Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction  (Read 1815 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction
« on: June 19, 2018, 09:52:18 AM »
Robert Sungenis' cohorts of Kolbe Center admit:


”The Kolbe Center is committed in a special way to defending the Catholic teaching that “the literal and obvious sense of Scripture” as intended by the sacred authors must be believed unless reason or necessity force us to reject that teaching in favor of an exclusively figurative interpretation. Pope Leo XIII emphatically upheld this teaching in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus, which has never been overruled by any subsequent magisterial teaching. From the middle of the nineteenth century until the middle of the twentieth century, the apparent evidence for Darwin’s molecules to man evolutionary theory seemed to contradict the literal and obvious sense of the author(s) of Genesis, chapters 1-11, as consistently understood and taught by the Fathers, Popes, and Councils. The modern “anti-culture of death” grew out of the macro-evolutionary theory whose fundamental principles have since been contradicted by the discoveries of modern science."

http://kolbecenter.org/contact-us/

So, even among the Catholic globe geocentrists, it is admitted that Scripture MUST be interpreted literally according to Pope Leo's PD and "be believed unless reason or necessity force us to reject that teaching in favor of an exclusively figurative interpretation.

What is the proof that we are forced to reject the literal interpretation of Scripture regarding its shape?

Re: Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2018, 10:10:51 AM »
Sungenis and Hugh Owen at the Kolbe Center have painted themselves into an impossible corner.

How do you -AS YOUR MISSION STATEMENT -  say that the literal interpretation of Genesis is true on Creation, but the parts about the Firmament are NOT true?


This is an impossibilty.


They even insist that PD is binding upon literal interpretation, but then they contradict themselves and say the Bible is mistaken.


Worse, Sungenis MOCKS Bible believers!


Re: Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2018, 10:15:35 AM »

Re: Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2018, 10:27:47 AM »
Sungenis and Hugh Owen at the Kolbe Center have painted themselves into an impossible corner.

How do you -AS YOUR MISSION STATEMENT -  say that the literal interpretation of Genesis is true on Creation, but the parts about the Firmament are NOT true?


This is an impossibilty.


They even insist that PD is binding upon literal interpretation, but then they contradict themselves and say the Bible is mistaken.


Worse, Sungenis MOCKS Bible believers!
Origen called the firmament “without doubt firm and solid” (First Homily on Genesis, FC 71). Ambrose, commenting on Genesis 1:6, said, “the specific solidity of this exterior firmament is meant” (Hexameron, FC 42.60). And Saint Augustine said the word firmament was used “to indicate not that it is motionless but that it is solid and that it constitutes an impassible boundary between the waters above and the waters below” (The Literal Meaning of Genesis, ACW 41.1.61).
Robert Sungenis is at odds with Church Fathers and Scripture.  Admitting PD and literal interpretation of Scripture is the smoking gun against their faulty interpretations.  What is their proof that Scripture is only speaking figuratively when it describes the earth when the Fathers say otherwise? 

Re: Sungenis' Outrageous Contradiction
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2018, 10:33:01 AM »
Even Wiki admits that historically they may have interpreted the globe to represent the universe.  So for the globers to pretend to use iconography to teach earth is a sphere is bogus.  The priest at the end of the Sungenis video in this thread has plenty to say on the subject, denying that the globe pictured in icons is the earth, but rather, is proven to be the universe.


Wiki
A possible non-literary but graphic indication that people in the Middle Ages believed that the Earth (or perhaps the world) was a sphere is the use of the orb (globus cruciger) in the regalia of many kingdoms and of the Holy Roman Empire. It is attested from the time of the Christian late-Roman emperor Theodosius II (423) throughout the Middle Ages; the Reichsapfel was used in 1191 at the coronation of emperor Henry VI. However the word 'orbis' means 'circle' and there is no record of a globe as a representation of the Earth since ancient times in the west till that of Martin Behaim in 1492. Additionally it could well be a representation of the entire 'world' or cosmos.