Is Love really the greatest? (1 Corinthians 13:13)

[spockrates]

I have noticed Spockrates that in some of your arguements I noticed that you refer to Wisdom(of King Solomon) and then you refer to love which St.Paul was refering to.I can requote passages but just assume I am correct in this fact or re-read your postings(do not look too long at the pictures of the beautiful ladies as you mind will wander!!)

Yes, you are correct on both counts: (1) I am indeed comparing Saint Paul’s wisdom on Love to King Solomon’s wisdom on Wisdom; and (2) I do agree that the virtues of Love and Wisdom have such unseen beauty that depicting them with pictures of ugly women would be unseemly!

As far as I am aware God is All Knowing,All Wise and All Loving–these are attributes of God.Which is the greatest-- The Wise God or The Loving God??? A passage in The Divine Office from memory goes something like this " the loving wisdom of our God-when all was sin and shame—"

Love that quote, “the loving wisdom of our God”! The truth behind it, I think, is not that Wisdom loves, but that Love makes a wise act loving. For Saint Paul writes"

If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, … but have not love, I am nothing.

(1 Corinthians 13:2)

So Spockrates you are confusing the issue when you refer to Wisdom and the greatest love that St.Paul was talking about!

Perhaps. That remains to be seen. Please explain how I am confusing the issue. (And please, feel free call me Spock.)

St.Paul is refering to acts of love or the virtue of love-Solomon to Wisdom and without him being aware of it The Holy Spirit.This Holy Spirit whom is LOVE, inspired both passages that you use–so since He is called Truth(remember Jesus said the Holy Spirit will teach you everything) ,well you better believe what He inspired St.Paul to write that love is the greatest!!

I think we agree that God is not merely Love, but also Truth. That is, God is both omnibenevolent and omniscient.



But please let me ask you this: Did Saint Paul write that Love is “greatest of all,” or that Love is the “greatest of these”? If he wrote that Love is the greatest of these, and NOT that Love is the greatest of all, then who or what are the “these” to what or to whom he refers?

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

(1 Corinthians 13:13)

Notice that in your Thread you used Love in the capital sense,did St.Paul use Love(the God of love) or a small love.If you have used Love in your question and then referred to St.Pauls’love then you have set up a “stawman”!!

I don’t see whose logical argument I’ve misrepresented, or how said argument is misrepresented. Please explain.

In short,to answer your question, Yes I do believe that Love and the virtue of love are too different concepts ,one stems from the other though.Sorry must go–full dirty dishes in the sink,rubbish gathering and lawns to be mowed.I friends wife I know used to say about her husband who liked to have a cup of tea after Mass with a good priest "you know Ray solves all the problems in the church—and then he comes home and has Sunday lunch!!!

No problem. That’s the beauty of a discussion forum–whether you have little time, or much time, there is always time to reply now or later.

 

[spockrates]

Because God IS Love. Not simply that He loves, but that He IS love.

God is not faith, but rather the object of our faith.

God is not hope, but rather the object of our hope.

But God IS love.

The more we love, the more we become like God. The process of theosis or deification is the process of growing in love. The object of the first two virtues is the last.

What I wonder, Ben, is whether Saint John was speaking figuratively when he wrote,

God is love.

(1 John 4:16)

I mean, John also wrote,

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”

(John 1:29)

but does that mean the Son of God is an animal, or some lycanthrope? And John also wrote,

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

(John 8:12)

but does that mean that the Son of God is the sun that rises each morning and sets each evening? And John also wrote,

Therefore Jesus said again, “I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep.”

(John 10:7)

but does that mean that mean that the Son of God has whitewashed wood planks for skin and a gate handle for a navel? And John also wrote,

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.”

(John 15:1)

but does that mean the Son of God is a real plant? And John also wrote,

Jesus answered, “I am … the truth … . No one comes to the Father except through me.”

(John 14:6)

but does that mean that the Son of God is a factual statement?

Thus, I’m thinking that Saint John was fond of using figures of speech. What are you thinking?

