Proving the Historical Accuracy of Tobit (Tobias)

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Yes everything in the Bible is true, and a lot of it really happened as well.

Jesus was not the immaculate conception, that’s a Catholic teaching (not found in Scripture) that refers to Mary.

The original posting to this thread stated

This amuses me. What I gather from that statement is that the person posting it is not really looking to learn, but looking for others to confirm what he or she already believes. Only those who “believe the same about Scripture” are welcome to reply. Which of course begs the question of whether the OP agrees with the Catholic approach to Scripture.

I’d love to continue fruitful discussion on this thread, but given those initial criteria it sure seems that the OP is only interested in hearing from those who will support his/her point of view, regardless of what the Catholic Church teaches.

Cheers

You are correct about the Blessed Ever Virgin Mother of Jesus God being the Immaculate Conception.
Yet, there is also no proof that Jesus is the Son of God rather than Joseph. We believe it as a matter of Faith.

 

[NotWorthy]

So how do you KNOW that Jesus changed bread and wine into His Body and Blood during the Last Supper?
How do you know that Jesus rose from the dead?
How do you know that Jesus ascended into Heaven?
How do you know that the Apostles, disciples and Mother of God were filled with the Holy Spirit?
For that matter, how do you know that Mary was visited by the Archangel Gabriel for the Anunciation?
For that matter, how do you know that Jesus was an immaculate conception? How do you know that He wasn’t born of both Joseph and Mary through sexual intercourse?

Fact is, there is no PROOF for any of these things. So how do you tell someone that they must believe these Truths, but not others found in the Bible? How do you say that even though the things about Jesus make as little or less sense than other things in the Bible, one has to believe the things said about Jesus, but not about the rest?

It sounds an aweful lot like grasping at straws and contradictions.

Yet, if we just believe with the Faith of a child, just as Jesus told us to…ALL that is written in the Bible, then the above stated problem goes away.

Someone with intelligence should be able to understand this.

I’d prefer to trust that the Church taught these things. Those things you mention would have to be true, or else yours and my entire faith would be false. The Church taught these things LONG before they were written in Scriptures. THAT’S how I know.

The Church also teaches that the the Creation story may be an alleghory, again so that our feeble human minds can grasp what the Creation story is meant to teach (and nothing more than what it MEANS to teach). That main lesson is that God created everything. Whether this happened over 6 days (which ancient Semites could understand) or millions of years (which ancient Semites would have simply had that 1000 yard stare…) doesn’t matter. What matters is that, out of love for us, God created all of this.

 

[NotWorthy]

Yes everything in the Bible is true, and a lot of it really happened as well.

Jesus was not the immaculate conception, that’s a Catholic teaching (not found in Scripture) that refers to Mary.

I wasn’t aware something could be a Catholic teaching and not be Scriptural, unless it specifically denies Scripture. I guess you think its un-scriptural for the Holy Spirit to guide the Church to all truth.

Hm.

 

[juliamajor]

The thread is"Proving the HISTORICAL accuracy of Tobit"Historicity does not prove faith. It never would ,never could. Just because something historically true doesn’t make it worthy of faith. Dogmas doctrines are are not based in history- to think otherwise is a great error.So the point is moot.There is no way you can really prove or disprove definitively Tobit’s historicity- though the evidence is pretty stacked against it.-historically. I was a history major in college ,ancient history.I know the value of history but I also know the power of faith. My faith doesn’t rely on history- oh, it’s nice to have some extra biblical proof , but that’s just icing on the cake.- The cake should be enough.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I’d prefer to trust that the Church taught these things. Those things you mention would have to be true, or else yours and my entire faith would be false. The Church taught these things LONG before they were written in Scriptures. THAT’S how I know.

The Church also teaches that the the Creation story may be an alleghory, again so that our feeble human minds can grasp what the Creation story is meant to teach (and nothing more than what it MEANS to teach). That main lesson is that God created everything. Whether this happened over 6 days (which ancient Semites could understand) or millions of years (which ancient Semites would have simply had that 1000 yard stare…) doesn’t matter. What matters is that, out of love for us, God created all of this.

So, how do you evangelize the world with that? You tell them that the Bible is the History of God’s Word…and the story of God among His chosen people. Then you tell them that many things in it are just nice stories that people made up to explain things that they did not understand…which sounds an aweful lot like mythology. Then you tell them that the hardest things to believe, are the absolute truth. Based on what? The Church. The Church uses Scripture to back up Her Faith.
The Faith was around before the Bible. So then you have the problem of explaining that people must put all of their eggs into one basket…the basket of liars.
When explaining that our Faith is the Truth…it doesn’t work well if you say that a big part of where our Faith is written has a bunch of lies.
And you cannot say “we didn’t say that they are lies…just not factual.” If they are not factual, they are fiction. If we use a reference book (which the Bible is) and it is full of fiction, it is no longer used as a reference book. It is a book of fiction…things made up.

