S
seagal
Guest
I didn’t say that and didn’t mean to imply it. I just echoed what Third Day wrote. The point I was making was that the Bible wasn’t intended to teach science lessons.
- Status
S
seagal
Guest
:grouphug:
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
If I’m a heretic, then burn me at the stake if you must, to protect what you personally believe is sacred, then I will not resist you.
But even while you’re doing it, I challenge you, show me love. Wish you didn’t have to do it.
The more you despise what I say or do or stand for, the more “brownie points” you get in Heaven for treating me with love, kindness, and respect.
Just something to consider.
I’m sorry if this comes across as preachy or condescending. If you like my words, then take them and do what you will with them. If you don’t, then forget you ever read them
Peace and
,
Alan
But even while you’re doing it, I challenge you, show me love. Wish you didn’t have to do it.
The more you despise what I say or do or stand for, the more “brownie points” you get in Heaven for treating me with love, kindness, and respect.
Just something to consider.
I’m sorry if this comes across as preachy or condescending. If you like my words, then take them and do what you will with them. If you don’t, then forget you ever read them
Peace and
,Alan
T
Third_Day
Guest
Where has the Church stated the bible is not a book of science?. Consider this quote from Father Warkulwiz in his book *The Doctrines of Genesis *that I have come to agree with and that addresses what Catholics have accepted without even realizing it.
“ The theistic version, which admits that God created the universe but will not admit that He has told us something about how He did it. Its adherents do not totally ignore God, they just marginalize Him by silencing Him. Their slogans are “The bible is not a science book” and “The Bible tells us how to go to heaven but not how the heavens go”. Their manner of seeking knowledge about the world differs little from that of their atheistic counterparts.
Today the Catholic Church has well developed theology of redemption and sanctification. However she has not well developed theology of creation because so many of her theologians, scholars and scientists have embraced theistic naturalism…Theistic naturalists are ignorant of, ignore, or dismiss the sound theology of creation developed by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church over the centuries, a theology based on the conviction that Genesis 1-11 speaks the literal truth.”
B
buffalo
Guest
Yes, through the flow of Genesis they began to understand God more personally. Somewhat like a son calling his father, father, dad, daddy etc…Very interesting stuff herebut I’m curious about a couple of things.
- In the text quoted above you say (I’m assuming the question actually came from the Torah scholars?) How did Eve know God’s name before it was revealed to Moses? My response would be Couldn’t God have also revealed it to her?
- Did the Jewish people in Moses’ time also believe literally in the 6 day creation period or were they aware that it was a way of telling a story? What do Jewish people today believe?
B
buffalo
Guest
It is really cool how they are able to remove all historical and science refernces, so purifying the Bible.
Go outside and observe 1 hours worth of events. Now write it down. Now filter everything that is historical and scientific. Pretty daunting task, don’t ya think?
S
ServantJohn
Guest
Maybe you described how you came up with the word “THEN” being in Genesis 2 somewhere in your post, but I don’t feel like reading all of them to find it. If not, where is the word “THEN” in Genesis 2? It does appear in the Douay-Rheims Bible as in Genesis 2:21 refering to the creation of woman after it was found that there was no helper for Adam, but I can’t find the word “THEN” anywhere else. I even looked at four other translations and none of them have the word “THEN” anywhere in Genesis 2.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Thank you for pointing that out. I normally just use the NAB.
So the DR bible doesn’t use the word “then.”
Does that mean that the NAB is misquoting God?
Alan
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I’m surprised nobody has commented on my challenges for us to quit being so picky at the specks in each other’s eye. I thought somebody would at least come on to say they think I’m arrogant.
Who do we think we are, if we get frustrated because we can’t change the mind and heart of somebody who thinks they infallibly understand something?
The need for love and unity is God given.
The need to be right (especially on something that isn’t necessary for salvation) comes from the ego.
I have an idea. Anybody who really wants to be heard out by those of the opposite opinion, try hearing them out first. See if it doesn’t lower some defenses, and/or give you insight into how your opponent’s mind works so you know how to communicate better when it is your turn
Alan
PS. Do I come across as arrogant or condescending, or as a person genuinely concerned for others?
If you can help me by telling me how you feel and why if I say something the rubs you the wrong way, then I can maybe learn how to quit being such a pain.
If I am to read my Bible right, it shouldn’t matter to me what you people think of whether I’m doing this to move toward spiritual unity with each other and God, or if I’m feeding my ego. You may think what you want about it, and there are no wrong answers.
I reflected on why I’m even here on these forums. Is it to learn, to teach, to feed my ego, to respond to God’s call? Do spiritual acts of mercy, or looking for admiration? I realized that those are all things that motivate me, so I guess I really don’t know which one most reflects the state of my soul unless I am qualified to judge my own soul.
So I leave it to God and you to provide feedback by what you say and how you say it, so that I may try to do a better job of communicated without coming across as ad hominem attack, or with any other mixed messages that make it hard to hear what I want to say.
