 42 (1950), 756, taken along with the words of St. Cyprian, Epist. 66, 8:CSEL 3/2,733: "The Church is the people united to its Priests, the flock adhering to its Shepherd."

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

SEE, THE FAITH HAS BEEN ENTRUSTED TO ALL THE FAITHFUL. BUT THE FAITHFUL IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN ORTHODOXY OF DOCTRINE MUST BE UNITED TO THE SHEPHERDS OF THE CHURCH [BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS] AS THE EARLY BELIEVERS WERE UNITED TO THE APOSTLES.

THE INDIVIDUAL FAITHFUL IS INCAPABLE OF TEACHING THE FAITH CORRECTLY IF HE IS RELYING ON HIS PRIVATE INTERPRETATION ALONE WITHOUT THE AID OF THE CHURCH.

2. Let us check CCC#85 if it is incompatible with our stand:

CCC#85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

This doctrine of the Catholic Church is founded on Sacred Scriptures. St. Paul confirms that even though the Church members are One Body in Christ the gifts given to each varies. NOT ALL ARE ENTRUSTED WITH THE DUTY TO TEACH AND TO GOVERN:

1 Corinthians 12:28-29 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

TO CLAIM THAT ALL CHRISTIANS ARE EQUAL IN MATTERS OF DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND MINISTERIAL TASK IS DELUSIONAL AND NO FOUNDATION IN THE SCRIPTURES.

[I'm sorry I didn't know you were going against your CCC.]

Ha, ha, ha... Don’t be delusional Gerry. Here is your INSERTION AND ADDITION:

[...how does an individual conclude that the Roman Catholic Church is indeed God's church if he is not gifted with to give the correct interpretation of the Bible and other appropriate sources such as history and tradition?...]

1. Your insertion makes it appear as if the individual Catholic CANNOT GIVE THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION not only of the Bible but of the History and Tradition as well. THIS IS CONTRARY TO CCC#84 WHICH SAYS THAT THE DEPOSIT OF THE FAITH IS ENTRUSTED TO ALL THE FAITHFUL. Thus, they are capable to interpret correctly the faith based on the Bible, Tradition and History PROVIDED they are UNITED with the CHURCH AUTHORITY.

2. CCC#85 is actually supporting my claim that the Authority on Faith is the Church. Thus, there is no Contradiction at all. The Church Authority are the one given the grace to officially teach the faithful and the faithful receives the faith from the Church thus they are capable of receiving the true faith free from error but ALWAYS IN COMMUNION WITH THE CHURCH.

[Well now, I guess you'll be making an article about our discussion.]

Of course, I will be making an article about this. Actually, I will post the exchange as they are. If there is any changes it will be a better editing of some words or sentences of my own because they were done rather in haste. I was not able to put the Biblical passages to further support my major assertions.

Is there any problem with that? You also made an article about Bro. Isahel and Bro. Cenon. How come you can do that to us and we cannot do it to you? Our comments in this site will remain as they are including our misspelling or broken sentences, etc. I’m eager to post them separately on my wallpaper. This exchange is important so that people can see for themselves who among us are faithful to the divine method of interpreting the Sacred Scriptures.

[Shaking the dust off my feet.]

Fine with me Gerry. C’mmon, shake the dust of your feet and pretend as if you are an apostle of the Lord.

On my part, there is no need to do such a thing. Even if I am convinced of the Truth of our Faith still I will not shake off the dust off my feet since it is not my intention to seek your destruction. What will I gain if you go to the fire of Gehenna by shaking the dust off my feet? Will I be happier in heaven for your demise?

I WILL LEAVE THAT MATTER TO THE HOLY SPIRIT. THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO MADE THE PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURES FREE FROM THE VENOM OF PRIVATE INTERPRETATION SHALL BE MY SHIELD AND MY SALVATION. GRACE COMES THROUGH HIM. WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING COMES FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO REJECTED PRIVATE REVELATION. May this same Holy Spirit have mercy on your soul who chose to uphold the method of interpretation that the He Himself condemned to oblivion for the content of Scriptures.

I PITY YOU GERRY BECAUSE INSTEAD OF BEING FAITHFUL TO THE WAY OF THE SPIRIT YOU CHOSE TO UPHOLD YOUR OWN PRIVATE METHOD ON THE PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURES. Thus, it reminds me of what St. Paul said:

1 Corinthians 2:11 You are the only one who knows what is in your own mind, and God's Spirit is the only one who knows what is in God's mind.

ONLY THE SPIRIT OF GOD COMPREHENDS THE MIND OF GOD. THUS, WHEN THE HOLY SPIRIT REJECTED PRIVATE INTERPRETATION FOR THE WORD OF GOD THAT IS THE WILL OF GOD. THIS IS WHAT WE WILL FOLLOW AS CHRISTIANS... THE WILL OF GOD... DEFINITELY NOT THE WILL OF GERRY SOLIMAN WHO UPHELD PRIVATE INTERPRETATION USING HIS OWN ROUTES AND HIS OWN INTERPRETATION BASED ON HIS SELF-STYLED DIALOGUES.

1 Corinthians 2:12 We have not received this world's spirit; instead, we have received the Spirit sent by God, so that we may know all that God has given us.

GOD HAS GIVEN US THE SCRIPTURES... NOT MADE OF PRIVATE REVELATION. GOD HAS GIVEN US THE CHURCH WHICH REJECTS PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. GOD HAS GIVEN US DIVINE REVELATION NOT OUT OF PRIVATE REVELATION.