You are hurting the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church to take things in the Bible and say that they are not factual.
It is much bigger than just you and me.

 

[juliamajor]

So, how do you evangelize the world with that? You tell them that the Bible is the History of God’s Word…and the story of God among His chosen people. Then you tell them that many things in it are just nice stories that people made up to explain things that they did not understand…which sounds an aweful lot like mythology. Then you tell them that the hardest things to believe, are the absolute truth. Based on what? The Church. The Church uses Scripture to back up Her Faith.
The Faith was around before the Bible. So then you have the problem of explaining that people must put all of their eggs into one basket…the basket of liars.
When explaining that our Faith is the Truth…it doesn’t work well if you say that a big part of where our Faith is written has a bunch of lies.
And you cannot say “we didn’t say that they are lies…just not factual.” If they are not factual, they are fiction. If we use a reference book (which the Bible is) and it is full of fiction, it is no longer used as a reference book. It is a book of fiction…things made up.

You are hurting the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church to take things in the Bible and say that they are not factual.
It is much bigger than just you and me.

What you are stating is rather overwrought and rather histrionic.Bible is not the History of God’s word. It’s not a true scientific style history…Histories require hard facts,eyewitnesses or first hand accounts.None of those criteria fit the bible or many ancient histories.
Salvation history is just what it says- it is concerned with salvation , in the context of a specific time and place.Writing about subjects centuries away from one’s time is never easy.And writing in a time when not many people could read and write, communication was at a snail’s pace. information trickled down along with gossip, hearsay, innuendo and maybe some facts.That was their idea of history- not ours. and since their relationship with God was the primary importance and not historical preciseness- the mish- mash of stories gleaned from different sources, different eras had to be redacted in a way to make it as cohesive as possible for a Israelite audience.So every thing is in the stew pot -facts, gossip, information, stories grandma told, ancestral tales etc, etc.This is not uncommon -and if you are familiar with foundational histories of many cultures then you would see that their world view and those of many ancients coincide in a sort of synchronicity.
Myth is not an evil or dirty word-It is the heartfelt expression of a people to define who they are and what they believe…Myths portray ,in story like fashion, intrinsic truths and the defining ideas and beliefs of a culture through vivid imagery and vibrant storytelling.Not lies. Remember we are dealing generally with prehistory. When you get into the monarchy their is more evidence of a historical reality based somewhat on eyewitness accounts.
The problem is the misunderstanding of genres- the bible is not a unified book- it was authored by many hands in different eras.To Grasp the mysteries of origins-of the world- of humanity- why we speak different languages- why death exists are things people had wanted to know , information that made sense to them had to be passed in a form familiar to the people of the past.
Lies require intent- these are not lies they are the truth as they know it expressed in a manner THEY could understand.A good understanding of literature I think would be helpful here.
Fiction is not the same as prevarication- not in any sense of the word. Was Dickens lying when he wrote fictional stories that portrayed the evils of his time? Are stories of Good vs evil, right and wrong lies because they are fictional?No, NO!
Bible is not a reference book- it’not an almanac , or a dictionary- The bible deals with truths-it deals with wisdom, it deals with love and other intangibles.Because we cannot see these things does that make them lies? or fantasies? Bible is a guide book - you look to see the follies of humanity, the evil sin creates the good that love creates and God’s care for the world in totality and each individual soul.
To say everything is factual in the bible is drives a bigger wedge and removes more people from belief then a fundamentalist adherence to . From Augustine on up to Benedict XVI they have seen the allegorical and metaphorical , and not always the factual in Bible stories. does that make metaphor and allegory lies also?

 

[NotWorthy]

So, how do you evangelize the world with that? You tell them that the Bible is the History of God’s Word…and the story of God among His chosen people. Then you tell them that many things in it are just nice stories that people made up to explain things that they did not understand…which sounds an aweful lot like mythology. Then you tell them that the hardest things to believe, are the absolute truth. Based on what? The Church. The Church uses Scripture to back up Her Faith.
The Faith was around before the Bible. So then you have the problem of explaining that people must put all of their eggs into one basket…the basket of liars.
When explaining that our Faith is the Truth…it doesn’t work well if you say that a big part of where our Faith is written has a bunch of lies.
And you cannot say “we didn’t say that they are lies…just not factual.” If they are not factual, they are fiction. If we use a reference book (which the Bible is) and it is full of fiction, it is no longer used as a reference book. It is a book of fiction…things made up.

