Issue with Entire Bible being Inspired and Sacred

  • Thread starter Thread starter dangerousdyls
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dangerousdyls

Guest
I’ll be honest, I’m struggling right now. I’m Catholic, I love the faith, but I’m struggling with the Bible. When I go to mass, some of the readings I really relate to and like. But…there are some Bible quotes I don’t hear at mass, quotes that I take issue with.

If the Bible is sacred and entirely inspired, how does it talk of
• killing infants
• accepting slavery
• women needing to be silent
• pregnant women being ripped open.

(Edited to remove anti-Christian website link)%between%

Some, I understand, are taken out of context, but some I really don’t understand how we can keep them as part of our faith, and recognize as “divine” or “inspired”.

Can someone shed light on this? How do we have an inspired, sacred word that directly contradicts what we believe, which is ultimately love? As a Catholic, am I required to believe the entire Bible is divinely inspired? Men put the books together and men wrote the books. I’m really struggling to wrap my head around divine inspiration, given some of the wrong things in the Bible.

My intention isn’t to mislead others, but to gain a better grounding in my own faith. If a nonbeliever points me to some of these verses and asks me to justify why they’re in our sacred book, I don’t have a response.

Also, can anyone provide a comprehensive resource that covers the history of the Bible – how the books were chosen, ordered, versed, who chose them, why, information on the original authors? I’m sure there’s loads of resources, but looking for something for a beginner like me, but still gives a thorough rundown of the history of the Bible.

Thank you!
 
Do you believe that out of something bad God can make something Good? No matter how bad?? Wouldn’t the stories of killing of infants inspire you to stop the genocide of abortion which exists every day? If we have learned that the killing of infants is bad why do people continue to do it?? See, what we take from the scriptures is supposed to be a bigger picture, something that moves and ‘inspires’ our hearts to turn towards the goodness of God for the greater glory of God, not so that we continue to live in sin by ignoring Gods commands and what God has taught us about respecting life long ago… Life is sacred and holy and is worthy of being protected… My advice is to look for the spirit of God in everything and how God works in the world, then now and always…
 
Don’t look at atheist websites for information on Christianity.

The Bible books were written by men and women inspired by God. That does not mean that they are inerrant in every word. The Bible is a process of thousands of years of God revealing himself to the human race. Human history is a very brutal and violent history. The saving grace of Christ’s Gospel in the New Testament represents the greatest thing to happen in human history. A triumph of redemption over sin and death.
 
The original post in this thread is exactly why we need more Bible Study.

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
The original post in this thread is exactly why we need more Bible Study.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
To start out let me give you a book to read… Where We Got the Bible …Our Debt to the Catholic Church by : The Right Rev. Henry G. Graham (TAN Books ISBN 9790895551374 ).

I would encourage you to purchase a good Catholic Study Bible and then search for a
Catholic Bible study group at a Catholic Church. You can find lots of Bible study groups
in Dallas but beware not all are Catholic. Search at your church and if they do not have one look for others in your area. If you are a serious student see if your diocese has a
Lay Ministry program.

By all means stay away from sites that are not Catholic … just because it is on the internet does not necessarily make it true. Also be careful of sites that have Catholic in their name … some are not good resources for Catholic teaching that conform to the teaching of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Hope this helps.
 
God is telling us what happened. Events like the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah were as a punishment for sin.
 
Re infants:
In the conquest of the Promised Land, the army of the tribes of Israel was not an ordinary army but was the means chosen by God to destroy the wicked from that land, in much the same way that the flood waters were the means chosen by God to destroy the wicked from the earth in Noah’s day. Because, in this unique case, the army of the tribes of Israel was acting with divine authority and not merely human authority, the ordinary rule of war against genocide did not apply to them. Although the innocent indeed died along with the wicked, their death was a blessing not a punishment; the innocent dead were rewarded in the afterlife with eternal happiness. See Wisdom 4:7-19 on early death.

Re slavery:
The Law of Moses was a good but imperfect, intermediate step between general moral chaos and the perfect Law of Christ. Thus, some immoral practices, such as slavery, were permitted under the Law of Moses which would eventually be done away with under the Law of Christ.

Re silence:
It is a good idea for everyone, both men and women, to observe a reverential silence, instead of talking idly, when assembled as a church to celebrate the mysteries of the Christian faith. Perhaps St Paul singled out women because in his day they were more prone to such behavior.
 
