Are the Scriptures inerrant?

[Paladin D]

Are the Scriptures inerrant? What does the Church have to say on this?

[Cam42]

This has already been discussed.....I would simply do a search. You are inviting some very senseless banter.....good luck.....

For those of us who have been through this before, get ready for the onslaught....

[Aloysius]

yes, they are inerrant according to the Catholic Church.

they are inerrant only in what they are intending to say and not in what the sacred author had no intention of saying even if the words make it appear to say something say... scientific or so... to modern readers..

It really shouldn't be so controversial, that's what the Church teaches. but if there must be an onslaught, I am prepared.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 21 2005, 10:05 AM']yes, they are inerrant according to the Catholic Church.

they are inerrant only in what they are intending to say and not in what the sacred author had no intention of saying even if the words make it appear to say something say... scientific or so... to modern readers..

It really shouldn't be so controversial, that's what the Church teaches.  but if there must be an onslaught, I am prepared.
[right][snapback]652436[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

And who determines what they "were intending to say" and what "the sacrad writers had no intention of say" even if they did?

[cmotherofpirl]

The Church.
Remember this is not a debate.,

[Apotheoun]

The Church holds that the Sacred Scriptures are inerrant, for as Pope Pius XII wrote, "Just as the substantial Word of God became like men in every respect except sin, so too the words of God, expressed in human languages, became like human speech in every respect except error." [Pope Pius XII, [u]Divino Afflante Spiritu[/u], no. 37]

[Quietfire]

The Church wrote, compiled, and spread the teachings of the New Testament with the help of the Holy Spirit.

No one has the authority to determine what this or that means in the Holy Bible other than the Catholic Church, since it belongs to her.

A 50$ bet and a book on "Dianetics" doesnt a religion make.

[Paladin D]

Thank you.

[Laudate_Dominum]

And in my experience examples of "error" in Scripture, are really just examples of error regarding how to read and understand Scripture. I flipped through a book (by some nasty atheist) dedicated to exposing the "errors" of the Bible, and the guy just made himself sound like a complete bafoon, because he had literally no appreciation for what the Bible actually is or how to understand its language and senses.

This is not to say there are no difficulties, but interpreting Scripture is not something any old person is really qualified to do, despite the protestant thesis.

[Guest Eremite]

Aloysius made an important distinction. Inerrancy extends to what the Sacred Writers "affirm" (to use the wording of the Second Vatican Council). So, for example, vis a vis science, the Sacred Writers teach us how to get to Heaven, not how the heavens go. Vis a vis history, it needs to be received according to the ancient manner of relating historical truth, which didn't always worry about being absolutely accurate.

And in case someone spouts nonsense about an infamous phrase in the Second Vatican Council's "Dei Verbum", see this article:

[url="http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt59.html"]http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt59.html[/url]

[phatcatholic]

read [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html"][b]PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS (On the Study of Holy Scripture)[/b][/url], especially para. 17-22.