Old Testament Myths

  • Thread starter Thread starter USMC_Convert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello Tim_ D

Before this thread is closed.

I wonder if you have noticed that natural science has slipped into the human being stuff in the first three simple chapters of Genesis. I am not referring to the descriptions of the physical universe and its animal inhabitants. Obviously, that is part of the material world and everyone knows that Catholicism deals with the spiritual world.
 
James248 said:
I see. It’s a pretty simple question considering you have ‘Catholic’ as your religion. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It is neither your business nor reggieM’s to demand of me to go down a check list and tell you what miracles I do and don’t believe in. You have no idea what kind of Catholic I am and have no right whatsoever to judge my orthodoxy.
 
Tim_D said:
It is neither your business nor reggieM’s to demand of me to go down a check list and tell you what miracles I do and don’t believe in. You have no idea what kind of Catholic I am and have no right whatsoever to judge my orthodoxy.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I apologize.
 
USMC_Convert said:
So I belong to a little group and we get together to discuss scripture and stuff right after Mass on Wednesdays. Anyway, so during our discussions once I brought up some of the things about Job. Which I was told that the book of Job was just a story told as an example, it never really happened.

In another discussion I brought up Noah and the flood which I was flat out told the flood was a complete myth, it never happened.

Finally and what got me to write this to see what you guys say, I was told that they wished they could part me from my “fundamentalism” and that the Catholic Church really leans left on all these things. Now I’m not exactly sure what that means but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a compliment and I’m not even sure what leaning left on these things could possibly mean. What really gets me is it is two older women, one of them being a religion teacher for decades, that are kind of spear heading all this.

So what is the story? Is the OT a myth? Is it simply a bunch of bed time stories to teach us lessons? What’s the deal…?

(For the record I believe in the OT, and the NT for that matter and no one can part me from that, but I am confused about what the Church teaches now, why these people would say things like that and what I should respond to them with)
Click to expand...
The group you meet with on Wednesdays after Service… Are they members or are they part of the teaching Clergy?
 
Tim_D said:
I do know it but if reggieM can hold me to a by-the-letter-literalism, then I should be able to do the same to him. And what was his response? To appeal to an authority that supports his stance.
Click to expand...
I think the only authority you’re appealing to is your own subjective opinion – and then when asked what that is, you say it’s none of my business.
 
DebChris said:
Whenever we attend Mass, we return to the Calvary. The Mass is outside of time.

Because God is indeed outside of time, how do we answer the question when asked “When were you saved?” I was saved when Christ died upon the Cross, and I continue to saved each and every time the Mass is celebrated until the end of time.
Click to expand...
One of the Best wisdoms I have read on CAF.

Thank you DebChris.

Ii made reading this tome of a thread worth it.
 
Renan said:
That’s why Pius XII condemned polygenism in his encyclical Humani Generis:

Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own" (HG 37).
Click to expand...
This is the real issue I have. The theological importance of Six Day Creation is not exactly so clear. I feel there is some wiggle room on it, though I think the safest bet it obviously to believe it as written.

Adam and Eve as a historical, factual retelling is absolutely necessary for Catholic belief. I see no other possible way for the theological questions to be answered.

As for the Flood, I think of this generally as in the middle of the two. Perhaps not absolutely necessary but so overwhelmingly important (that we are NOT children of Cain for example) as to be more worthy of belief than any other interpretation. And I would be extremely wary of any teacher who denied it.
 
The real problem is that some, not all, modern folk cannot recognize the spiritual world which is actually different from the material world—but—the spiritual world can take place in the material world. Think decomposing human skin and bones.

In addition, there is little chance that young modern folk on a free speech public message board actually understand the depth of some Catholic “why” doctrines (in addition to God is real) flowing from the first three informative chapters of Genesis.

Certainly, spiritual truths found in the first three exciting chapters of Genesis are extremely important. They also need to have a blood and guts foundation.
 
NonTimendum said:
This is the real issue I have. The theological importance of Six Day Creation is not exactly so clear. I feel there is some wiggle room on it, though I think the safest bet it obviously to believe it as written.

Adam and Eve as a historical, factual retelling is absolutely necessary for Catholic belief. I see no other possible way for the theological questions to be answered.

As for the Flood, I think of this generally as in the middle of the two. Perhaps not absolutely necessary but so overwhelmingly important (that we are NOT children of Cain for example) as to be more worthy of belief than any other interpretation. And I would be extremely wary of any teacher who denied it.
Click to expand...
That is the way I view it also.
 
reggieM said:
Jesus’ resurrection is not an “extreme example”? What do we conclude when we apply reason to it?

Tim didn’t want to go down the path where he tells us which of Jesus’ miracles actually happened and which didn’t. But you could, if you’d like. As I said, there are people who deny that any miracles ever occurred, so you’re not offering anything new here.

What we end up with is a collection of myths and fictional accounts.
Click to expand...
You have a remarkable capacity for not understanding the simplest of statements.

Go on believing all wonders in the Bible must be historicly true if you wish.
Me, I will apply the reason God gave me along with the gift of faith.
That way you wont find me at Waco … you maybe not so much.
 
Blue_Horizon said:
That way you wont find me at Waco … you maybe not so much.
Click to expand...
Ridicule, insults, condescension, attitude of superiority, rash judgement – that’s pretty much the standard approach that atheists take towards the things of God.
 
reggieM said:
Ridicule, insults, condescension, attitude of superiority, rash judgement – that’s pretty much the standard approach that atheists take towards the things of God.
Click to expand...
Hmmn, you wouldnt be ridiculing or insulting me by any chance would you Reggie… :blessyou:
 
Blue_Horizon said:
Hmmn, you wouldnt be ridiculing or insulting me by any chance would you Reggie… :blessyou:
Click to expand...
Hopefully soon, you all will find a few minutes to tell me that post 192 is right or wrong about the first three begging chapters of Genesis. That should be a quick five minutes since I only deal with three chapters in the Bible.😃
 
From The Quotable Newman:
“Scripture may be said to be the medium in which the mind of the Church has energized and developed…And it has been the doctrine of all ages of the Church, as is shown in the disinclination of her teachers to confine themselves to the mere literal interpretation of Scripture. Her most subtle and powerful method of proof, whether in ancient or modern times, is the mystical sense, which so frequently used in doctrinal controversy as on many other occasions to supersede any other…”

John Newman uses this mystical sense for Church’s doctrine of the Holy Spirit.
The heretical School of Antioch took a literal approach to reading Scripture. Jews who only read scripture in its most literal sense rejected Christ as savior.
Christian Apologists proved the divinity of the Gospels by means of the allegorical.

Catholics can reply to the question, “Where is that in Scripture?” It does not necessarily need to be in scripture to be true. " It is by no means self-evident that all religious truth is to be found in a number of works, however sacred, which were written at different times, and did not form one book; and in fact a doctrine is very hard to prove."
Here John Newman comes back to the authority of the Church, and sacred Tradition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top