This type of criticism of the Word of God tends to judge the Bible based on secular standards, with a strong bias against religion and revealed truth, and no use of the virtue of faith. There are responses to these criticisms, but the bottom line is that people need to rely on faith, and not fallen reason alone, in order to love the Word of God.

The Bible does not approve of slavery. There is some limited approval for indentured servitude, but not slavery itself.

Nothing immoral was permitted or approved under the Law of Moses. Indentured servitude is distinct from slavery, and was an unfortunate necessity in ancient times.

The expression that women should be silent in the churches (1 Cor 14:34) is figurative. For Paul also allows that a women who is prophesying in church should cover her head (1 Cor 11:5). Paul is expressing that God wills men and women to have different roles, to some extent, in the Church, the family, and society.

The question of killing infants and whole tribes is answered by the fact that God ordered the killing. And when God decides the end of a person’s life, it is not murder, since all lives belong to Him.

[Hosea 14]
{14:1} Let Samaria perish, because she has urged her God towards bitterness. Let them perish by the sword, let their little ones be thrown down, and let their pregnant women be cut in two.

This passage does not approve of killing little ones and pregnant women. It simply describes the idea that a very sinful and unrepentant people will suffer greatly because they have rejected God.

It is an infallible teaching of the Magisterium that the Bible is entirely inspired and therefore entirely inerrant. We believe based on faith, not reason alone.
 
Ron_Conte said:
It is an infallible teaching of the Magisterium that the Bible is entirely inspired and therefore entirely inerrant. We believe based on faith, not reason alone.
Click to expand...
“Entirely inerrant” – does this mean you disagree with what PaulfromIowa said above?

I’m really struggling with the concept of it being “inerrant”. Can you give a deeper explanation of inerrant? For example, if some of these writers accepted slavery, wouldn’t that mean their thinking/writing was errant?
 
Todd977 said:
Re slavery:
The Law of Moses was a good but imperfect, intermediate step between general moral chaos and the perfect Law of Christ.
Click to expand...
Thanks Todd, this does help – but I have to ask…since you’re saying the Law of Moses was imperfect, doesn’t that mean errant? If the Bible is inerrant, why does it have imperfections in it? Isn’t that a contradiction? What is meant by the Bible is inerrant?
 
1believer1 said:
To start out let me give you a book to read… Where We Got the Bible …Our Debt to the Catholic Church by : The Right Rev. Henry G. Graham (TAN Books ISBN 9790895551374 ).
Click to expand...
Perfect, that’s exactly what I was looking for, thank you. Does anyone have any more resources/recommendations? The material in the book is 100 years old, wonder if there’s something that’s been published more recently

That’s a great idea about seeking out a Bible study, thanks for the pointer. I’m sure that would help me a lot and I could ask some more questions there.

I understand your concern about going to non-Catholic sites, but I do think it’s important to keep an open mind. I want to know what others are thinkng and saying so I’m not completely blindsided when I’m conversing with a non-Catholic. If I know their objections (which sometimes I have the same question), I can come up with a smarter response and strengthen my faith.
 
dangerousdyls said:
Thanks Todd, this does help – but I have to ask…since you’re saying the Law of Moses was imperfect, doesn’t that mean errant? If the Bible is inerrant, why does it have imperfections in it? Isn’t that a contradiction? What is meant by the Bible is inerrant?
Click to expand...
You have to read it in context. Firstly with the mind of the Church and the fathers. Much of the Bible is allegory, similie, eschatology, metaphor, poetry. A lot is literal. One shouldn’t confuse one for the other.
 
Catholics believe that Scripture is inerrant, meaning free of error in matters both historical and moral/ethical. (ALL of it. Read Dei Verbum, Providentissimus Deus, or any number of documents on inerrancy. It is NOT just “faith and morals.”)

Practically, this means that what the writer of the book means to say is not a mistake because it is protected by God.

The task of the student of Scripture is to uncover what the authors meant by what they said. And, go figure, that’s not always easy. Taking things at face value - especially in a wildly different language from the originals - is not a good strategy. So saying for instance, “Scripture says slavery is ok,” or something similar, does not take into account the particulars of who is saying what, how they are saying it, and what can be inferred from all of that in an attempt to understand what is actually meant by it.

Another example, regarding the Law… NO the Law was not perfect absolutely speaking, as Christ points out when discussing divorce. It was perfect for the situation though, allowing the lesser evils to avoid the greater ones (namely, despair). The Law is from God… But we’ve entirely missed the point, because we’ve assumed that “the Law” as it stands in Scripture is the same as “Scripture.” It’s not. We have the Law written down in Scripture. That’s a subtle but big difference.

