Questions About The Bible

[happilycatholic]

Why would a person come on a “non-catholic” thread to get a catholic opinion/info? Why not go to the Traditional thread or the Apologetics thread for accurate information?

Why? Because any answer you pose will give the OP fodder for an argument.

…or a reason to quit.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

You mean Catholics have no sources to tell them the dates that each book of the Bible was written?

The question is one of human evidence - not of Divine revelation. So it is a question for scholars, not dogmatic theologians. This is not a weakness or a flaw, merely a fact The truth of the Bible as the Bible (that is, as Scripture rather than as a collection of of ancient Jewish texts)is a theological question, not a question of historical research.​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Dear friend! In Christ?

Your fishing in a hole that has no fish

There is an abundance of historical evidence on when the various books of the bible were written and compiled.

**But - that evidence is not revealed by God, & leaves ample room for uncertainty, as is the way with anything that is the result of human industry & scholarship; & that is what the arguments & evidence are: the result of human industry & scholarship. And in fact, the question of dating is one of great complexity, which is why those skilled in such matters differ. **​

**Faith cannot be founded on anything as weak & shifting as human scholarship - it has to be founded on the grace of Christ, which no human industry could ever discover. If Wisdom cannot be mined (Job 28), far less can the grace of faith which the Fathers bestows through Christ be discovered by a human thing such as “historical evidence”. To found faith on that , is a sort of rationalism **

**Regardless of the dates of the books & their parts, it is the Spirit who makes the books efficacious as a Divine message - to that, the dating and sequence of books are irrelevant. **

This information is easy to obtain and very on the net.

You know this and we know this, so what is the point your trying to make:shrug:

If you REALLY have questions on the bible please ask them, because this does not warrant a reply.

Love and prayers,

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I will get back to the “private interpretation” question in the next post; but I have an example to show what I mean by my first question, regarding dates in the Bible.

Consider this text:

Why would the author of this Bible text say specifically: “In the first year of Belshazzar?” What would be his reason for THIS reference to time? How would Catholics figure out when this first year of King Belshazzar was?

I understand your third question - but not the first two: could you explain ? Thanks. As to the third: by looking at the relevant evidence from Akkadian texts. FWIW, The question of Belshazzar’s kingship is entirely distinct from that of the historicity of the Book of Daniel. There is no necessary connection between them, & the Book of Daniel may very well be non-historical; even though Belshazzar himself is firmly historical. It is still inspired Scripture.​

**The historical Belshazzar was king in Babylon while his father Nabu-nai’id (Nabonidus) was in Teima in Arabia (which was was for most of the reign of Nabonidus). The period covered is that from 555 to 538. So Belshazzar (more correctly, Bel-shar-usur) was not a sovereign ruler, but was acting on his father’s behalf. **How is this known ? Not by revelation, but because there are plenty of texts from the period. Revelation is no more necessary or appropriate for this question than it would be for questions about more recent history.

Can you cite references? Or, if you don’t think it’s important for us to know, please talk about that too!!

As a start, try going here:​

• [http://www.livius.org/na-nd/nabonidus/nabonidus.html (http://www.livius.org/na-nd/nabonidus/nabonidus.html)

**The site is an excellent source for ancient history; & is eas****y to navigate **