 

[spockrates]

William of Saint-Thierry writes from Mirror of Charity this–and I quote parts of it—
“—Hasten then to be a sharer in the Holy Spirit.----and if,when he comes,he finds you humble and still and respecting the words of God,he will rest upon you;and he will reveal to you what God the Father withdraws from the wise and prudent of this world;and those things will begin to draw upon you which Wisdom could say to the disciples when on this earth,but which they were unable to bear,until the Spirit of truth came who was to teach them all truth.-----For in the darkness and ignorance of this life,he is the light which enlightens the lowly of spirit;he is the love which draws us;he is the sweetening presence;he is man’s approach to God;he the love of the loving;he is devotion;he is piety–”
Taken from The Divine Office-The office of readings from The Common of Doctors of the Church"
Socrates I must say that yours is a good thread,one day I will read all the postings again-Love is the greatest for sure!!

Yes, it is a golden thread, but only because people like you make it so! All I’m doing is asking questions, for I don’t have much Wisdom to offer. (BTW, I like being called Socrates, too! You may call me that, if you like, or Soc for short.)

 

[pneuma07]

Yes, we can! For I would say the same as you. But the question for which I’m seeking an answer to is this: What virtue reveals to us whether an act is in communion with God’s will? I’m hoping we will say together, “Wisdom!” For this is what Saint James says:

Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; 8he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.

(James 1:2-7)

That is, he is saying that when one is facing a trial, and has an ethical dilemma, and does not know what action to take, one should ask God for Wisdom to know how to go. But if one acts on the desire to love alone, without giving any thought to one’s actions, one might be deceived into thinking such careless actions are aligned with the will of God. The reality, however, might be that such a one is deceived, and the act committed is sinful, and perpendicular to His will. The upshot is that Love alone is not enough to keep us in communion with God’s will. If one is to please God, Wisdom (like Faith) is also essential.

Would you say the same, P7?

Dear Spock,

I’d say you look IMHO in good harmony with Catechism and Aquinas.

• If the gifts of the Spirit “complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them”, as per CCC 1831,
  and
• if each of the seven gifts is to be considered specifically linked to a virtue, and wisdom
  is specifically linked to Love as per Aquinas

then we could confidently say

Wisdom completes and perfects Love of those who receive it ( ie Wisdom).

This also appears consistent with Gregory the Great’s vision of Wisdom as the highest of the gifts… and St. Paul’s vision of Love as the greatest of the theological virtues ( which are, we can concede, grater than the four cardinal human virtues )

If this is somehow reasonable:

Wisdom is the greatest gift we can ask to receive. By praying to receive Wisdom, before a dilemma or anytime we do, we ask then to perfect, to complete our Love.

Or should we, alternatively, long just for Wisdom in itself , rather then as guide and support towards better Love ?

It seems Scriptures are inclined to tell us : ask for wisdom. Solomon did ask for it, rather than achieving it as a task with divine assistance.

About Love we’re not told to ask for it as a gift. We are told, commanded, to love.

Am I on to something Spock ?

If so, Love appears the task, the goal. I’d say that Agape, IS communion of will with God.

Wisdom is essential in approaching this communion, in our path towards theosis.

The Lord gives us task ( Agape, communion with His will ), and gift to achieve the task ( Wisdom) if we ask for this.

---

IMHO we cannot see in Revelation that we are going to be judged on our Wisdom.

That can be considered also like this: if you give me a gift, you are not going to judge me on whether I got what you yourself gave me freely. ( although I could try to tell you I had the “merit” to ask for your gift )

You’ll likely judge me on achievements you expect from me, that I can get through your gift.

 

[benedictus2]

What I wonder, Ben, is whether Saint John was speaking figuratively when he wrote,

God is love.

(1 John 4:16)

I mean, John also wrote,
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”

(John 1:29)
but does that mean the Son of God is an animal, or some lycanthrope? And John also wrote,
When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

(John 8:12)
but does that mean that the Son of God is the sun that rises each morning and sets each evening? And John also wrote,
Therefore Jesus said again, “I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep.”

(John 10:7)
but does that mean that mean that the Son of God has whitewashed wood planks for skin and a gate handle for a navel? And John also wrote,
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.”

(John 15:1)
but does that mean the Son of God is a real plant? And John also wrote,
Jesus answered, “I am … the truth … . No one comes to the Father except through me.”

(John 14:6)
but does that mean that the Son of God is a factual statement?

Thus, I’m thinking that Saint John was fond of using figures of speech. What are you thinking?

Hey spock, I was going to reply to this but then I thought, hmmmm, I have seen that kind of reasoning before by someone called Socrates4Jesus who incidentally was banned a few days before you signed up.

Now my experience with Soc4Jesus was not very good. He was not really interested in learning but merely to twist things around. When shown compelling logic, he avoids them and goes back to the same old tired questions and reasoning even when it has been rebutted many times over.