We believe in the Resurrection. It’s not so hard then to believe the rest, is it? 👍
 
dangerousdyls said:
Thanks Todd, this does help – but I have to ask…since you’re saying the Law of Moses was imperfect, doesn’t that mean errant? If the Bible is inerrant, why does it have imperfections in it? Isn’t that a contradiction? What is meant by the Bible is inerrant?
Click to expand...
It means the bible in its entirety is inspired by God and therefore it contains spiritual inerrant 'truths. That said it has to be read in that light. The bible is not a history book it is a spiritual book so it should not be read as a history book although it tells us a lot about our history. Moreover it teaches us about Gods interaction with humanity.
 
e_c said:
Catholics believe that Scripture is inerrant, meaning free of error in matters both historical and moral/ethical. (ALL of it. Read Dei Verbum, Providentissimus Deus, or any number of documents on inerrancy. It is NOT just “faith and morals.”)
Click to expand...
Okay…so, I found a link here on CA:
catholic.com/magazine/articles/is-everything-in-the-bible-true

“According to Scripture scholar Raymond Brown, the awareness of these so-called historical errors moved the Church at Vatican II to teach that the Bible is free from error only in matters of faith and morals and not in matters of history and science (New Jerome Biblical Commentary, 1169). Brown supports this claim by appealing to section 11 of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum), which reads, “we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture, firmly, faithfully and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.” The phrase “for the sake of our salvation” is the key reference used to argue that only those things needed for our salvation (i.e., faith and morals) and not history and science, are free from error.”

So, to clarify, do you disagree with what Raymond Brown is saying? You say no histocial error, but he leaves room for historical error
 
dangerousdyls said:
since you’re saying the Law of Moses was imperfect, doesn’t that mean errant? If the Bible is inerrant, why does it have imperfections in it? Isn’t that a contradiction? What is meant by the Bible is inerrant?
Click to expand...
All the law and the prophets hang and depend on the greatest commandments, if we could live these commands, the world would be perfect.

Between the time of Adam and Moses, there was not a law saying, do not kill. So when Caine killed his brother, he was not breaking any law, but he was doing evil.

When the law was given to Moses, every killing from then on was breaking the law. By it’s very definition, the law condmens us, but I feel God would have prefered us to be obeidient without any law, other than the greatest commandments.

If we should achieve salvation, many of the laws will have no meaning, like thou shall not kill. Hopefully, salvation will be a time of perfectly living the greatest commandments.
 
dangerousdyls said:
Okay…so, I found a link here on CA:
catholic.com/magazine/articles/is-everything-in-the-bible-true

“According to Scripture scholar Raymond Brown, the awareness of these so-called historical errors moved the Church at Vatican II to teach that the Bible is free from error only in matters of faith and morals and not in matters of history and science (New Jerome Biblical Commentary, 1169). Brown supports this claim by appealing to section 11 of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum), which reads, “we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture, firmly, faithfully and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.” The phrase “for the sake of our salvation” is the key reference used to argue that only those things needed for our salvation (i.e., faith and morals) and not history and science, are free from error.”

So, to clarify, do you disagree with what Raymond Brown is saying? You say no histocial error, but he leaves room for historical error
Click to expand...
This is not something new due to Vatican 2. If you read St. Augustine, he says the same thing in the 3rd Century.
 
I am pretty familiar with Fr. Raymond Brown. I have friends who were taught by him, and at least one who was a peer of his in the Sulpicians. I have read him as well and am acquainted with the legacy he has left at St. Mary’s Seminary.

The consensus on the conservative side of those in the know seems to be that the man died basically a deist due to his hermeneutic methodology (God rest him). Google image search “descent of the modernists”… Once you start to chip away at Biblical inspiration, you are in big trouble, as 20th century scholarship has shown. Ratzinger and company were shining lights in the midst of all the darkness…

So yes, I disagree with Fr. Ray Brown. So does the document referenced, on any fair reading of it, and in any kind of continuity with documents that touch on the same topic. God safeguarded Scripture for our salvation. We need a text that is trustworthy, regardless of what it is talking about (which is often multi-layered and far-ranging).

There is not a single detail of Scripture that is unquestionably historical in intent that can be shown to be false, and every shred of archaeology that is being down in the relevant regions nowadays seems to confirm what we are told by, you guessed it, the ones who were there and were protected by God when recording and narrating those same events.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top