Hard to believe Scripture

[distracted]

December 8 Mass readings are difficult to believe…

the account of the fall.

Genesis 3:9-15, 20:

After the man, Adam, had eaten of the tree, the Lord God called to the man and asked him, “where are you?” He answered, “I heard you i the garden; but i was afraid, because i was naked, so i hid myslef.” Then he asked, “who told you that you were naked? You have eaten, then, from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat!” The man replied, “the woman whom you put here with me - she gave me fruit from the tree, and so i ate it.” The Lord God then asked the woman, “why did you do such a thing?” The woman answered, “the serpent tricked me into it, so i ate it.” Then the Lord God said to the serpent: “Because you have done this, you shall be banned from all the animals and from all the wild creatures; on your belly shall you crawl, and dirt shall you eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will strike at your head, while you stirke at his heel.” The man called his wife Eve, because she became the mother of all the living.

If one were required to take this literally, i don’t believe there would be too many Christians…

**Are we to take any of it literally??? Just wondering… **

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

What is it about the passage that you are struggling with?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Some of the Church’s comments on Genesis:

Moreover we may rightly and deservedly hope that our time also can contribute something towards the deeper and more accurate interpretation of Sacred Scripture. For not a few things, especially in matters pertaining to history, were scarcely at all or not fully explained by the commentators of past ages, since they lacked almost all the information which was needed for their clearer exposition. How difficult for the Fathers themselves, and indeed well nigh unintelligible, were certain passages is shown, among other things, by the oft-repeated efforts of many of them to explain the first chapters of Genesis
—Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, 1943, #31
The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.
—Catechism of the Catholic Church #390.The first quote is probably more referring to the formation of light and planets and such. But the task of interpretation is not so much the modern scientific scrutiny that our culture demands, but rather recognizing Scripture as God’s communication and answer the question: What is God trying to communicate through this human author’s account?

 

[distracted]

What is it about the passage that you are struggling with?

i definitely do NOT struggle w/ the notion that man fell… I KNOW from experience that that is true… (and how). I just find the part about the snake difficult to believe… I am wondering if the devil is just called a serpent for some mysterious reason???

I mean, animals do not talk to man…

THat is probably the hardest thing to believe about the passage…

If it weren’t for my awareness of the Presence of Christ in the Church 24/7… (and some “lesser” Christian “things”)… I would tend question Christianity because of this passage… and am not surprised that many others DO…

 

[MarcoPolo]

If it weren’t for my awareness of the Presence of Christ in the Church 24/7… (and some “lesser” Christian “things”)… I would tend question Christianity because of this passage… and am not surprised that many others DO…

But are you not then applying a standard of science that the apart from the intent of the author? The story should be interpreted in light of the tradition in which it was written. Our problem is that myth was more useful in antiquity. They didn’t have all the legalistic demand for accuracy in scientific matters, etc… C.S. Lewis believed myth had the capacity to be more true than fact. Because God’s communication often takes on a dynamism of meanings, sometimes He may have communicated in accord with the ancients’ mythical styles of teaching.

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

i definitely do NOT struggle w/ the notion that man fell… I KNOW from experience that that is true… (and how). I just find the part about the snake difficult to believe… I am wondering if the devil is just called a serpent for some mysterious reason???

I mean, animals do not talk to man…

THat is probably the hardest thing to believe about the passage…

If it weren’t for my awareness of the Presence of Christ in the Church 24/7… (and some “lesser” Christian “things”)… I would tend question Christianity because of this passage… and am not surprised that many others DO…

Well, we understand the follow up to this passage to be about placing enmity between man and the forces of evil, not between man and snakes. Revelation also clearly draw the connection between the serpent and Satan. The two main literal interpretations I’ve seen are the Satan took on the appearance of a serpent and the Satan possessed the serpent, both of which easily account of the serpent’s speech, and both of which seem doubtlessly within Satan’s power to accomplish.

As for the official Catholic stance of the passage, that I cannot help you with.

 

[notacat]

I mean, animals do not talk to man…

I take it that you believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If you believe that, why is it difficult to believe in animals talking?

