Catholic Church and Bible

[at0m1c]

Please advise!

[url="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html"]Times Online: Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the bible[/url]

THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.

The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.

Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.

The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible.

In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is “God’s word expressed in human language” and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.

They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.

The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”

They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.

“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”

Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, “His blood be on us and on our children”, a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt. Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had “tragic consequences” in encouraging hatred and persecution. “The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians.”

As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.”

In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew’s and Edinburgh, explain its context.

They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.

The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. “We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new.”

A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It’s a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: “There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.

That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching.”

BELIEVE IT OR NOT

UNTRUE

Genesis ii, 21-22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man

Genesis iii, 16

God said to the woman [after she was beguiled by the serpent]: “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

Matthew xxvii, 25

The words of the crowd: “His blood be on us and on our children.”

Revelation xix,20

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone.”

TRUE

Exodus iii, 14

God reveals himself to Moses as: “I am who I am.”

Leviticus xxvi,12

“I will be your God, and you shall be my people.”

Exodus xx,1-17

The Ten Commandments

Matthew v,7

The Sermon on the Mount

Mark viii,29

Peter declares Jesus to be the Christ

Luke i

The Virgin Birth

John xx,28

Proof of bodily resurrection

[Theoketos]

Short Answer: All of the above are true still, but they have really important nuances.

Long Answer see below...

[cmotherofpirl]

We just discussed this story with its misleading headline somewhere here or it open mic.

[scardella]

Talk about screwed up spin...

[cmotherofpirl]

The object is to sell headlines, not truth.

[photosynthesis]

isn't there another thread about this?

[StatingTheObvious]

Nobody had ever accused the Catholics as being 'literal fundamentalists'. Hasn't it always been the [i]inspired[/i] 'Word' of God? I mean, come on. If Eve was made with Adam's rib, wouldn't Eve have been a clone and been a male.

Edited October 21, 2005 by StatingTheObvious

[Aloysius]

the Bible is inerrant in what the sacred authors intended to say. their intended saying is the Inspired Word of God, not necessarily the literary devices they used to convey it.

And the Church, divinely guided, has explained much of what the Sacred Authors intended to say when it is hard to understand. They intended to say that there were only two original humans from which we all derive ancestry. They intended to say that those two original humans were in favor with God. They intended to say that those two fell by disobeying God and because of that all of humanity has a fallen nature. They did not intend to say that back in those times snakes talked.

[infinitelord1]

i believe the bible is the 100% truth. I think that as human beings evolve we will be able to prove the validity of the bible more accurately. I also believe that although the bible speaks the 100% truth it doesnt contain the 100% truth of everything.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Oct 22 2005, 12:13 AM']i believe the bible is the 100% truth. I think that as human beings evolve we will be able to prove the validity of the bible more accurately. I also believe that although the bible speaks the 100% truth it doesnt contain the 100% truth of everything.
[right][snapback]766962[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The Bible tells the truth, but it is not CNN or the London Times. There is more than one valid way to tell the truth.

[cmotherofpirl]

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=40958"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=40958[/url]

[son_of_angels]

When I read the book of Genesis, I see God the Creator creating in six distinct acts of creation, which are framed essentially by a beginning and an ending, then a sanctification of the seventh day, that is where God rested and looked over all creation.

Moreover I see the first Man and first Woman placed in a garden, which, though in the world, still has no definite location in terms of Geography, and likewise is a place which none of us can reach by foot. Ergo, they were in the world, and there was a paradise in the world, and the whole world exists for the coming of man into it. When he came, he brought sin, and the Garden, which had wrought only perfection was removed from it.

None of these things are deniable by Science because they are all essentially Acts of God, nor are they provable. To a certain extent reason can inform one of the necessity of a creator, but it is intangible to speak of his nature per se through nature, for the Garden of Eden is no longer quite with us. When God does something, my most recent thoughts have led me to believe, in the flow from cause to effect, his actions begin with a cause that effects everything and then moves down to something which effects nothing, whereas a human action starts with a cause with a limited number of effects and then grows to a cause with a great number of effects. Hence, the further in effect we move the less we are able to perceive the effects of a God who affects EVERYTHING.

What am I saying? That in distinct actions God created the earth. Though it has not been fully declared as dogma, I pray for the day when such will be the case. He created in six distinct actions, but they were distinct according to his standards of distinctness, yet are now imperceivable to us who move our direction in time. Ergo, nature and cause must themselves to something imperceivable, and, were we of another faith, that faith should convince us that it were 12 days, or by the splitting of God's body, or whatever that these distinct actions of Creation by God occured. Yet they must be distinct, in the same way that the ultimate effects of our actions are distinct, though incomprehendable without revelation.

We should be clear on this...Even if every natural process were able to be explained through science, it has nothing to do with the mind and will of God as Creator, nor even the specificity of his actions. We should believe firmly the testimony of the Bible, especially when it contradicts science.

[Laudate_Dominum]

For some random reason this reminds me of this time when this protestant fellow approached this old catholic gentleman who was praying the rosary in front of an abortion clinic. The protestant went up to him and started saying stuff like, "do you know that the bible says.. [insert anti-catholic argument here]?", the old guys response was, "I don't read the bible, I'm Catholic."
The funny part is, it kind of shut up the protestant evangelist.



I realize this is actually kind of sad, but for whatever reason I think it was very amusing. That old man was a simple fellow, maybe because I actually knew him I feel comfortable laughing about it. Well anyway... maybe you had to be there.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I still like the other story better, about my friend in the dentists office who was approached by a protestant who pointed at his prominent miraculous medal and said, "you know you don't need any mediators to get to Jesus". To which he spontaneously replied, "well then I guess I don't need you".

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Oct 22 2005, 03:51 AM']I still like the other story better, about my friend in the dentists office who was approached by a protestant who pointed at his prominent miraculous medal and said, "you know you don't need any mediators to get to Jesus". To which he spontaneously replied, "well then I guess I don't need you".
[right][snapback]767084[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
that is sweet.