So friend, I doubt you are here to learn so not playing your games amigo.

 

[pneuma07]

Fascinating! Wisdom (i.e., the Logos or Word) incarnate was speechless as at the beginning! For how can a baby speak? But God is love, and the infant Jesus was God. So Mary must have noticed something different about Him. His expressions of love (perhaps by not crying when He was hungry, or needed to be changed, or otherwise in need?) must have spoke silently to her. The God-babe, at least in the beginning, likely expressed who He really was through selfless acts of love? But perhaps even this might have been Wisdom in His divine mind. For lacking the brain function to speak, the words instructing Him to act in love might have been present in His soul nonetheless.

I’m not saying this is how it was. Just wondering.

For wonder is the feeling of a philosopher, and philosophy begins with wonder.

(Theaetetus)

I’d answer, “No, at least not well!”



Or rather, how do they help one another? Please see my answers to Ryan:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6170237&postcount=345

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6170237&postcount=346

When I consider the mentioned post

Wisdom says, “Go forward, wait, turn right, turn left. Now, now love!” And Love obeys wisdom, and moves them both toward the goal of loving. Without each other they are likely to fail to love as God desires, for Wisdom cannot possibly feel love like God, and Love cannot possibly see how to love like God. But together (like the God the Father of Love, and Logos the Son together) genuine love (a love which is beautiful, compassionate, and wise) is truly fulfilled.

I see us as near as ever to each other on this.

You’re repeatedly stating that Love is the goal, and Wisdom should behave as its beatiful guide. I fully subscribe your description, if I get it correctly.

Although I cannot say I got the solution to my aporia expressed in the post you’re anwering, this is my present proposal:

Growing harmony between Love and Wisdom is probably what we can see as peculiar of a path towards Him.

Wisdom helps our Love. Wisdom is the greates gift we can ask God to give us.

Love shows, demostrates our Wisdom.

We’re called to know and love Him. Who loves Him knows Him.
Then we’re ultimately called to love Him.

Therefore I dare answer the OP:

**Yes, Love is greatest. **

Love is what we have to achieve.

Love is the ultimate measure and essence of theosis.

In Christ
P7

 

[spockrates]

Hey spock, I was going to reply to this but then I thought, hmmmm, I have seen that kind of reasoning before by someone called Socrates4Jesus who incidentally was banned a few days before you signed up.

Now my experience with Soc4Jesus was not very good. He was not really interested in learning but merely to twist things around. When shown compelling logic, he avoids them and goes back to the same old tired questions and reasoning even when it has been rebutted many times over.

So friend, I doubt you are here to learn so not playing your games amigo.

You must have me confused with someone else.

 

[spockrates]

Dear Spock,

I’d say you look IMHO in good harmony with Catechism and Aquinas.

• If the gifts of the Spirit “complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them”, as per CCC 1831,
  and
• if each of the seven gifts is to be considered specifically linked to a virtue, and wisdom
  is specifically linked to Love as per Aquinas

then we could confidently say

Wisdom completes and perfects Love of those who receive it ( ie Wisdom).

This also appears consistent with Gregory the Great’s vision of Wisdom as the highest of the gifts… and St. Paul’s vision of Love as the greatest of the theological virtues ( which are, we can concede, grater than the four cardinal human virtues )

If this is somehow reasonable:

Wisdom is the greatest gift we can ask to receive. By praying to receive Wisdom, before a dilemma or anytime we do, we ask then to perfect, to complete our Love.

Or should we, alternatively, long just for Wisdom in itself , rather then as guide and support towards better Love ?

It seems Scriptures are inclined to tell us : ask for wisdom. Solomon did ask for it, rather than achieving it as a task with divine assistance.

About Love we’re not told to ask for it as a gift. We are told, commanded, to love.

Am I on to something Spock ?

If so, Love appears the task, the goal. I’d say that Agape, IS communion of will with God.

Wisdom is essential in approaching this communion, in our path towards theosis.

The Lord gives us task ( Agape, communion with His will ), and gift to achieve the task ( Wisdom) if we ask for this.

---

IMHO we cannot see in Revelation that we are going to be judged on our Wisdom.

That can be considered also like this: if you give me a gift, you are not going to judge me on whether I got what you yourself gave me freely. ( although I could try to tell you I had the “merit” to ask for your gift )

You’ll likely judge me on achievements you expect from me, that I can get through your gift.