Here’s another example: And the LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times? (Num 22:28 NAS77)

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t expect my dog to start talking to me, but I do believe the Bible.

 

[khutcheson]

I take it that you believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If you believe that, why is it difficult to believe in animals talking?

Here’s another example: And the LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times? (Num 22:28 NAS77)

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t expect my dog to start talking to me, but I do believe the Bible.

Bingo

 

[distracted]

Some of the Church’s comments on Genesis:

Moreover we may rightly and deservedly hope that our time also can contribute something towards the deeper and more accurate interpretation of Sacred Scripture. For not a few things, especially in matters pertaining to history, were scarcely at all or not fully explained by the commentators of past ages, since they lacked almost all the information which was needed for their clearer exposition. How difficult for the Fathers themselves, and indeed well nigh unintelligible, were certain passages is shown, among other things, by the oft-repeated efforts of many of them to explain the first chapters of Genesis
—Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, 1943, #31
The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.
—Catechism of the Catholic Church #390.The first quote is probably more referring to the formation of light and planets and such. But the task of interpretation is not so much the modern scientific scrutiny that our culture demands, but rather recognizing Scripture as God’s communication and answer the question: What is God trying to communicate through this human author’s account?

thanks for the quote from the pope… nice to know I am not alone… (Well, i knew i wasn’t, but its nice to hear a pope say about the same thing…)

I do get the message of waht god is trying to communicate to us… No problem there… just don’t get that thing about the snake…

 

[distracted]

But are you not then applying a standard of science that the apart from the intent of the author? The story should be interpreted in light of the tradition in which it was written. Our problem is that myth was more useful in antiquity. They didn’t have all the legalistic demand for accuracy in scientific matters, etc… C.S. Lewis believed myth had the capacity to be more true than fact. Because God’s communication often takes on a dynamism of meanings, sometimes He may have communicated in accord with the ancients’ mythical styles of teaching.

hmmm… makes one wonder how much of the scriptures are “influenced” by the human… rather than the divine… or something. I don’t know how to word waht i am trying to say.

I would just like to have an answer when someone accuses us Christians of believing man-written wrods. Some have argued wtih me that mere men wrote the bible… I tell them God wrote it through human beings… but i don’t know if everyone "buys’ that… or w aht…

 

[distracted]

Well, we understand the follow up to this passage to be about placing enmity between man and the forces of evil, not between man and snakes. Revelation also clearly draw the connection between the serpent and Satan. The two main literal interpretations I’ve seen are the Satan took on the appearance of a serpent and the Satan possessed the serpent, both of which easily account of the serpent’s speech, and both of which seem doubtlessly within Satan’s power to accomplish.

hmmm… a possessed serpent. that’s not hard to believe… They naturally look demonic to me anyway…

This all makes sense… Where did you get it?

As for the official Catholic stance of the passage, that I cannot help you with.

why - cause you’re not Catholic?? What religion are you?

 

[distracted]

I take it that you believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If you believe that, why is it difficult to believe in animals talking?

Here’s another example: And the LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times? (Num 22:28 NAS77)

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t expect my dog to start talking to me, but I do believe the Bible.

i remembered about the talking donkey long after i posted this… but i still would have posted it because it is still odd (Genesis 1)… and of course, God knows that such things would confound us poor humans… so i don’t know why He allowed things to be written that way…

Also: I never said I did not believe or that it was even incredibly difficult to believe (even that the snake actually spoke). I just… well, to tell the truth, i was thinkin of non-believers more than myself… They look at this kind of passage and think “How can intelligent people believe t his kind of thing?” and i just figured they kind of have a point… I think it would be best if most people who are exploring the truths of Christianity for the first time, should start with the New Testament… but then again, as you say, the resurrection (ascension) is sometimes problematic to us humans as well… The way i get over “doubts” or questions such as these is to look at human life. Even an ordinary life is a miracle… when you think about it… Jesus being resurrected is just… another miracle… or whatever…

 

[notacat]

God knows that such things would confound us poor humans… so i don’t know why He allowed things to be written that way…

Probably because they’re true and believing them keeps us humble.

*But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; (*1Co 1:27)

When I say I believe the Bible I know many people think I’m stupid or foolish or gullible…probably all three.

