Proving the Historical Accuracy of Tobit (Tobias)

[juliamajor]

That’s a narrative of someone like yourself who wants to devalue the accurate WORD OF GOD !!!

If there were lies in the Bible, none of the Bible would hold value…do you not understand that?

Do you know nothing of the importance of discrediting a witness in the court of law? Once the witness is discredited about anything, his testimony is worthless to the court.

Why would you want to discredit the Word of God?..which, by the way, it is impossible to do in truth.

Oh, now NOTWORTHY, is “liberal Catholic”.Give it a rest.Anyone who disagrees with you is evil and wicked and trying to destroy the Word of God and the Church.
Your vitriol is out place. The Navarre Bible isn’t known for it’s liberalism…Just because it’s not an historical narrative does not negate it’s power or it’s sacredness. It is folks like you that have a narrow view that all biblical literature is historical narrative. That’s just not true. and making it so doesn’t do justice to the work. Sacredness and inspiration does not have to rely on historicity.That’s a modern conception. Is the power of God’s word based on history?Or does it’s power come from the Holy Spirit?What your saying is if it isn’t historically true -it isn’t God’s Word.If it isn’t historically True it isn’t inspired. That’s really a narrow interpretation of inspiration- of the Holy Spirit’s ability to go where he wills.
Parables are all over the bible, just as word play,chiasms and merisms. not all are clearly stated as such .Parables abound in NT but also exist in the OT-unannounced

 

[NotWorthy]

That’s a narrative of someone like yourself who wants to devalue the accurate WORD OF GOD !!!

So… instead of dis-proving what the Navarre says, you resort to discrediting the source. Are you a democrat, perchance?

Why don’t you discredit what it said. For instance,

Although the author sets his story in the time when the Israelites were captive in Assyria and Media (8th-7th centuries BC), one can see that he is writing much later, for he makes reference to the fall of Jerusalem and the captivity in Babylon (Tob. 13:9-12; 14-15).

How can a true-to-life historical book miss this rather major point in Jewish history?

Also, are you aware of the Navarre Study Bible? I’ve never heard any good Catholic have anything but praise for the commentary. What do you know that they don’t?

And please, don’t mis-judge me so quickly and question my motives with silly comments like someone like yourself who wants to devalue the accurate WORD OF GOD !!! That only makes you look foolish.

If there were lies in the Bible, none of the Bible would hold value…do you not understand that?

Please re-read my post and point out to me where I said Tobit had any lies in it. If you find me saying that, then I will humbly apologize and beg your forgiveness. If you can’t find where I stated that, well then… you’re forgiven!

Do you know nothing of the importance of discrediting a witness in the court of law? Once the witness is discredited about anything, his testimony is worthless to the court.

Why would you want to discredit the Word of God?..which, by the way, it is impossible to do in truth.

I do not wish in any way to discredit the Word of God. I think you are jumping to conclusions way too fast.

 

[NotWorthy]

Oh, now NOTWORTHY, is “liberal Catholic”.

Yeah, that’s me - the poster child for the right to have women priests, gay bishops, and abortion on demand clinics!

Even Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi tell me I’m too liberal!

BTW, thanks julia for coming to my defense!!! God Bless!

 

[Mintaka]

Okay, so say I’m writing a picture book for kids, all about a certain historical incident or person that I think teaches a good lesson. But suppose I live out on the frontier somewhere, with no Internet or library. How will I tell the story? From my own memory. How will I make the kids understand and like my story? By adding interesting details from my imagination that fill in the history I know.

So I write a “wisdom narrative” based on a historical incident, with a good moral all pointed out so as to teach that wisdom; but it also includes some fictional coloring.

Have I lied? Is my story untrue or fallible because I added in some bells and whistles to help make the story interesting or point out the moral?

This is how I see Tobit: some of it is historically true, some of it is a wisdom narrative, and some of it is historical or wisdom fiction. Overall, it is totally true and inspired.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Oh, now NOTWORTHY, is “liberal Catholic”.Give it a rest.Anyone who disagrees with you is evil and wicked and trying to destroy the Word of God and the Church.
Your vitriol is out place. The Navarre Bible isn’t known for it’s liberalism…Just because it’s not an historical narrative does not negate it’s power or it’s sacredness. It is folks like you that have a narrow view that all biblical literature is historical narrative. That’s just not true. and making it so doesn’t do justice to the work. Sacredness and inspiration does not have to rely on historicity.That’s a modern conception. Is the power of God’s word based on history?Or does it’s power come from the Holy Spirit?What your saying is if it isn’t historically true -it isn’t God’s Word.If it isn’t historically True it isn’t inspired. That’s really a narrow interpretation of inspiration- of the Holy Spirit’s ability to go where he wills.
Parables are all over the bible, just as word play,chiasms and merisms. not all are clearly stated as such .Parables abound in NT but also exist in the OT-unannounced

I didn’t use the words “liberal Catholic” in what you quoted me. I also didn’t use the words evil or wicked to describe someone who disagrees with me.
The Bible is the Word of God. If you say that something in it is a lie, than you can then assume that everything in it is a lie. And then there will be much less to have when trying to evangelize.

