S
simspt
Guest
How are these terms used differently among Catholic scholars? Did Catholics use these terms during the 2nd century before canonization occurred when arguing against gnosticism?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
Crumpy
Guest
Each of those is a very large subject. You’re asking for a team of people to spoonfeed you on subjects that you should research for yourself. Look up there and see the tab for “encyclopedia”? There’s a wealth of information there that should get you started.
P
Pete_Holter
Guest
Welcome to the forums, simspt! May the Lord be with you!How are these terms used differently among Catholic scholars? Did Catholics use these terms during the 2nd century before canonization occurred when arguing against gnosticism?
“Inspiration of the Bible” is a good article to read about all three concepts.
You can also view discussion on this topic beginning here. Following this thread will link you to other threads and resources.
And here are some thoughts about Scripture prior to the year A.D. 200:
Pope Saint Clement of Rome (A.D. 96): “Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Observe that nothing of an unjust or counterfeit character is written in them” (, Ch. 45Letter to the Corinthians).
The “Old Man” who brought Justin Martyr to faith in Christ (A.D. 130): “There existed, long before this time, certain men more ancient than all those who are esteemed philosophers, both righteous and beloved by God, who spoke by the Divine Spirit, and foretold events which would take place, and which are now taking place. They are called prophets. These alone both saw and announced the truth to men, neither reverencing nor fearing any man, not influenced by a desire for glory, but speaking those things alone which they saw and which they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit. Their writings are still extant, and he who has read them is very much helped in his knowledge of the beginning and end of things, and of those matters which the philosopher ought to know, provided he has believed them. For they did not use demonstration in their treatises, seeing that they were witnesses to the truth above all demonstration, and worthy of belief; and those events which have happened, and those which are happening, compel you to assent to the utterances made by them” (qtd. in , Ch. 7Dialogue with Trypho).
Saint Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): “Further, to persuade you that you have not understood anything of the Scriptures, I will remind you of another psalm, dictated to David by the Holy Spirit, which you say refers to Solomon, who was also your king. But it refers also to our Christ” (, Ch. 34Dialogue with Trypho).
Saint Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): “I shall not venture to suppose or to say …] the Scriptures contradicted each other …]; and if a Scripture which appears to be of such a kind be brought forward, and if there be a pretext [for saying] that it is contrary [to some other], since I am entirely convinced that no Scripture contradicts another, I shall admit rather that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive to persuade those who imagine that the Scriptures are contradictory, to be rather of the same opinion as myself” (, Ch. 65Dialogue with Trypho).
Saint Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): “And this was done and said by the blessed prophet with much intelligence and mystery; and there is nothing said or done by any one of the prophets, without exception, which one can justly reprehend, if he possess the knowledge which is in them” (, Ch. 112Dialogue with Trypho).
Saint Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): “I consider it reasonable to recur to our progenitors, who both in point of time have by a great way the precedence of your teachers, and who have taught us nothing from their own private fancy, nor differed with one another, nor attempted to overturn one another’s positions, but without wrangling and contention received from God the knowledge which also they taught to us. For neither by nature nor by human conception is it possible for men to know things so great and divine, but by the gift which then descended from above upon the holy men, who had no need of rhetorical art, nor of uttering anything in a contentious or quarrelsome manner, but to present themselves pure to the energy of the Divine Spirit, in order that the divine plectrum itself, descending from heaven, and using righteous men as an instrument like a harp or lyre, might reveal to us the knowledge of things divine and heavenly. Wherefore, as if with one mouth and one tongue, they have in succession, and in harmony with one another, taught us both concerning God, and the creation of the world, and the formation of man, and concerning the immortality of the human soul, and the judgment which is to be after this life, and concerning all things which it is needful for us to know, and thus in various times and places have afforded us the divine instruction… To [Moses] first did God communicate that divine and prophetic gift which in those days descended upon the holy men, and him also did He first furnish that he might be our teacher in religion, and then after him the rest of the prophets, who both obtained the same gift as he, and taught us the same doctrines concerning the same subjects. These we assert to have been our teachers, who taught us nothing from their own human conception, but from the gift vouchsafed to them by God from above” (, Ch. 8 & 10Hortatory Address to the Greeks).
