tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post8022843187849855531..comments2024-03-17T08:25:33.806+00:00Comments on Thoughts of Francis Turretin: Blasphemy NoteTurretinfanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-33559087061433084602007-09-19T01:35:00.000+01:002007-09-19T01:35:00.000+01:00I'm sorry... in my efforts to be clever, I muddled...I'm sorry... in my efforts to be clever, I muddled what I was trying to say. I meant to imply that there apparently must be some sort of "secret knowledge" within the RCC that would explain the disconnect between the definition of "blasphemy" (which they apparently understand), and their definition of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" (which they do not apparently understand).<BR/><BR/>TheoJunkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09445444858090314944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-51578607440393471652007-09-18T18:53:00.000+01:002007-09-18T18:53:00.000+01:00Incidentally, the fact that other synergists besid...Incidentally, the fact that other synergists besides RCs would believe the same thing on this point was exactly why I mentioned it.<BR/><BR/>-TurretinfanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-37832962798290059712007-09-18T18:52:00.000+01:002007-09-18T18:52:00.000+01:00While it is inconclusive, the only thing the the C...While it is inconclusive, the only thing the the CCC cites (other than the three texts of Scripture already quoted in context in the post above) is:<BR/><I>137 Cf. John Paul II, DeV 46.</I><BR/><BR/>According to the CCC, DeV is short for "Dominum et Vivificanum [sic]" by which they apparently mean "Dominum et Vivificantem" <A HREF="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-22411319436052476912007-09-18T18:33:00.000+01:002007-09-18T18:33:00.000+01:00I note that non-reformed protestants also would (a...I note that non-reformed protestants also would (and do) affirm the RCC interpretation of those passages.<BR/><BR/>Yes, it is willful disregard for the words of the text, in favor of preservation of one's pet doctrine... or, eisegesis, if one prefers.<BR/><BR/>I note also, that their CCC entry, in addition to not staying true to the scripture, also does not stay true to the RCC's own definitions TheoJunkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09445444858090314944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-81137997347689034482007-09-18T13:23:00.000+01:002007-09-18T13:23:00.000+01:00Dear Godith,I'm trying to ask the reader to determ...Dear Godith,<BR/><BR/>I'm trying to ask the reader to determine whether the CCC's interpretation of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as being "final impenitence" is a possible or reasonable explanation of the passage, viewing Christ's statement in context.<BR/><BR/>It is, of course, the answer a synergist would want it to be, but it is both clearly not based on exegesis of the text, and also Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-40558654015293690902007-09-18T01:52:00.000+01:002007-09-18T01:52:00.000+01:00Are you trying to tell us what the unforgiveable s...Are you trying to tell us what the unforgiveable sin is? If so....??<BR/>--GodithAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com