Fascinating! If what you say is wise because it is true, then I should rethink what I’ve suggested. Before I said that the only difference between Love and Wisdom was emotion. Now, perhaps, I’m wrong? Let’s consider this.

Love is

• emotion of love
• motivation to love
• decision to love
• action expressing love

Wisdom is

• determination of truth
• decision to act on the truth determined

Not only is Wisdom handicapped by a lack of feeling, she is also incapable of action! Wisdom’s value as a virtue, then, appears to be in her discerning the truth (for example, determining the best way to act morally, and according to God’s will). Love’s value as a virtue, it now seems, is not only in her compelling us to act, but in her empowering us to act in love.

It seems my right brain, then, had a clearer conception of the truth than my left! For my imagination of Love being blind and mute, and Wisdom being crippled is more in line with your suggestion that only Love acts. Wisdom is confined to her wheelchair, and cannot act at all apart from Love. Love, having the legs to act, can push Wisdom’s chair to the object loved. But being blind, she must rely on Wisdom’s sight to guide her. And being mute, she cannot tell the person who has her how to best love, but can only produce the emotion, motivation and decision to love.

Extremely helpful, P7. Thank you!



The next question, I suppose, is whether it is better to know God’s will, but not carry it out? Or is it better to not know God’s will, but act anyway?

 

[spockrates]

When I consider the mentioned post

Wisdom says, “Go forward, wait, turn right, turn left. Now, now love!” And Love obeys wisdom, and moves them both toward the goal of loving. Without each other they are likely to fail to love as God desires, for Wisdom cannot possibly feel love like God, and Love cannot possibly see how to love like God. But together (like the God the Father of Love, and Logos the Son together) genuine love (a love which is beautiful, compassionate, and wise) is truly fulfilled.

I see us as near as ever to each other on this.

You’re repeatedly stating that Love is the goal, and Wisdom should behave as its beatiful guide. I fully subscribe your description, if I get it correctly.

Although I cannot say I got the solution to my aporia expressed in the post you’re anwering, this is my present proposal:

Growing harmony between Love and Wisdom is probably what we can see as peculiar of a path towards Him.

Wisdom helps our Love. Wisdom is the greates gift we can ask God to give us.

Love shows, demostrates our Wisdom.

We’re called to know and love Him. Who loves Him knows Him.
Then we’re ultimately called to love Him.

Therefore I dare answer the OP:

**Yes, Love is greatest. **

Love is what we have to achieve.

Love is the ultimate measure and essence of theosis.

In Christ
P7

Yes, P7, and it seems to me that Wisdom agrees with you. In that agreement she is even more beautiful, I think. For she humbly assists Love to make her sister virtue greater than herself. We can learn a lot about humility, and other good ways, from the wise woman of whom Solomon spoke!



And she seems to be speaking even now (whether she is speaking through the wisdom you have given me, or through the Holy Spirit, I do not know). For she gives me the answer to the question I asked in the previous post. That answer is that it’s better to love unwisely than never love at all! Wisdom has spoken, and my eyes are open, and as a saintly woman so wisely said:

Once you see truth, you can’t *unsee *it!

–Mother Teressa of Calcutta

However, the question that has goaded us since the beginning of this dialog still remains: How could God say no one was wiser than Solomon, and yet Solomon so unwisely say this?

For Wisdom is more precious than rubies,
and *nothing *you desire can compare with her.

(Proverbs 8:11)

There is no doubt Solomon was wise, for God Himself said to Solomon (and it bears repeating):

I [God] will give you [Solomon] a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be.

(1 Kings 3:12)

So we are still faced with this paradox: Either (1) God was in error, and not all of what Solomon wrote is wise; or (2) we are in error and Wisdom truly is greater than Love.

Then again, perhaps some third possibility is the case. The only thing, at the moment, that comes to mind as a third possibility (and I hope Wisdom will tell you whether this is the solution to our paradox) is this: Solomon was completely ignorant of the Love of which we are privy. But if he was ignorant of love, then he could not be wise about love, for wisdom is the opposite of ignorance!

Do you have any more wisdom to help me out of my ignorance, P7?

 

[spockrates]

… So friend, I doubt you are here to learn so not playing your games amigo.