P
Pete_Holter
Guest
Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 175-185): “If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those things in Scripture which are made the subject of investigation, yet let us not on that account seek after any other God besides Him who really exists. For this is the very greatest impiety. We should leave things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit” (, Bk. 2, Ch. 28, 2Against Heresies).
Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 175-185): “Now if any man set Luke aside, as one who did not know the truth, he will, [by so acting,] manifestly reject that Gospel of which he claims to be a disciple. For through him we have become acquainted with very many and important parts of the Gospel; for instance, the generation of John, the history of Zacharias, the coming of the angel to Mary, the exclamation of Elisabeth, the descent of the angels to the shepherds, the words spoken by them, the testimony of Anna and of Simeon with regard to Christ, and that twelve years of age He was left behind at Jerusalem; also the baptism of John, the number of the Lord’s years when He was baptized, and that this occurred in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar…
“It follows then, as of course, that these [heretics] must either receive the rest of his narrative, or else reject these parts also. For no persons of common sense can permit them to receive some things recounted by Luke as being true, and to set others aside, as if he had not known the truth.” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 14, 3-4Against Heresies).
Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 175-185): “[N]or can [the heretics] prove Luke guilty of falsehood, when he proclaims the truth to us with all diligence. It may be, indeed, that it was with this view that God set forth very many Gospel truths, through Luke’s instrumentality, which all should esteem it necessary to use, in order that all persons, following his subsequent testimony, which treats upon the acts and the doctrine of the apostles, and holding the unadulterated rule of truth, may be saved. His testimony, therefore, is true” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 15, 1Against Heresies).
Athenagoras (A.D. 176-177) : “I think that you also, with your great zeal for knowledge, and your great attainments in learning, cannot be ignorant of the writings either of Moses or of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and the other prophets, who, lifted in ecstasy above the natural operations of their minds by the impulses of the Divine Spirit, uttered the things with which they were inspired, the Spirit making use of them as a flute-player breathes into a flute” (, Ch. 9A Plea for the Christians).
Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 180-185): “And Moses, who lived many years before Solomon, or, rather, the Word of God by him as by an instrument, says, ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth’” (, Bk. 2, Ch. 10Theophilus to Autolycus).
Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 180-185): “How much more, then, shall we know the truth who are instructed by the holy prophets, who were possessed by the Holy Spirit of God! On this account all the prophets spoke harmoniously and in agreement with one another, and foretold the things that would come to pass in all the world. For the very accomplishment of predicted and already consummated events should demonstrate to those who are fond of information, yea rather, who are lovers of truth, that those things are really true which they declared concerning the epochs and eras before the deluge: to wit, how the years have run on since the world was created until now” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 17Theophilus to Autolycus).
Saint Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190): “I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures of which not one tittle shall pass away without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit has spoken these things… Let us then ever obey the voice of the divine word.
“…]
“For truly holy are those letters that sanctify and deify; and the writings or volumes that consist of those holy letters and syllables, the same apostle consequently calls inspired of God, being profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to every good work. No one will be so impressed by the exhortations of any of the saints, as he is by the words of the Lord Himself, the lover of man. For this, and nothing but this, is His only work—the salvation of man” (, Ch. 9Exhortation to the Heathen).
In Christ,
Pete
Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 175-185): “Now if any man set Luke aside, as one who did not know the truth, he will, [by so acting,] manifestly reject that Gospel of which he claims to be a disciple. For through him we have become acquainted with very many and important parts of the Gospel; for instance, the generation of John, the history of Zacharias, the coming of the angel to Mary, the exclamation of Elisabeth, the descent of the angels to the shepherds, the words spoken by them, the testimony of Anna and of Simeon with regard to Christ, and that twelve years of age He was left behind at Jerusalem; also the baptism of John, the number of the Lord’s years when He was baptized, and that this occurred in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Cæsar…
“It follows then, as of course, that these [heretics] must either receive the rest of his narrative, or else reject these parts also. For no persons of common sense can permit them to receive some things recounted by Luke as being true, and to set others aside, as if he had not known the truth.” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 14, 3-4Against Heresies).
Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 175-185): “[N]or can [the heretics] prove Luke guilty of falsehood, when he proclaims the truth to us with all diligence. It may be, indeed, that it was with this view that God set forth very many Gospel truths, through Luke’s instrumentality, which all should esteem it necessary to use, in order that all persons, following his subsequent testimony, which treats upon the acts and the doctrine of the apostles, and holding the unadulterated rule of truth, may be saved. His testimony, therefore, is true” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 15, 1Against Heresies).
Athenagoras (A.D. 176-177) : “I think that you also, with your great zeal for knowledge, and your great attainments in learning, cannot be ignorant of the writings either of Moses or of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and the other prophets, who, lifted in ecstasy above the natural operations of their minds by the impulses of the Divine Spirit, uttered the things with which they were inspired, the Spirit making use of them as a flute-player breathes into a flute” (, Ch. 9A Plea for the Christians).
Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 180-185): “And Moses, who lived many years before Solomon, or, rather, the Word of God by him as by an instrument, says, ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth’” (, Bk. 2, Ch. 10Theophilus to Autolycus).
Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 180-185): “How much more, then, shall we know the truth who are instructed by the holy prophets, who were possessed by the Holy Spirit of God! On this account all the prophets spoke harmoniously and in agreement with one another, and foretold the things that would come to pass in all the world. For the very accomplishment of predicted and already consummated events should demonstrate to those who are fond of information, yea rather, who are lovers of truth, that those things are really true which they declared concerning the epochs and eras before the deluge: to wit, how the years have run on since the world was created until now” (, Bk. 3, Ch. 17Theophilus to Autolycus).
Saint Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190): “I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures of which not one tittle shall pass away without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit has spoken these things… Let us then ever obey the voice of the divine word.
“…]
“For truly holy are those letters that sanctify and deify; and the writings or volumes that consist of those holy letters and syllables, the same apostle consequently calls inspired of God, being profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to every good work. No one will be so impressed by the exhortations of any of the saints, as he is by the words of the Lord Himself, the lover of man. For this, and nothing but this, is His only work—the salvation of man” (, Ch. 9Exhortation to the Heathen).
In Christ,
Pete
P
patg
Guest
There is an excellent little book that covers this subject quite well: “Biblical Fundamentalism, What Every Catholic Should Know” by Ronald Witherup, S.S. (imprimatur and Nihil Obstat). And I agree with a previous poster that this is a very wide subject about which you can read thousands of previous posts in these forums.How are these terms used differently among Catholic scholars? Did Catholics use these terms during the 2nd century before canonization occurred when arguing against gnosticism?
S
simspt
Guest
Thanks for the info, I appreciate it.
P
Pete_Holter
Guest
Hi again, simspt!
In case you don’t make it this far back into the trail of threads, I have posted about what I’ve seen from Witherup’s book here. This resource does not seem trustworthy. He has written,
“To the best of my knowledge, the word [inerrancy] has never been used in official Church doctrine at the level of an ecumenical council.”
And my reaction is to wonder, Why has he not simply read the councils? There are only 21 of them.
He also wrote,
“the Catholic Church’s position on lack of error in the Bible embraces only doctrinal and moral teaching, not scientific or historical.”
Unless by “Bible” he means “Vulgate,” my reaction is to wonder, How can he honestly say this when the documents of the Magisterium clearly condemn statements such as this?
I am left with the impression that he should have spent more time researching for this section of his book before taking it upon himself to write about it. I thought I should share my thoughts.
Your brother in the Lord,
Pete
In case you don’t make it this far back into the trail of threads, I have posted about what I’ve seen from Witherup’s book here. This resource does not seem trustworthy. He has written,
“To the best of my knowledge, the word [inerrancy] has never been used in official Church doctrine at the level of an ecumenical council.”
And my reaction is to wonder, Why has he not simply read the councils? There are only 21 of them.
He also wrote,
“the Catholic Church’s position on lack of error in the Bible embraces only doctrinal and moral teaching, not scientific or historical.”
Unless by “Bible” he means “Vulgate,” my reaction is to wonder, How can he honestly say this when the documents of the Magisterium clearly condemn statements such as this?
I am left with the impression that he should have spent more time researching for this section of his book before taking it upon himself to write about it. I thought I should share my thoughts.
Your brother in the Lord,
Pete
- Status
- Not open for further replies.