For what do you say when someone asks you, “Is the Bible true?” You reply “yes”. They bring out the story of Tobit, and you say that it is just a story people made up to teach a lesson or a moral". They then say, “But you told me that the Bible was true, so you are contradicting yourself. If the Christians cannot even keep from contradicting what they say is the ‘Word of God’, why should I give any credit to Christianity at all?”

I really do not understand what is difficult about understanding this point. Nor do I understand why it is so important for people to spend so much time trying to discredit God’s Word. That is satan’s job.

 

[Padraig_77]

I didn’t use the words “liberal Catholic” in what you quoted me. I also didn’t use the words evil or wicked to describe someone who disagrees with me.
The Bible is the Word of God. If you say that something in it is a lie, than you can then assume that everything in it is a lie. And then there will be much less to have when trying to evangelize.

For what do you say when someone asks you, “Is the Bible true?” You reply “yes”. They bring out the story of Tobit, and you say that it is just a story people made up to teach a lesson or a moral". They then say, “But you told me that the Bible was true, so you are contradicting yourself. If the Christians cannot even keep from contradicting what they say is the ‘Word of God’, why should I give any credit to Christianity at all?”

I really do not understand what is difficult about understanding this point. Nor do I understand why it is so important for people to spend so much time trying to discredit God’s Word. That is satan’s job.

You hit the nail on the head there. John Salza of ScriptureCatholic.com told me that all the alleged “historical errors” in Tobit and other Deuterocanonicals have been answered and refuted by the great theologian/commentator Cornelius a Lapide. I just have to find the work in which he refutes the claims.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

So… instead of dis-proving what the Navarre says, you resort to discrediting the source. Are you a democrat, perchance?

No, I am not a democrat.

Why don’t you discredit what it said. For instance, How can a true-to-life historical book miss this rather major point in Jewish history?

There are explanations in the former posts which explain what is a seeming inconstistency in the story.

Also, are you aware of the Navarre Study Bible? I’ve never heard any good Catholic have anything but praise for the commentary. What do you know that they don’t?

The problem lies in that it seems to be being used by many to find fault with a story that in no way seems to have been told as an alagory (as I have heard it referred to).

And please, don’t mis-judge me so quickly and question my motives with silly comments like someone like yourself who wants to devalue the accurate WORD OF GOD !!! That only makes you look foolish.

I am truly sorry to have judged you wrongly if I did. I come across too many people who want to say that things in the Bible are not factual or historical. God is certainly smart enough to have been able to say that something in the Bible is “told just to teach a moral lesson, and not to be taken as historical” if that is what it is. For surely Jesus announced that He was teaching in parables. So if Jesus was smart enough, then wouldn’t God be? Oh, wait, Jesus is God. But how will we be able to teach other’s that if we do not even have an accurate “Word of God”? Why should anyone believe what is written in the Bible if it is not accurate? If you got a news article, and you found that parts of it were not true, yet you didn’t know what was the complete truth…would you believe what the news article said?

Please re-read my post and point out to me where I said Tobit had any lies in it. If you find me saying that, then I will humbly apologize and beg your forgiveness. If you can’t find where I stated that, well then… you’re forgiven!

I do not wish in any way to discredit the Word of God. I think you are jumping to conclusions way too fast.

If I have done so, I am sincerely sorry.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Okay, so say I’m writing a picture book for kids, all about a certain historical incident or person that I think teaches a good lesson. But suppose I live out on the frontier somewhere, with no Internet or library. How will I tell the story? From my own memory. How will I make the kids understand and like my story? By adding interesting details from my imagination that fill in the history I know.

So I write a “wisdom narrative” based on a historical incident, with a good moral all pointed out so as to teach that wisdom; but it also includes some fictional coloring.

Have I lied? Is my story untrue or fallible because I added in some bells and whistles to help make the story interesting or point out the moral?

This is how I see Tobit: some of it is historically true, some of it is a wisdom narrative, and some of it is historical or wisdom fiction. Overall, it is totally true and inspired.

So what part of the Resurrection of Christ Jesus did the “authors” of the Bible add bells and whistles to in order to help make the story interesting or point out the moral?
The part where Jesus rose from the dead? The part where He appeared to the apostles? The part where the stone was moved? Or maybe it was the words and commands that He gave to His apostles?

