Literal/None Literal Stories

  • Thread starter Thread starter SnakeMauler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SnakeMauler

Guest
A friend imposed on me this question:

How does one know which stories to take literally and which are fables? Was there an actual Adam and Eve? Was there a great flood that covered the Earth? Was there a Noah?

How should I answer this? I’m always confused on how a Catholic is supposed to answer this.

Thanks,
Snakemauler
 
Four of my children have been through Catholic high school so far.

There they were taught that the Catholic teaching is that Genesis and Revelation are to be interpreted figuratively.

I know that’s going to annoy some people, but let them prove to me that I’m wrong.

Alan
 
SnakeMauler said:
A friend imposed on me this question:

How does one know which stories to take literally and which are fables? Was there an actual Adam and Eve? Was there a great flood that covered the Earth? Was there a Noah?

How should I answer this? I’m always confused on how a Catholic is supposed to answer this.

Thanks,
Snakemauler
Click to expand...
The church requires belief in the literal nature of only a small handful of scripture stories. The bible is a library of books, not “a book” and as such contains a wide variety of writings - just like a library. There are poems, songs, legends, myths, allegories, parables, and history. This concept is expressed in *Dei Verbum (*the dogmatic statement on divine revelation - available online). While all scripture is divinely inspired truth, the truth is expressed in many different forms and understanding the literary form of the writing is essential to understanding the writing. This is true for everything from the creation accounts in genesis to the birth accounts in the gospels.

For a much more thorough understanding of all this, I suggest the inexpensive book used as the textbook in many adult scripture classes: *And God Said What, An Introduction to Biblical Literary Forms *by Margaret Ralph published by Paulist Press.
 
The key is to determine whether you are for the traditional understanding or one modern school of thought that tends to interpret much of the Bible as inspired fables. There is various levels of how far some go with their position of how much of the Bible is historical and how much is didactic fables. I am a traditionalist through and through. I follow the understanding of what Catholic theologians have understood for the last 2000 years. I always consult the Early Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church. In my opinon that is the most reliable and logical. Both approaches are approved by the Church under doctrinal guidelines.
 
As Catholics we are obliged to follow the Church’s teaching on scriptural matters. Of course, the Church hasn’t addressed each and every story of the Bible. So, we are left to prayerfully interpret each story, but we must stay within the guidelines of the Church’s teaching. For example, as Catholics we MUST believe that the world began with two people who were, in some way, disobedient to God. The teaching of original sin and the need for a Savior hinge on the fact that since the beginning of mankind, sin was brought into the world by one man. However, the rest of Adam and Eve’s story is up to your interpretation. Was there a tree, a fruit and serpent? That is up to you to to determine if it is literal or figurative. But we do not have any wiggle room (as Catholics) on the belief in two original parents. Likewise, we are not required to believe that God created the world in 6 literal days. But we are required to believe that God created the world. Regarding Noah, the Catechism repeatedly refers to God’s covenant with Noah, so I think that the Church teaches that he was real. But I haven’t studied the matter thoroughly.

This section of the Catechism may be helpful for you…
 
AlanFromWichita said:
Four of my children have been through Catholic high school so far.

There they were taught that the Catholic teaching is that Genesis and Revelation are to be interpreted figuratively.

I know that’s going to annoy some people, but let them prove to me that I’m wrong.

Alan
Click to expand...
Rather than outright prove you wrong, may we negotiate from your turf regarding Adam and Eve as mentioned in the OP? 🙂

First. Do I understand you saying that absolutely every incident in Genesis is to be interpreted figuratively?

Are you saying that a real person cannot be interpreted as if he or she actually lived as an honest-to-goodness, flesh and blood human being?

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
 
If the ruling as required by and for Catholics were followed many seemingly difficulties would no longer exist.The ruling is that the literal and obvious sense[meaning]must always take precedence unless reason or neccessity dictate otherwise.The onus of proof for deviation from the literal or obvious rests with the deviator.This is not to say that only the literal or obvious may be considered,so that he who holds to a literal 24hr six day creation needs no permission to accept or prove - btw as a matter of interest in the teachings of the Church Fathers have a look at www.ScriptureCatholic.com - twinc
 
Back to this again? Here is the Catholic answer:

catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp

All of the books of the Bible have been brought into question. All Scripture is inspired by God. It is filled with prophecy that points to the coming of Jesus Christ. Christ was born why? He came in “fulfillment of the scripture.” He came because of actual events in actual history. He answered questions related to Scripture with Scripture.