I assure you I’m nothing like the one you mentioned. I’ve already learned a lot from P7 and others in this discussion! I also try to learn from others by reading other discussion threads. It’s possible that what I posted in my reply to you was similar to what I read in one of those threads; although I’m embarrassed to admit that I cannot remember what thread that might have been. Sorry if I misrepresented the ideas of someone else as my own. It was not intentional.

 

[pneuma07]

Yes, P7, and it seems to me that Wisdom agrees with you. In that agreement she is even more beautiful, I think. For she humbly assists Love to make her sister virtue greater than herself. We can learn a lot about humility, and other good ways, from the wise woman of whom Solomon spoke!



And she seems to be speaking even now (whether she is speaking through the wisdom you have given me, or through the Holy Spirit, I do not know). For she gives me the answer to the question I asked in the previous post. That answer is that it’s better to love unwisely than never love at all! Wisdom has spoken, and my eyes are open, and as a saintly woman so wisely said:

Once you see truth, you can’t *unsee *it!

–Mother Teressa of Calcutta

However, the question that has goaded us since the beginning of this dialog still remains: How could God say no one was wiser than Solomon, and yet Solomon so unwisely say this?

For Wisdom is more precious than rubies,
and *nothing *you desire can compare with her.

(Proverbs 8:11)

There is no doubt Solomon was wise, for God Himself said to Solomon (and it bears repeating):

I [God] will give you [Solomon] a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be.

(1 Kings 3:12)

So we are still faced with this paradox: Either (1) God was in error, and not all of what Solomon wrote is wise; or (2) we are in error and Wisdom truly is greater than Love.

Then again, perhaps some third possibility is the case. The only thing, at the moment, that comes to mind as a third possibility (and I hope Wisdom will tell you whether this is the solution to our paradox) is this: Solomon was completely ignorant of the Love of which we are privy. But if he was ignorant of love, then he could not be wise about love, for wisdom is the opposite of ignorance!

Do you have any more wisdom to help me out of my ignorance, P7?

Dear Spock,

   having walked together so far, I am confident we're not going to fall now.:)

On the question that has goaded us since the beginning of the dialog, what looks wise here seems IMHO … trying to get what Proverbs 8:11 really tells us.

The key word appears

**חֵפֶץ *chephets ***

That is not a simple “thing”
The main meaning of this “chephets” seems to be “delight, pleasure”,
hence also “thing that can be desired”

If we google this OT word we can find, inter alia,

The Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon
Strong’s Number: 2656 encodedOriginalWord
Original Word Word Origin
חפץ from (02654)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
chephets khay’-fets
Parts of Speech TWOT
Noun Masculine 712b
Definition
1. delight, pleasure a. delight b. desire, longing c. the good pleasure d. that in which one takes delight

Translated Words
KJV (39) - acceptable, 1; delight, 3; delightsome, 1; desire, 12; matter, 1; pleasant, 1; pleasure, 16; purpose, 3; willingly, 1; NAS (39) - care, 1; delight, 8; delightful, 2; delights, 1; desirable things, 1; desire, 10; desired, 2; event, 1; good pleasure, 3; matter, 1; pleased, 1; pleasure, 3; precious, 1; sight, 1; undesirable, 2; what you desire, 1;

On top of that the immediate context of Proverbs 8:11 , speaks about gold and material precious objects. It looks like * chephets * could indeed mean here “ desired and precious object”, without any need to absolutize it to mean any "thing”.

So it seems quite likely we can understand Proverbs 8:11 as not stating that absolutely NO thing, included therefore the greatest of virtues, is comparable to Wisdom.

Of course we’d need the help of a biblist to confirm this conjecture

I hope this can anyway be helpful.

P7

 

[spockrates]

Dear Spock,

   having walked together so far, I am confident we're not going to fall now.:)

On the question that has goaded us since the beginning of the dialog, what looks wise here seems IMHO … trying to get what Proverbs 8:11 really tells us.