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. (Jas 4:6)

 

[distracted]

Probably because they’re true and believing them keeps us humble.

*But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; (*1Co 1:27)

When I say I believe the Bible I know many people think I’m stupid or foolish or gullible…probably all three.

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. (Jas 4:6)

you must live in a big city…

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

hmmm… a possessed serpent. that’s not hard to believe… They naturally look demonic to me anyway…

This all makes sense… Where did you get it?

Well, first of all from scripture…namely by looking at the references to Satan and serpents in the Bible and where they overlap. Cross-referencing he two shows the very straightforward connection in Revelation. I also looked at a few Biblical commentaries to see if there was some other interpretation of it that I’d missed.

why - cause you’re not Catholic?? What religion are you?

That’s correct. As for what religion I am? I am Christian (and I use the term not to contrast with Catholic, but rather identifying myself first and foremost as a follower of Christ). More specifically, my faith would be described as evangelical.

 

[MarcoPolo]

hmmm… makes one wonder how much of the scriptures are “influenced” by the human… rather than the divine… or something. I don’t know how to word waht i am trying to say.

I would just like to have an answer when someone accuses us Christians of believing man-written wrods. Some have argued wtih me that mere men wrote the bible… I tell them God wrote it through human beings… but i don’t know if everyone "buys’ that… or w aht…

It is altogether possible that you can give a correct answer to a cynic that will not convince him. It does not make your answer any less correct. The humans employed by God very much had influence on the content of Scripture, such that the interpreter must seek to determine the author’s intent.

CCC#101 In order to reveal himself to men, in the condescension of his goodness God speaks to them in human words: "Indeed the words of God, expressed in the words of men, are in every way like human language, just as the Word of the eternal Father, when he took on himself the flesh of human weakness, became like men.

CCC#110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. “For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.”

Language is the way humans communicate. God meets us at our level because we don’t go higher. Some fundamentalists believe Scripture is written by “dictation” but that certainly does not stand when recognizing the cultural influence and literary forms that change from writer to writer.

I have noticed this sort of trap that many non-Catholics have when rejecting the human institution of the Church, thinking that humanity is incompatible with God. The Incarnation is the means by which we must realize God’s revelation and Church. Humanity and Divinity united as one.

 

[distracted]

Well, first of all from scripture…namely by looking at the references to Satan and serpents in the Bible and where they overlap. Cross-referencing he two shows the very straightforward connection in Revelation. I also looked at a few Biblical commentaries to see if there was some other interpretation of it that I’d missed.

That’s correct. As for what religion I am? I am Christian (and I use the term not to contrast with Catholic, but rather identifying myself first and foremost as a follower of Christ). More specifically, my faith would be described as evangelical.

So - Why aren’t you Catholic??

 

[distracted]

It is altogether possible that you can give a correct answer to a cynic that will not convince him. It does not make your answer any less correct.

True… fortunately, i haven’t been dealing with unbelievers much these days, except anonymously…

I have noticed this sort of trap that many non-Catholics have when rejecting the human institution of the Church, thinking that humanity is incompatible with God. The Incarnation is the means by which we must realize God’s revelation and Church. Humanity and Divinity united as one.

yeah, i’ve seen that before… people thinking humanity is so apart from God… which we are when we sin (and /or are aroundit) … but… anyway… it seems some religions have this aversion to anything physical… one of the differences between Catholics and Protestants is that … i guess it comesfrom Catholics taking Jesus into our bodies and Protestants don’t… Am i making sense???

I don’t have much time… but anyway, maybe you get the gist of what i am saying… ?

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

So - Why aren’t you Catholic??

I think that’s a topic for a different thread

 

[MarcoPolo]

I don’t have much time… but anyway, maybe you get the gist of what i am saying… ?

I get it. The Sacraments have the same Incarnational nature…they are both physical and spiritual, earthly and divine, temporal yet eternal. Just like the Incarnate Jesus who was the fusion of the two worlds, so are the Sacraments, which are of course Jesus perpetuated on earth. Many Protestants reject all the human, earthly side of the Incarnation in this way, and it’s up to us to articulate that this is what’s happening!