Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible

[PaulJason]

Why do you trust secular British reporters as theological authorities? This makes no sense. Just because they interpret the Catholic statement as a denial of the Bible’s truth doesn’t mean that that’s what it is. British reporters can’t tell a theological idea from a hole in the head (the same famous newspaper you cite once ran an article on the Plymouth Brethren which referred to this egalitarian sect, which doesn’t even ordain people in its strict form, as having “priests”).

The actual quote they give is fully defensible. The Bible is not designed to give us details about science or even history. The Bible is a story of salvation history. Its infallibility (or, if you prefer, inerrancy, though the latter word is often used for the stricter view which I do not hold) covers all matters pertaining to divinely revealed truth, whether they be theological, scientific, historical, or whatever. It is not restricted to some ethereal “religious” meaning. But neither does that infallibility cover every scientific and historical belief stated or implied by the human authors.

Edwin

Please,do me the courtesy of reading the whole thread before posting it will save us all a lot of wasted time.

 

[PaulJason]

OK. I should have known better than to expect you to answer a question.

Pastor Jim

Do me a favor go back and read what the original intent of this thread was. You will find it in the first few post. Basiclly I was whinnning because no one answered post around here useless you say something crazy or stupid like “Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible”. Then you poped up without reading anything else and started in, not really surprising
see as you have only been around for 17 days and have 15+ posts a day, which leads me to believe you post before you think.

So please either go back read and answer my original questions or start your thread.

 

[PaulJason]

This is nice and all but not what I am looking for.

Has anyone here read the document? If so what does it say?

(No I have not read yet, I ordered one it is on its way)

Has the Vatican responded to the document or the report?

Have the Bishops responded to the report?

Is this a valid document?

These are the questions I am asking. I know the report is from a secular news rag. I was just using it to get any kind of response. Sorry I did it that way, but useless you post something to stir people up around here you get ignored.

And yes I have read Jimmy Akins article. However it addresses the report and the reporter not the document.

Above you will find the questions I wanted answered in this thread. If you can not help please stop clogging my thread.

Thank you

 

[Verbum]

Hi Pastor Jim,

Perhaps you’re confused because I used the phrase “the analogy of scripture”, which does not refer to an analogous comparison of two things, but to a hermeneutic principle that simply means that all of scripture must be interpreted as a whole.

You couldn’t have said a more Catholic thing. One of the documents of Vatican II *(Dei Verbum)*says precisely that :

But, since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/v2revel.htm

If you read taht document, you will see that the Church firmly believes that everything in the Bible is true, but that it must be understood in the spirit that it was written. The Bible is often called a “book”. It is not a book, it is a library, and the books it contains have been written over several centuries by many different individuals in widely different contexts. The mentality of the writers as well as the literary conventions they follow must be taken into account, so that, for example, the book of Revelation cannot be interpreted in the same way as the Gospel of John, though both are the truth of God. It is a study that never ends.

The arguments started by a quote from a publication referring to a document we haven’t seen do not really lead anywhere. But I am sure the good bishops of Great Britain would not willingly go against* Dei Verbum*, although they might err in their wish to make the document’s teaching accessible to the masses.

Verbum

PS I shall not have access to a computer in the next couple of weeks. Sorry if I do not respond to further developments.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Paul: Another poster (not I) had in one of his/her posts this link, which is to a site called Catholic Planet. I am not sure if this particular site itself is a reliable site. This site gives a review of the document which the news article is talking about, the document set out not by “The Catholic Church” nor “its hierarchy” but only by a group of bishops in England, Scotland and Wales, and as a ‘teaching’ document, not a document which is binding on the faithful. Here is the link.

catholicplanet.com/TSM/critical-review.htm

 

[Harmony1988]

This guy is a special case, I believe Dan already addressed his behaviour in the 6 points.

He constantly, constantly asks/answers things that have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Statements like “I’m sorry you find scripture offensive”. “Sorry if this is too tough for you”, if he engaged in some scriptural debate, he’d be kicked out the debate shortly after joining it.

I’m sorry Pastor Jim, making statements like these and trying to milk out an unnecessary response from others can also be seen as “poisoning the well”, and a heap of other fallacies like ignoratio elenchi.

Stop dancing around the point. Have you read what the catechism says? It answers your question as to what Catholicism teachs of the Bible. Game over.

 

[PaulJason]

Paul: Another poster (not I) had in one of his/her posts this link, which is to a site called Catholic Planet. I am not sure if this particular site itself is a reliable site. This site gives a review of the document which the news article is talking about, the document set out not by “The Catholic Church” nor “its hierarchy” but only by a group of bishops in England, Scotland and Wales, and as a ‘teaching’ document, not a document which is binding on the faithful. Here is the link.

catholicplanet.com/TSM/critical-review.htm

Thank you for the link

 

[Spirithound]

Actually’ elohim’ can be used same as the “royal” we or as a collective as a king and his court(angels) . It could also mean( and scholars have doubts about this one) that it could be Yahweh and lesser gods under Him. Read Nahum Sarna’s Commentary on Genesis by JPS .Nobody “hid” these facts- philology and other biblical sciences are not perfect and usage can be lost in the mists of time.

Don’t forget there are 3 Persons in the Trinity

 

[Gene_Church]

Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
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.

See link for the rest of the story…

timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article574768.ece

So the Catholic Church now claims the Bible is not true?

I love how secular writers attempt to rewrite Christian thinking, in order to minimize its importance.

 

[Gene_Church]

The article falsely describes the controversy with Galileo, in that the Church demanded scientific proof, rather than unproved theories, to be provided before they were taught.

The teachings establish, not that the Bible is not divinely inspired, but that different portions of the Bible were written with different styles and purposes. We do not read the Bible in a literalist sense, but in a literal one.

 

[ROBIN97]

harmony,

That’s how I see it.
Honestly, have you ever really seen these types of posts ever be open to hearing what Catholics have to say?

It goes like this:

1. See some claim made somewhere in the media
2. Claim that this is dogma of what Catholics believe.
3. Go to a Catholic discussion board, and ask why Catholics believe in X when the bible says otherwise, thus creating the apparent contradiction between Scripture and Catholic doctrine.
4. Don’t listen to any other Catholic on that discussion board who clarifies what the actual position is and why the initial source is inaccurate.
5. Original poster assumes the veracity of the claim they read somehwere else, but never accepts the clarification offered by the posters they are engaging with.
6. Ignore any reference to the Catechism which has an authoritative value to Catholic doctrines and claim that the Catholic refutation of their misconception constitutes a personal attack on them.

After a few years dealing with posters like these, their strategy becomes about as transparent as glass.

Yes. I likewise saved your 6 points - Under the title "6 Points of Anti-Catholic Attack Methodology Often Used by Cheap-Shot Pastors and Others. I will definitely use it in my Apologetics literature. Good job of observation.!

Robin