You are hurting the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church to take things in the Bible and say that they are not factual.
It is much bigger than just you and me.

You are incredible!

What are we supposed to do? We are to preach the truth as we know it. If we don’t know it, you don’t teach it.

Listen closely.

The Church does not know if the 6 days of Creation in Genesis is true or simply a tool to teach that God created everything in the Universe (for that is the main lesson of Genesis 1).

Therefore, the Church does not teach that the Universe was definitely created in 6 days.

Neither should you. And neither should you chastise me for thinking that it may have taken millions and billions of years. The Bible is not a Scientific Book. Don’t make it out to be.

 

[NotWorthy]

Juliamajor,

BTW, thanks for that marvelous last post of yours! Very well said!

John

 

[Contarini]

Why trust the Bible at all if it allegedly contains errors?

Why not? I trust all sorts of things that contain errors. Why this either/or: either a thing must be entirely accurate or totally untrustworthy? Nothing else in life works that way. Besides, the “errors” under discussion here don’t affect the purpose for which we believe the Bible to have been inspired.

And anyway, the standard view on Tobit is that this is a work of fiction. That’s a different issue. Why would the existence of fiction in the Bible bother you?

If it is the Word of God (which I believe it is) why would God allow it to contain errors?

Why wouldn’t He? Maybe God is not as bothered by “errors” as you are.

I feel that saying “oh, well, these are parables or allegories and weren’t meant to be taken literally” is just a cop-out made by those who want to remain Catholics but conform to modern Darwinian thinking.

Or rather, to the virtue of intellectual honesty.

I’m looking for answers from Catholics who accept the historicity of the entire Bible and those who just “appreciate for it spiritual values”, picking and choosing parts they like and dismissing those they don’t like. I certainly am looking for the truth, that’s why I’m looking for answers from “Conservative” Catholics, rather than “Liberal” Catholics.

But you posted this on a discussion forum, so folks who disagree with you (even non-Catholics like me) are free to answer.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Try to lose the attitude. I’m not interested in hearing people who deny Scripture, such as yourself.

Well, you’re out of luck. You have come onto a public forum and made the outrageous accusation that people who differ with you on this point “deny Scripture.” They/we are going to argue back, because you’re wrong on this one and need to be shown your error. Instructing the ignorant is a spiritual work of mercy.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

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 not understand that no one is talking about lies?

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.

If that were true, I could not be a Christian. Because I am morally certain that there are inaccuracies in the Bible (not just in the deuterocanonical books, which as an Anglican I put on a lesser level anyway, but that’s not the point here).

I am pretty sure that you’re wrong even on the legal issue. A witness might, for instance, have all sorts of crazy ideas about science or history but still be an accurate reporter of what he or she had seen. And that leads to the main problem with your analogy: it rests on a rather foolish apologetics approach of the Enlightenment era which treated the Biblical writers as courtroom witnesses. But they aren’t. They are literary authors. You can’t apply the same set of rules at all.

Edwin

 

[NotWorthy]

Well, you’re out of luck. You have come onto a public forum and made the outrageous accusation that people who differ with you on this point “deny Scripture.” They/we are going to argue back, because you’re wrong on this one and need to be shown your error. Instructing the ignorant is a spiritual work of mercy.

Edwin

C’mon Edwin!!! You’ve got a lot of catching up to do, brother! 3 more pages to go!

 

[Contarini]

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.

A Lapide wrote a commentary on the whole Bible. Only part of the NT commentary seems to be available online, but the whole thing can be found in English translation in a lot of academic libraries. I ran across it (back before I went to grad school–I had actually never heard of A Lapide) in a Protestant (Christian Church/Church of Christ) seminary library in East Tennessee. So go to your local university library and check. If they don’t have it, try to get your public library to order it InterLibrary Loan.