NO TO PRIVATE REVELATION!!!

1 Corinthians 2:13 So then, we do not speak in words taught by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Spirit, as we explain spiritual truths to those who have the Spirit.

THE APOSTLES REFUSED TO IMPLEMENT PRIVATE INTERPRETATION BECAUSE PRIVATE INTERPRETATION IS DEVOID OF THE GRACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. IT IS PURELY HUMAN WISDOM.

1 Corinthians 2:14 Whoever does not have the Spirit cannot receive the gifts that come from God's Spirit. Such a person really does not understand them, and they seem to be nonsense, because their value can be judged only on a spiritual basis.

INDEED, THOSE ADVOCATING PRIVATE INTERPRETATION IS NON-SENSE. IMAGINE, CONSIDERING PRIVATE INTERPRETATION AS ESSENTIAL TO MENTAL PROCESS. THAT IS NONSENSE. THE HOLY SPIRIT GAVE WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING TO HUMAN PERSONS BUT WITHOUT PRIVATE INTERPRETATION OF THE ORACLE OF GOD.

1 Corinthians 2:15 Whoever has the Spirit, however, is able to judge the value of everything, but no one is able to judge him.

OF COURSE, BECAUSE THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED WITH GRACE TO TEACH THE TRUTH OF FAITH CORRECTLY HAVE BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY BY THE LORD HIMSELF TO FUNCTION ACCORDING TO HIS DIVINE PLAN. THE PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL WHO REFUSES TO LISTEN OR OBEY CAN COMPLAIN BUT THEY DON’T HAVE THE AUTHORITY OVER THE AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED BY THE LORD.

1 Corinthians 2:16 As the scripture says, "Who knows the mind of the Lord? Who is able to give him advice?" We, however, have the mind of Christ.

THE MIND OF CHRIST IS ROOTED IN HIS OWN SPIRIT. AND THE MIND OF THE SPIRIT IS ROOTED IN THE MIND OF GOD. THE SPIRIT REJECTS PRIVATE REVELATION AND SO DO CHRIST AND GOD THE FATHER.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UPHOLDS THE MIND OF CHRIST, AND OF THE SPIRIT, AND OF THE FATHER. By grace and by choice we refuse “to grieve the Spirit”:

Ephesians 4:30 “And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.”

SUBJECTING THE PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURES TO PRIVATE REVELATION WILL SURELY SADDEN THE SPIRIT OF GOD WHO MADE IT SURE THAT IT IS FREE FROM SUCH EVIL.

SUBJECTING THE DIVINE REVELATION TO PRIVATE INTERPRETATION IS SACRILEGIOUS AND AN ACT OF REBELLION AGAINST THE WILL OF GOD.

For that it is you who should be afraid of your salvation. Because other sins can be forgiven but not the SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT, as the Prophet Isaiah and the Lord Jesus attest:

Isaiah 63:10 but they rebelled against him and made his holy spirit sad. So the LORD became their enemy and fought against them.

Matthew 12:31 For this reason I tell you: people can be forgiven any sin and any evil thing they say; but whoever says evil things against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

Matthew 12:32 Anyone who says something against the Son of Man can be forgiven; but whoever says something against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven---now or ever.

Mark 3:29 But whoever says evil things against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, because he has committed an eternal sin."

Luke 12:10 "Whoever says a word against the Son of Man can be forgiven; but whoever says evil things against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

IF WE WILL FOLLOW THE STAND OF GERRY SOLIMAN WE WILL BE OPPOSING THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO MADE THE PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURES FREE FROM PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. THAT IS A SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT... THAT IS DIRECT DISOBEDIENCE TO THE HOLY SPIRIT.

[Gerry

I know that you have your own teaching on what the Scriptures are and how it came to be. For me, the authority of the Scriptures wasn’t given by the church and neither the church declared its inspiration.]

THIS IS UNBIBLICAL. THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES CAME FROM GOD BUT HANDED ON TO THE CHURCH. IT WAS THE CHURCH LEADERS WHO WROTE THEM, PREACHED THEM, TAUGHT THEM CORRECTLY AND HANDED THEM FROM ONE GENERATION TO ANOTHER.

THE CHURCH IS PRIOR TO THE BIBLE. THE LORD ESTABLISHED THE CHURCH FIRST BEFORETHE BIBLE. ONE CANNOT TAKE THE BIBLE AND REJECT THE CHURCH. THE BIBLE IS THE WORD OF GOD WHILE THE CHURCH IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. In the Holy Scriptures the Church is repeatedly called the Body of Christ:

Ephesians 1:22-23 And he hath subjected all things under his feet and hath made him head over all the church, Which is his body and the fulness of him who is filled all in all.

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he may hold the primacy:

"Who (Paul) now rejoice in my sufferings for you, ... for His Body's sake, which is the Church (Col. 1:24).

Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, says he, are given by Christ ". . .for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the Body of Christ" (Eph. 4:11-12).

I DON’T KNOW WHAT KIND OF DIALOGUES YOU HAVE FORMULATED IN YOUR MIND THAT HAVE LED YOU TO THE DOWNRIGHT REJECTION OF THE CHURCH IN RELATION TO SACRED SCRIPTURES.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UPHOLDS BOTH: THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH. NO MORE, NO LESS. TO TAKE ONE AND REMOVE THE OTHER IS A HERESY. SOLA SCRIPTURA IS HERETICAL BECAUSE IT REJECTS THE CHURCH – THE BODY OF CHRIST.

Fr. Abe, CRS

February 1, 2010 8:23 AM