Or what part of the Last Supper did the “authors of the Bible” add bells and whistles to in order to help make the story interesting or point out the moral? The part where the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world?

What part of His Most Sorrowful Passion was given bells and whistles to make the story more interesting for readers? The part where He was betrayed by one of the twelve? The part where they stripped Him and whipped Him? The part where they placed a crown of thorns on His Head? The part where He met His Mother on the Road to Calvary? The part where they nailed Him to the Cross? The part where He asks the Father to “forgive them, for they know not what they do”? The part where He dies and was burried?

Just who are these authors? Wait, They are the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!!!
God, Who created you is also capable of making it obvious (as He did in announcing His teaching parables) that the story is a lie, or even that it was given bells and whistles so as to not bore the readers.

 

[NotWorthy]

Originally Posted by NotWorthy forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
So… instead of dis-proving what the Navarre says, you resort to discrediting the source. Are you a democrat, perchance?

No, I am not a democrat.

OK, I was just joking. That tactic seems to be the norm for many democrats I know.

Originally Posted by NotWorthy forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gifWhy don’t you discredit what it said. For instance, How can a true-to-life historical book miss this rather major point in Jewish history?

There are explanations in the former posts which explain what is a seeming inconstistency in the story.

OK, sometimes I’m lazy. Can you show me these explanations again?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

OK, I was just joking. That tactic seems to be the norm for many democrats I know.

OK, sometimes I’m lazy. Can you show me these explanations again?

Numbers 19 and 27.

 

[NotWorthy]

Numbers 19 and 27.

Neither of those posts addresses my point.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Neither of those posts addresses my point.

These posts explain how the narrarators in the Navarre Bible, noble though they may be, ***if ***they are implying that the stories in the OT or NT are allagories based on what they believe are historical inaccuracies, then they are wrong. The posts explain how the seeming inaccuracies are explained…and proves that there is no reason to doubt that the story is historically accurate rather than just a fictional story to teach some lesson.

 

[NotWorthy]

These posts explain how the narrarators in the Navarre Bible, noble though they may be, ***if ***they are implying that the stories in the OT or NT are allagories based on what they believe are historical inaccuracies, then they are wrong. The posts explain how the seeming inaccuracies are explained…and proves that there is no reason to doubt that the story is historically accurate rather than just a fictional story to teach some lesson.

Then, address the point. I claimed that the setting of the story shows to be around the 7th or 8th century BC. But in the story, they talk as if Jerusalem has already fallen and the Jews were in captivity in Babylon (Tobit 13:9-12; 14-15).

 

[NotWorthy]

Also, who was Ahikar? Tobit is depicted as being an uncle of Ahikar. The book, “The Wisdom of Ahikar” was a book very popular among the Jews of the diaspora even though it was not of Jewish origin.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Notworthy, I do not have all of the answers to the questions that you ask…but that does not mean that there are no answers. And I do know that Tobias and Tobit were father and son. Maybe the confusion is in the generations. That does not mean that the story is a lie.

If I say that something happened to me in the 3rd grade, when it was actually the 2nd grade, does that mean that it didn’t happen? The belief that many seem to hold is that what I say happened is just allagory…and all that I did was confuse the date a little. Why not do a little research to correct the confusion about the debate rather than to discredit the entire thing?

The research has been done…and books were listed showing where the answers are. They are in the posts I counted for you. I do not have the answers…yet the answers exist.

 

[NotWorthy]

Notworthy, I do not have all of the answers to the questions that you ask…but that does not mean that there are no answers. And I do know that Tobias and Tobit were father and son. Maybe the confusion is in the generations. That does not mean that the story is a lie.

I have never claimed, nor even hinted that the story is a lie. I’ve told you that before, and I resent the implication that I am claiming this. It’s a wonderful story, one of my favorites of the Old Testament. Please choose your words more carefully when describing my accusations.

If I say that something happened to me in the 3rd grade, when it was actually the 2nd grade, does that mean that it didn’t happen? The belief that many seem to hold is that what I say happened is just allagory…and all that I did was confuse the date a little. Why not do a little research to correct the confusion about the debate rather than to discredit the entire thing?

I am discrediting nothing. I just feel, as do many highly-regarded **Orthodox **Catholic authors, that this book is meant to teach a great moral lesson. It is a wonderful, wonderful book!

The research has been done…and books were listed showing where the answers are. They are in the posts I counted for you. I do not have the answers…yet the answers exist.