Edwin

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

What you are stating is rather overwrought and rather histrionic.Bible is not the History of God’s word. It’s not a true scientific style history…Histories require hard facts,eyewitnesses or first hand accounts.None of those criteria fit the bible or many ancient histories.
Salvation history is just what it says- it is concerned with salvation , in the context of a specific time and place.Writing about subjects centuries away from one’s time is never easy.And writing in a time when not many people could read and write, communication was at a snail’s pace. information trickled down along with gossip, hearsay, innuendo and maybe some facts.That was their idea of history- not ours. and since their relationship with God was the primary importance and not historical preciseness- the mish- mash of stories gleaned from different sources, different eras had to be redacted in a way to make it as cohesive as possible for a Israelite audience.So every thing is in the stew pot -facts, gossip, information, stories grandma told, ancestral tales etc, etc.This is not uncommon -and if you are familiar with foundational histories of many cultures then you would see that their world view and those of many ancients coincide in a sort of synchronicity.
Myth is not an evil or dirty word-It is the heartfelt expression of a people to define who they are and what they believe…Myths portray ,in story like fashion, intrinsic truths and the defining ideas and beliefs of a culture through vivid imagery and vibrant storytelling.Not lies. Remember we are dealing generally with prehistory. When you get into the monarchy their is more evidence of a historical reality based somewhat on eyewitness accounts.
The problem is the misunderstanding of genres- the bible is not a unified book- it was authored by many hands in different eras.To Grasp the mysteries of origins-of the world- of humanity- why we speak different languages- why death exists are things people had wanted to know , information that made sense to them had to be passed in a form familiar to the people of the past.
Lies require intent- these are not lies they are the truth as they know it expressed in a manner THEY could understand.A good understanding of literature I think would be helpful here.
Fiction is not the same as prevarication- not in any sense of the word. Was Dickens lying when he wrote fictional stories that portrayed the evils of his time? Are stories of Good vs evil, right and wrong lies because they are fictional?No, NO!
Bible is not a reference book- it’not an almanac , or a dictionary- The bible deals with truths-it deals with wisdom, it deals with love and other intangibles.Because we cannot see these things does that make them lies? or fantasies? Bible is a guide book - you look to see the follies of humanity, the evil sin creates the good that love creates and God’s care for the world in totality and each individual soul.
To say everything is factual in the bible is drives a bigger wedge and removes more people from belief then a fundamentalist adherence to . From Augustine on up to Benedict XVI they have seen the allegorical and metaphorical , and not always the factual in Bible stories. does that make metaphor and allegory lies also?

You have just proved my point. With what you are saying, why and how would anyone convert to Christianity? What is the myth in God’s supposed word, and what is fact?

And why should they believe a person who is trying to explain it, as that person is just as fallible as they are?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

You are incredible!

What are we supposed to do? We are to preach the truth as we know it. If we don’t know it, you don’t teach it.

Listen closely.

The Church does not know if the 6 days of Creation in Genesis is true or simply a tool to teach that God created everything in the Universe (for that is the main lesson of Genesis 1).

Therefore, the Church does not teach that the Universe was definitely created in 6 days.

Neither should you. And neither should you chastise me for thinking that it may have taken millions and billions of years. The Bible is not a Scientific Book. Don’t make it out to be.

The Bible is the TRUTH. God could easily have said that it took Him billions of years. He has NEVER implied that it took more than six days.
Science is, many times, totally off base. Not only that, but it changes with every generation…if not more often. God’s word never changes.
Guess who I am going to be believing.

 

[diggerdomer]

The Bible is the TRUTH. God could easily have said that it took Him billions of years. He has NEVER implied that it took more than six days.
Science is, many times, totally off base. Not only that, but it changes with every generation…if not more often. God’s word never changes.
Guess who I am going to be believing.

Yes the Bible is truth but creation could have happened in six days or six billion years. The Catholic Church does not require that we believe any specific age for the earth, duration of creation, etc.

If you disagree please share with us the authoritative teaching you’re basing your opinion on.

Cheers

 

[juliamajor]

The Bible is the TRUTH. God could easily have said that it took Him billions of years. He has NEVER implied that it took more than six days.
Science is, many times, totally off base. Not only that, but it changes with every generation…if not more often. God’s word never changes.
Guess who I am going to be believing.

Oy!!!

 

[juliamajor]

You have just proved my point. With what you are saying, why and how would anyone convert to Christianity? What is the myth in God’s supposed word, and what is fact?

And why should they believe a person who is trying to explain it, as that person is just as fallible as they are?

You’ve read it but you have not understood…I tried to make myself as clear as possible.Only the most rigorous Fundamentalists take everything in the bible literally… Our church doesn’t teach that -so I suggest you read Benedict XVI take on Genesis.Not Fundie at all.

 

[NotWorthy]

The Bible is the TRUTH. God could easily have said that it took Him billions of years. He has NEVER implied that it took more than six days.
Science is, many times, totally off base. Not only that, but it changes with every generation…if not more often. God’s word never changes.
Guess who I am going to be believing.

I would follow what the Church that you profess to follow and Her understanding of the Bible.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Someone please tell me where the Pope or the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church implies that I am NOT following her teachings.