The key word appears

**חֵפֶץ *chephets ***

That is not a simple “thing”
The main meaning of this “chephets” seems to be “delight, pleasure”,
hence also “thing that can be desired”

If we google this OT word we can find, inter alia,

The Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon
Strong’s Number: 2656 encodedOriginalWord
Original Word Word Origin
חפץ from (02654)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
chephets khay’-fets
Parts of Speech TWOT
Noun Masculine 712b
Definition
1. delight, pleasure a. delight b. desire, longing c. the good pleasure d. that in which one takes delight

Translated Words
KJV (39) - acceptable, 1; delight, 3; delightsome, 1; desire, 12; matter, 1; pleasant, 1; pleasure, 16; purpose, 3; willingly, 1; NAS (39) - care, 1; delight, 8; delightful, 2; delights, 1; desirable things, 1; desire, 10; desired, 2; event, 1; good pleasure, 3; matter, 1; pleased, 1; pleasure, 3; precious, 1; sight, 1; undesirable, 2; what you desire, 1;

On top of that the immediate context of Proverbs 8:11 , speaks about gold and material precious objects. It looks like * chephets * could indeed mean here “ desired and precious object”, without any need to absolutize it to mean any "thing”.

So it seems quite likely we can understand Proverbs 8:11 as not stating that absolutely NO thing, included therefore the greatest of virtues, is comparable to Wisdom.

Of course we’d need the help of a biblist to confirm this conjecture

I hope this can anyway be helpful.

P7

P7:

I do appreciate you’re walking with me thus far on this trek, where I have not gone before! And you might have something there. But I think we’d be wise to not so quickly put words into Solomon’s mouth that he might not have intended. I mean, the wise king does *not *say,

[No material thing] you desire compares with [Wisdom].

Rather, he says,

Nothing you desire compares with her.

If we are to take the most obvious meaning of his words, without trying to read anything into them, then he is indeed saying there is *no thing *that he desired that compared to Wisdom. Let’s try, then, to see if the obvious meaning might be reconciled with the truth now obvious to us–that is, the truth that Love is the greatest of all virtues. I can see four possibilities available to us if we agree to start by taking Solomon to mean what he plainly wrote:

1. 
   *]Solomon was mistaken in saying nothing compares to Wisdom, or
   *]You and I are mistaken in saying that nothing compares to Love, or
   *]Love is never desired by anyone, or
   *]The Love we desire was not possible for Solomon to receive and thus not something he should desire
   
   If you cannot think of another possibility, let’s pray for Wisdom and see if God gives her to us. Perhaps she will speak softly to one of us and tell which possibility is the reality. For starters, she seems to be saying that (2) and (3) are not real. But what do you think of (1) or (4)?
   
   http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...nd-number-six-in-battlestar-gallactica--2.jpg
   
   Perhaps God’s Wisdom will tell
   one of us the truth about Love?

 

[spockrates]

… But if we have to compair God to God, God (the Father) is Love and Logos is Wisdom. Love was motivated to created all things through Wisdom. The second is only true if the Son is greater than the Father.

… I’m sure, then, that you must agree that when Saint John wrote this,

God is love.

(1 John 4:8, 16))

he was saying that both the Son and the Father are perfect and complete in love. And when Saint John wrote this,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.

(John 1:1-2)

he was saying that both the Son and the Father are flawless and fully wise. For the Word (AKA Logos, or Wisdom) was God the Father, and was the Son who was with God the Father.

Rather, the Apostle was saying that the one God (in all three persons) is loving and the only God (in all three persons) is wise. Am I understanding you correctly, my friend?
…

Ryan:

Hmmm. Looks like I was wrong, there. The Word (or Logos) of whom Saint John wrote in the first two verses of his Gospel was the Son of God who is both with the Father God and is God.



Embarrassed as I am by that factual error, I think you might agree that the Father and the Son are equally Love and Wisdom, for they are equally loving and wise. My thought, then, is that God, in all three persons, is *Wisdom *(for they are each omniscient) and *Love *(for they are each omnibenevolent) and *Power *(for they are each omnipotent). I hope that this drawing I made, although oversimplified, shows what I’m thinking is possibly the truth.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[benedictus2]

You must have me confused with someone else.

Nope. You are Socrates4Jesus alright. I recognized your style and your kind of reasoning straight away. If I had bothered to read your replies to the other posts instead of just reading the OP I would have picked up on it straight away.

Exactly the same Soc as the one on the Eucharist thread.

As a matter of fact, I recognized you when I read your reply and wondered why you were gonig by another name so I thought maybe you have been banned. So I went and checked Socrates4Jesus and sure enough, banned a few days before Spoc signed up.