Until then, you may think as you wish about my motives or anyone else’s, and I’ll continue to follow wherever I’m led – hopefully as time goes on I will gain wisdom and do a better job of following the right motivating factor that’s most likely to help me act in a way God would like to see me act.
Alan
Who do we think we are, if we get frustrated because we can’t change the mind and heart of somebody who thinks they infallibly understand something?
The need for love and unity is God given.
The need to be right (especially on something that isn’t necessary for salvation) comes from the ego.
I have an idea. Anybody who really wants to be heard out by those of the opposite opinion, try hearing them out first. See if it doesn’t lower some defenses, and/or give you insight into how your opponent’s mind works so you know how to communicate better when it is your turn
Alan
PS. Do I come across as arrogant or condescending, or as a person genuinely concerned for others?
If you can help me by telling me how you feel and why if I say something the rubs you the wrong way, then I can maybe learn how to quit being such a pain.
If I am to read my Bible right, it shouldn’t matter to me what you people think of whether I’m doing this to move toward spiritual unity with each other and God, or if I’m feeding my ego. You may think what you want about it, and there are no wrong answers.
I reflected on why I’m even here on these forums. Is it to learn, to teach, to feed my ego, to respond to God’s call? Do spiritual acts of mercy, or looking for admiration? I realized that those are all things that motivate me, so I guess I really don’t know which one most reflects the state of my soul unless I am qualified to judge my own soul.
So I leave it to God and you to provide feedback by what you say and how you say it, so that I may try to do a better job of communicated without coming across as ad hominem attack, or with any other mixed messages that make it hard to hear what I want to say.
Until then, you may think as you wish about my motives or anyone else’s, and I’ll continue to follow wherever I’m led – hopefully as time goes on I will gain wisdom and do a better job of following the right motivating factor that’s most likely to help me act in a way God would like to see me act.
Alan
C
Crumpy
Guest
Very interesting stuff here
- In the text quoted above you say (I’m assuming the question actually came from the Torah scholars?) How did Eve know God’s name before it was revealed to Moses? My response would be Couldn’t God have also revealed it to her?
- Did the Jewish people in Moses’ time also believe literally in the 6 day creation period or were they aware that it was a way of telling a story? What do Jewish people today believe?
- We don’t know how Eve would have known the holy name YHWH for God. I’ve tried to cover a lot of ground in my posts and so did not elaborate except to point out this “problem” or “interesting feature” of the second creation account. And, this information comes from a variety of books that I have read.
I’ve read a book that was written from the Jewish and feminist point of view. This book highlights the very different treatment of women in the two creation accounts. In the first account, there seems to be equality of the sexes, and they are equally made in the image and likeness of God. In the second account, Eve is rather second class, in a particular way. God speaks directly to Adam but does not immediately speak to Eve. When God does speak to Eve, I seem to recall that it is only after the sin and so Eve is not dealt with nicely. She seems to be trying to make up ground, And, the statement to evidence that is when Cain is born, she makes a remark about the child that she and God have made (seems rather intentionally to leave Adam out and not give him any credit for the feat). It’s as if she is trying to do some social climbing.
- I don’t think that anybody can answer the question of what the Jewish people believed in the time of Moses.
There are strongly different points of view in the Torah. In Leviticus, there is a strong priesthood consisting of the descendents of Aaron. In Leviticus, the Levites are servants of the priesthood and never offer sacrifice. In Deuteronomy, the situation is totally different. There is no special place for the descendents of Aaron and instead the Levites are fulfilling the role of the priesthood.
Leviticus is describing a wilderness priesthood and Deuteronomy is describing a temple priesthood (as a generalization, although technically in Deuteronomy Moses and the Israelites are just on the border, ready to conquer Canaan). So, it’s a big puzzle with different points of view.
You’re right, modern Jewish scholars try to ferret out the history of Jewish beliefs and try to figure out when the canon of scripture was developed. I was just reading about this in The Jewish Study Bible and it’s just not known. The final form of the Torah (Gen, Ex, Lev, Num, Deut) seems to have been standardized about the time after the second captivity. So,it’s hard to pin down the answer to your question – even in Jewish scholarship.
Modern Jewish scholars use all the latest tools of exegesis, and are at least aware of Christian thought.
It might be edifying to you to know that the Septuagint is the oldest manuscript of the Bible (according to The Jewish Study Bible) which is before the time of Christ. But, the oldest existing Hebrew text was the Masoretic text, whose oldest copies date to about the 700 or 800’s AD. So, they were tremendously interested in the Dead Sea scrolls for the value that they were an older Hebrew document of the Bible.
A point I made much earlier in this thread, is that there is no official opinion about the interpretation of any verse in the Hebrew Bible, in Judaism. But, there are many opinions, even contradictory opinions, in Judaism, in its ancient documents, like the Talmud (“study” i.e. talmud torah, the study of the teaching). The commentaries that I have read take the seven day creation account as a myth, which is a sacred holy way of teaching truths about God. Across the spectrum of Judaism, there is strong belief in the literal idea of six day creation. And, then there are more liberal views ranging all the way to agnosticism and atheism.
P
Poco
Guest
Ok Alan,
You’re arrogant and condescending! :slapfight:
(you know I’m kidding, right?)