Our relationship with God is not just a faith experience but according to actual events in actual history. Christ died as a sacrifice for all men so that sins could be forgiven. He, the Living God, is alive at this moment.

God bless,
Ed
 
grannymh said:
Rather than outright prove you wrong, may we negotiate from your turf regarding Adam and Eve as mentioned in the OP? 🙂

First. Do I understand you saying that absolutely every incident in Genesis is to be interpreted figuratively?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure. They just told me “the book of Genesis.”
Are you saying that a real person cannot be interpreted as if he or she actually lived as an honest-to-goodness, flesh and blood human being?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you’re asking.
The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Alan
 
OK, so I should just tell my friend to check out the dogmatic thing on divine inspiration and read the rest with reason?
 
SnakeMauler said:
OK, so I should just tell my friend to check out the dogmatic thing on divine inspiration and read the rest with reason?
Click to expand...
I would just inform him that there is a traditional understanding and there is the untraditional which approaches it as inspired by unhistorical, and it is not forbidden by the Church to accept either.
 
COPLAND_3 said:
I would just inform him that there is a traditional understanding and there is the untraditional which approaches it as inspired by unhistorical, and it is not forbidden by the Church to accept either.
Click to expand...
The difficulty with such a general approach is that it ignores the fact that there is no choice regarding basic doctrines in Genesis – for Catholic Church members.
 
Originally Posted by grannymh forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif

First. Do I understand you saying that absolutely every incident in Genesis is to be interpreted figuratively?
Click to expand...
AlanFromWichita said:
I’m not sure. They just told me “the book of Genesis.”
Click to expand...
There are two difficulties here.

1.Some people learned Catholic doctrine without reference to Scripture. Thus, a teacher could declare that the book of Genesis was figurative and no one would know the difference. The truth is that there are key Catholic doctrines connected to Adam and Eve.
  1. Imagine interpreting Divine Revelation figuratively. Imagine trying to figure out a figurative doctrine. :eek:
The truth is that the Catholic Church preserves and protects Divine Revelation which is found in Scripture. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, it declares doctrine based on the reality found in* Genesis*. Perhaps, the teacher who said that Genesis is to be interpreted figuratively is not familiar with basic Catholic Doctrine and its source.
grannymh --Are you saying that a real person cannot be interpreted as if he or she actually lived as an honest-to-goodness, flesh and blood human being?
Click to expand...
AlanFromWichita --I’m not sure what you’re asking.
Click to expand...
:rotfl:You know, that was a crazy way to phrase my question!
I keep wondering if that teacher knew that Adam and Eve were real people. This free interpretation by anybody and everybody gets confusing to say the least. If the book of Genesis is to be interpreted figuratively, is our human nature figurative since we have the same human nature as a figurative Adam? :rotfl:

The bottom line is that I am so glad that the Catholic Church is around with its no nonsense doctrines.

Blessings,
granny

The real human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
 
grannymh said:
The difficulty with such a general approach is that it ignores the fact that there is no choice regarding basic doctrines in Genesis – for Catholic Church members.
Click to expand...
I think I pointed out that we can accept the historical and unhistorcial as long as both agree with binding Catholic doctrine. I don’t recommend the school of thought that teaches that most of Scripture is not historicial, as a matter of fact I oppose it strongly on a personal level.

But let us not get confused with the distinction between allegory and the position that some take that Genesis or other books are just didactic folk stories. There is a big difference between Scripture as inspired folktale and interpreting Scripture spiritually. You can interpret Jonah literally being swallowed by a whale at the same time thinking that the story is not historical, and you can reverse that and think that it is historical but interpret it spiritually like Jesus did (Mt 12:40). I personally believe it is a 100% historical, and I believe it can be interpreted literally, allegorically, and analogically.

But I think the OP is whether the Church accepts or condemns whether we believe that Scripture is historical or not historical. Accepting it historically is how the Fathers of the Church understood it, and in my opinion is the safest and most fulfilling way to go.