 

[karoleck]

Loved your replies Spock-- you might be onto something there!!!you have a good sense of fun.I wonder if more attention was paid to the personality of St.Paul,it would reveal more of how his mind worked. I think that you would agree that he was an action -jackson type–as for philosophy–he left it all to the Greeks!! (and Spocrates)–his was Christ and Christ Crucified—so for St.Paul he always wanted action from his converts–love in actions–collecting money for needy communities,helping a slave,etc.so the love that St.Paul writes about is an action love–in other words virtueous acts.—something like The ACTS of the APOSTLES.Love means loving-in his eyes— they are the greatest because they last–not like our thread here!. A Question to you Spocky-now very chummy–if Solomon was so wise-how come he was not wise with his choice of ladies! StJohn of The Cross wrote that one of the consequences of sin was that the intellect was darkened and the will is weakened–so in the end ,did Solomon loose his wisdom? Am I onto something there!!-just kidding!!

I will reply to your response to my previous postings and the questions put-sometime into the celestial future.

 

[spockrates]

Nope. You are Socrates4Jesus alright. I recognized your style and your kind of reasoning straight away. If I had bothered to read your replies to the other posts instead of just reading the OP I would have picked up on it straight away.

Exactly the same Soc as the one on the Eucharist thread.

As a matter of fact, I recognized you when I read your reply and wondered why you were gonig by another name so I thought maybe you have been banned. So I went and checked Socrates4Jesus and sure enough, banned a few days before Spoc signed up.

You make a serious accusation, Ben2, and I wonder what I am to do. How can I convince you that the person you describe who deserved to be banned is not me?

I suppose the first step is to not be surprised but to be grateful. I’ve been praying that I would learn Wisdom, and now my prayer is answered. For what better way to become wise than to put my ideas to the test and see if I pass. And here is my test: Jesus said,

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”

(Matthew 5:11-12)

I’m not saying you are intentionally making a false accusation. I’m sure you are sincere, but sincerely wrong. The wise thing to do is to not get mad, but be glad that I’m wrongfully accused. For this will give me an opportunity to put what P7 and Ryan and others have taught me about Love and Wisdom to the test.

 

[spockrates]

Notice, P7 and Ryan, what is transpiring:

1. 
   *]I have been wrongfully accused of being someone I am not
   *]Love moves me to love my accuser, as Christ loved those who accused Him
   *]I decide to do as He did and not retaliate, but love instead
   
   You were right, Ryan, in saying that I should choose to love. For St. John says that God is Love, and St. Paul says that I should imitate God. But the question remains: *How *should I love? Should I ignore the accusation and do nothing, as Jesus was silent before His accusers? Should I gently and respectfully rebuke my accuser, as St. Peter advises me? Should I defend myself and explain why my accuser is mistaken, as St. Paul himself did?
   
   And you were right, P7, in saying that Love needs Wisdom. For I know that I should love, as that is what the virtue of Love would have me do. But Love is unable to tell me how to love wisely. I could flip a coin or roll dice and choose one of the three acts of Love without thinking, but my thoughtless act of love might be turn out to be unwise.
   
   Here, then, is where Love seeks the help of her sister virtue Wisdom, because, for Love to be wise, she must rely on Wisdom to guide her. Wisdom, at the moment, gives me this advice:
   
   Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
   or you will be like him yourself.
   
   Answer a fool according to his folly,
   or he will be wise in his own eyes.
   
   (Proverbs 26:4-5)
   
   First, I should be careful to not falsely accuse Ben2, or I should become like him in this particular instance. I should say that I’m not accusing Ben2 of being a fool, though I think his accusing me is unwise and that he is deceived. Second, I should respond to his accusation, or he shall think that he is right to accuse me. Now, having this Wisdom to guide me, I hope to wisely love Ben2.

 

[spockrates]

… Now my experience with Soc4Jesus was not very good. He was not really interested in learning but merely to twist things around. When shown compelling logic, he avoids them and goes back to the same old tired questions and reasoning even when it has been rebutted many times over.

Nope. You are Socrates4Jesus alright. I recognized your style … Exactly the same Soc as the one on the Eucharist thread. …

Ben2:

I’ve no doubt that you sincerely believe me to be this person you describe. But if you take time to hear me out, you might change your mind. Please listen to what I have to say.

You say that this person you accuse me of being was “not really interested in learning, but merely to twist things around.” In my opinion, such a person might certainly deserve to be banned from the Forum. St. Paul himself warned the young priest Timothy about those

“… who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth.”