The research has been done by the Navarre Bible Study, as well. I’ve given you their thoughts on this matter. I’m willing to listen to your sources, but until I’ve heard their reasoning, I’ve got no reason to believe any differently.

 

[Luke65]

I’m willing to listen to your sources, but until I’ve heard their reasoning, I’ve got no reason to believe any differently.

NotWorthy, I love you, I’ve seen one great post after another from you. And so please allow me to remind you of a couple things:

newadvent.org/cathen/14749c.htm
Until recently there never was question among Catholics in regard to the historicity of Tobias. It was among the historical books of the Old Testament, the Fathers had always referred to both elder and younger Tobias and to the other personages of the narratives as to facts and not to fancies.
…
With these and a few other exceptions, Catholic exegetes are unanimous in clearly defending the historicity of Tobias.
…
This almost unanimity among Catholic exegetes is quite in keeping with the decision of the Biblical Commission (23 June, 1905). By this Decree Catholics are forbidden to hold that a book of the Holy Writ, which has generally been looked upon as historical, is either entirely or in part not history properly so called, unless it be proven by solid arguments that the sacred writer did not wish to write history; and the solidity of the arguments against the historicity of an historical book of the Bible we are not to admit either readily or rashly. Now the arguments against the historical worth of Tobias are not at all solid; they are mere conjectures, which it would be most rash to admit.

“Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand.” - St. Augustine

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I have never claimed, nor even hinted that the story is a lie. I’ve told you that before, and I resent the implication that I am claiming this. It’s a wonderful story, one of my favorites of the Old Testament. Please choose your words more carefully when describing my accusations.

I am discrediting nothing. I just feel, as do many highly-regarded **Orthodox **Catholic authors, that this book is meant to teach a great moral lesson. It is a wonderful, wonderful book!

The research has been done by the Navarre Bible Study, as well. I’ve given you their thoughts on this matter. I’m willing to listen to your sources, but until I’ve heard their reasoning, I’ve got no reason to believe any differently.

Excuse me, and forgive me please if you believe the story of Tobit and Tobias, as it is written in the Bible, is historically accurate. Forgive me if you have not been questioning the historical accuracy of
wonderful, wonderful book which also teaches a great moral lesson.

It has seemed to me that you do not believe in the historical accuracy of the story, but believe it to be an allagory.
If I am wrong in that, I am truly sorry. I would truly appreciate your statement on whether you believe the story to be truthful and historically accurate in its content, or if you believe it is a wonderful story which did not happen the way it is portrayed in the Bible. I am not talking about the narratives.

 

[NotWorthy]

NotWorthy, I love you, I’ve seen one great post after another from you. And so please allow me to remind you of a couple things:

newadvent.org/cathen/14749c.htm
Until recently there never was question among Catholics in regard to the historicity of Tobias. It was among the historical books of the Old Testament, the Fathers had always referred to both elder and younger Tobias and to the other personages of the narratives as to facts and not to fancies.
…
With these and a few other exceptions, Catholic exegetes are unanimous in clearly defending the historicity of Tobias.
…
This almost unanimity among Catholic exegetes is quite in keeping with the decision of the Biblical Commission (23 June, 1905). By this Decree Catholics are forbidden to hold that a book of the Holy Writ, which has generally been looked upon as historical, is either entirely or in part not history properly so called, unless it be proven by solid arguments that the sacred writer did not wish to write history; and the solidity of the arguments against the historicity of an historical book of the Bible we are not to admit either readily or rashly. Now the arguments against the historical worth of Tobias are not at all solid; they are mere conjectures, which it would be most rash to admit.

Please relook at my post that was first questioned and see if I still fit into this category. If at first sight, Tobit seems to be a history, is is not history in the proper sense of the word. It is in fact closer to a “moralistic novel”. Novels such as these are moralistic stories wrapped around historical truths. I think the “Passion of the Christ” could be called this, as Mel Gibson took much artistic license to tell his story.

BTW, I love you, too guys!!!

 

[NotWorthy]

Excuse me, and forgive me please if you believe the story of Tobit and Tobias, as it is written in the Bible, is historically accurate. Forgive me if you have not been questioning the historical accuracy of
wonderful, wonderful book which also teaches a great moral lesson.

It has seemed to me that you do not believe in the historical accuracy of the story, but believe it to be an allagory.
If I am wrong in that, I am truly sorry. I would truly appreciate your statement on whether you believe the story to be truthful and historically accurate in its content, or if you believe it is a wonderful story which did not happen the way it is portrayed in the Bible. I am not talking about the narratives.

See if Post #59 addresses my point.

It’s not 100% true historical fact, but its not all fabricated either. Judith, in my opinion would fall under the same category (although further discussion on this may be better on another thread).