By the way, if you want the first 3 chapters of Genesis interpreted literally based completely on Catholic teaching, here is my commentary on it litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Commentary+on+Genesis+by+John+Litteral
 
COPLAND_3 said:
I think I pointed out that we can accept the historical and unhistorcial as long as both agree with binding Catholic doctrine. I don’t recommend the school of thought that teaches that most of Scripture is not historicial, as a matter of fact I oppose it strongly on a personal level.

But let us not get confused with the distinction between allegory and the position that some take that Genesis or other books are just didactic folk stories. There is a big difference between Scripture as inspired folktale and interpreting Scripture spiritually. You can interpret Jonah literally being swallowed by a whale at the same time thinking that the story is not historical, and you can reverse that and think that it is historical but interpret it spiritually like Jesus did (Mt 12:40). I personally believe it is a 100% historical, and I believe it can be interpreted literally, allegorically, and analogically.

But I think the OP is whether the Church accepts or condemns whether we believe that Scripture is historical or not historical. Accepting it historically is how the Fathers of the Church understood it, and in my opinion is the safest and most fulfilling way to go.

By the way, if you want the first 3 chapters of Genesis interpreted literally based completely on Catholic teaching, here is my commentary on it litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Commentary+on+Genesis+by+John+Litteral
Click to expand...
Good thoughts, thank you. Did scan the link but for some reason I was having trouble so I put it in favorites for later. I’m of the generation who learned Catholic doctrine without reference to Scripture so I find it fascinating to go from Scripture to Doctrine.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.
 
grannymh said:
Good thoughts, thank you. Did scan the link but for some reason I was having trouble so I put it in favorites for later. I’m of the generation who learned Catholic doctrine without reference to Scripture so I find it fascinating to go from Scripture to Doctrine.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.
Click to expand...
That has to be an interesting perspective you have, I come from a Baptist background where Scripture was cherry-picked to support our hobby horse doctrines. One good thing is that I was taught to love Scripture and to study it zealously. Bible study that is guided by Catholic Doctrine has made my love for Scripture grow leaps and bounds!
 
I think it depends on the context of the story. Literal or not, the stories are lessons to teach us about God, sin, etc. Many important lessons are taught on how to live according to God’s plan.

There are sites dedicated to research by scientists with advanced degrees (Master’s, Ph.D) based on the idea that the world is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old.

creation.com/
icr.org/

There might be more, but those are the ones I have been reading regularly. It is interesting to read an article on the secular news that heavily promotes evolution (Yahoo!/MSN/AOL) and then read it from a creation perspective. 👍
 
Since four of my children were taught the same things by various religion teachers, lay, nuns, and priests, I’m going with them until somebody produces some good evidence otherwise.

They said that the true Catholic teaching is to be interpreted figuratively. I don’t know if the teachers used the word “figurative” but for sure it wasn’t “literally.”

If we think that’s wrong, then I’d like to see where, in official Catholic documentation, where this is addressed. That’s not a problem for me.

For anybody who thinks the thought of it being allegory or whatever it’s called, is somehow an insult, I don’t understand that. Jesus told parables all the time and we didn’t consider them as literal fact. Why can’t His Father tell a parable, too? Going at it the other way, has anybody come up with a good explanation of how Genesis can be literal without our all being products of incest?

Alan
 
AlanFromWichita said:
Since four of my children were taught the same things by various religion teachers, lay, nuns, and priests, I’m going with them until somebody produces some good evidence otherwise.

They said that the true Catholic teaching is to be interpreted figuratively. I don’t know if the teachers used the word “figurative” but for sure it wasn’t “literally.”

If we think that’s wrong, then I’d like to see where, in official Catholic documentation, where this is addressed. That’s not a problem for me.

Alan
Click to expand...
I can give you true Catholic teaching about Adam and Eve from the universal Catechism.
Can’t get better “official Catholic documentation” than that.
👍

Of course, parables, etc., can be good teaching tools. However, your human nature is not some parable, is it? And neither is Adam’s real human nature. To understand our current human nature as being destined for eternal life in the presence of the Beatific Vision, we need to know what happened to the first human nature which was then transmitted to its descendents including you and me.

May I respectfully advise you to go to the horse’s mouth? If that saying is not a familiar one in your neighborhood, it means going straight to the source of Catholic teaching.

Real Catholic teaching regarding Adam and Eve is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.

The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.

One can put the word paragraph and the number in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Entering topics is also very useful.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is the apple of God’s eye.
(example of reality and figurative language)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top