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Thank you! :thankyou:Ok Alan,
You’re arrogant and condescending! :slapfight:
(you know I’m kidding, right?)
I’d rather it be said once than thought many times.
I’ll change something.
:tiphat:
Now returning to the regularly scheduled : :slapfight:
Alan
B
buffalo
Guest
Research overturns oldest evidence of life on Earth
(PhysOrg.com) – It appears that the supposed oldest examples of life on our planet – 3.5 billion-year-old bacteria fossils found in Australian rock called Apex Chert – are nothing more than tiny gaps in the rock that are packed with minerals.
(PhysOrg.com) – It appears that the supposed oldest examples of life on our planet – 3.5 billion-year-old bacteria fossils found in Australian rock called Apex Chert – are nothing more than tiny gaps in the rock that are packed with minerals.
C
Crumpy
Guest
I have written a number of replies to the question in this thread. To put my own statements to the test, I consulted a book called “A Practical Commentary on Holy Scripture” written by the late auxiliary Bishop of Freiburg Germany, Dr. Frederick Justus Knecht. This edition in English was published by TAN Books and Publishers, Rockford,IL, 1998. It is based on the 16th edition of the bishop’s commentary, which was published in 1923.
Remarkably, the Bishop made parallel comments to those in my previous posts. He says that the seven days in Genesis 1 have no connection to 24-hour days.They are solely used to “teach” that man should work six days a week and rest on the seventh for the worship of God.
There was a footnote from the publisher that in 1906, the Pontifical Biblical Commission answered a similar question and stated that the word “day” can mean either a 24-hour day or a longer indefinite period.
LOL, this question has come up from serious and devoted Catholics around the world, over and over, for a very long time. It certainly is an honest question and a thoughtful one.
Remarkably, the Bishop made parallel comments to those in my previous posts. He says that the seven days in Genesis 1 have no connection to 24-hour days.They are solely used to “teach” that man should work six days a week and rest on the seventh for the worship of God.
There was a footnote from the publisher that in 1906, the Pontifical Biblical Commission answered a similar question and stated that the word “day” can mean either a 24-hour day or a longer indefinite period.
LOL, this question has come up from serious and devoted Catholics around the world, over and over, for a very long time. It certainly is an honest question and a thoughtful one.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
If we can accept that we cannot change another’s mind or heart; but God can, maybe we can break the vicious cycle. We can help set the stage for God to change others, but if it isn’t the person’s time, we will not see immediate results.
Just like it is futile for me to say to a woman, “be like me so that we may better get along,” it is futile to try to persuade someone against their will. The sooner we surrender to that, the more we can start learning to enjoy each other’s company, and maybe then we can listen to each other’s points of view and maybe even learn something when all we thought we’d do is teach somebody else.
I don’t want to change anybody’s mind on this anymore. I don’t care whether you believe that creation happened this way or that – what I want to know is how can whatever you believe be put to use to help us become more united with God and each other.
Alan
P
Poco
Guest
Don’t need to change a doggone thing!
T
Third_Day
Guest
The Hebrew word for day can mean an indefinite period of time such as “in the day of the Lord.” It can also mean 24 hours. However in Genesis the words "evening AND morning are included such as “and there was morning and evening the first day.” When evening and morning are together in scripture they NEVER refer to an indefinite period of time, they always refer to 24 hours.
If we are going to be consistent then we must take the literal meaning of Genesis as six days of 24 hours.Plus you have the number with those words such as the first day, the second day etc. Put all that together and to be true to biblical exegesis it means six 24 hour days.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Thank you for the happy face!
C
Crumpy
Guest
Many years ago, and since, more and more, I realized that our biggest problems have to do with living with each other. If Christianity is not the way to live together the best, then we have to make it so and show others. We’ve often been very bad at selling that point.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I think some of what we are seeing here at CAF, is that we all have come from different points of views and cultures, and are currently in a diversity of roles and situations, all over the globe.
Now that technology allows us to confront each other verbally and with smileys and other images, we find that all these different points of view are difficult to embrace at once. The Good News is that we don’t have to – we don’t have to rebuild the tower of Babel. I’m sure that the way things are going we’ll have such a tower constructed in our minds.
But we are challenged to learn to be at peace amidst people who have totally opposite ideas of right and wrong than us on any given issue.
If we can unite in heart and spirit, even though our minds are going to remain far apart unless God wills us to become clones of each other, then I think that would be progress. Maybe this is grandiose, but many of us are well connected with many other Catholics and non-Catholics. If we can demonstrate peace in the midst of diversity (or chaos) then we will have been tested and can have some confidence that the peace is real. If we experience that, then it is our prayer that others can experience a taste of that peace, through us.
Then, once we have reconciled our differences with our brothers, we can go back to giving God’s people the gift of our point of view – which was, in turn, a gift from God.
If we meditate on the Eucharist, we can’t possibly cast aspersions at each other outside of Sunday Mass. That simply is not part of our job description; it just strokes the ego of any selfishness that might reside in us.
Alan
- Status