(2 Timothy 3:6-7)

So I endeavored to demonstrate that I’m not like that. I explained that I’ve learned a lot from P7 and Ryan in this discussion thread. But if you don’t have the time to read our discussion, that’s OK. Perhaps you will have the time to consider this:

You say that you encountered this person you describe in a discussion thread about the Eucharist. From the sound of it, he did not believe in the Real Presence, and was unwilling to learn. But, if you will look at my response in this discussion thread, you will see that that is not what I believe at all:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=416344

Please read post # 7, there, and tell me if I sound like a person who “is always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth” that the Eucharist is the Real Presence. Do I not, rather, sound like a person that not only believes, but also defends what he believes?

 

[spockrates]

Loved your replies Spock-- you might be onto something there!!!you have a good sense of fun.I wonder if more attention was paid to the personality of St.Paul,it would reveal more of how his mind worked. I think that you would agree that he was an action -jackson type–as for philosophy–he left it all to the Greeks!! (and Spocrates)–his was Christ and Christ Crucified—so for St.Paul he always wanted action from his converts–love in actions–collecting money for needy communities,helping a slave,etc.so the love that St.Paul writes about is an action love–in other words virtueous acts.—something like The ACTS of the APOSTLES.Love means loving-in his eyes— they are the greatest because they last–not like our thread here!. A Question to you Spocky-now very chummy–if Solomon was so wise-how come he was not wise with his choice of ladies! StJohn of The Cross wrote that one of the consequences of sin was that the intellect was darkened and the will is weakened–so in the end ,did Solomon loose his wisdom? Am I onto something there!!-just kidding!!

I will reply to your response to my previous postings and the questions put-sometime into the celestial future.

Thank you for saying so, Karoleck. I cannot take any credit for your enjoyment of this discussion thread, however. For all I’m good at is showing my ignorance by asking too many questions! It’s people like P7 and Ryan who make it an enjoyable learning experience for me personally, and I’m sure for you too!

 

[pneuma07]

P7:

I do appreciate you’re walking with me thus far on this trek, where I have not gone before! And you might have something there. But I think we’d be wise to not so quickly put words into Solomon’s mouth that he might not have intended. I mean, the wise king does *not *say,

[No material thing] you desire compares with [Wisdom].

Rather, he says,

Nothing you desire compares with her.

If we are to take the most obvious meaning of his words, without trying to read anything into them, then he is indeed saying there is *no thing *that he desired that compared to Wisdom. Let’s try, then, to see if the obvious meaning might be reconciled with the truth now obvious to us–that is, the truth that Love is the greatest of all virtues. I can see four possibilities available to us if we agree to start by taking Solomon to mean what he plainly wrote:

1. 
   *]Solomon was mistaken in saying nothing compares to Wisdom, or
   *]You and I are mistaken in saying that nothing compares to Love, or
   *]Love is never desired by anyone, or
   *]The Love we desire was not possible for Solomon to receive and thus not something he should desire
   
   If you cannot think of another possibility, let’s pray for Wisdom and see if God gives her to us. Perhaps she will speak softly to one of us and tell which possibility is the reality. For starters, she seems to be saying that (2) and (3) are not real. But what do you think of (1) or (4)?
   
   http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...nd-number-six-in-battlestar-gallactica--2.jpg
   
   Perhaps God’s Wisdom will tell
   one of us the truth about Love?

1. 
   Dear Spock,
   

     I guess linguistic research could be at least as helpful to us as logic, at this particular point.

   "For wisdom<02451>is better<02896>than<04480>jewels<06443>; And all<03605>desirable<02656>things<02656>cannot<03808>compare<07737>with her.
   
   Our key word *chephets * is that number 02656, here translated, or maybe approximated, as “desirable things”.
   
   Solutions 1) and 2) seem to imply the verse reads “nothing compares” .
   
   The above approximation would sound “no desirable thing compares”.
   
   What are more precisely these “desirable things” , this chephets, which is in other passages translated as “delight” or “pleasure” ?
   
   My guess is that we can understand that wisdom does not belong to the field of the “desirable things” or “pleasant things” as meant here. Maybe we’re precisely told wisdom is on another level.
   As if we were told “Put yourself on another level, change attitude. Do not ask for the things the world looks for, that attract your eyes, or your greed, or your proud”
   
   Nothing more than a conjectural feeling of mine.
   I repeat we need help from a biblist, telling us what our key word can most likely really mean here.
   
   If we cannot get this decisive help, I remain quite satisfied with this conjecture.
   
   And I thank you and every contributor for this beautiful thread.
   
   See you on CAF.
   P7