Questions About The Bible

[jmcrae]

I think the premise that because something is not catholic that its not accurate about anything is wrong and a bit arogant. I find a lot of things that are accurate that aren’t Catholic.

CARM is a special case. They are specifically anti-Catholic, and they publish a great deal of stuff that even they themselves know is not actually true. It is also not a good place to get good Protestant theology, either, for that very reason.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

What I am asking here is what authority do Catholics use for determining the date that a given Bible passage was written?

I guess the owness is on you to prove any human knows when the passages were written.

Apparently, by some of the posts, any source is OK, and individuals are free to choose what they like

Certainly sounds as baiting, that is not a proper statement

• even Protestant publications listing the dates.

Anybody can make up a date, so please explain how any protestant could know such

I honestly thought that Catholics would have some sort of official recommendations here, and would be very interested to learn more about it.

It is possible you are lost concerning the Ecumenical Councils, or baiting on tradition. What you need to address is 1) Much of the bible predates common literacy, 2) The Old Testament (OT) has various versions and edits. We know this as information exists in books which could not be known until after the original context was completed. ( like the king who lived later, the war which occurred later) 3) Jesus did not write for us, had he believed the bible was to be the sole source he would have written the bible.

If you want to learn about your bible or ours read about the ecumenical councils of Nicaea (~325) and Constantinople (~380)

 

[Verisimilitude]

What I am asking here is what authority do Catholics use for determining the date that a given Bible passage was written? Apparently, by some of the posts, any source is OK, and individuals are free to choose what they like - even Protestant publications listing the dates. I honestly thought that Catholics would have some sort of official recommendations here, and would be very interested to learn more about it.

Not any source, just one that is supported by reason and tradition that does not contradict known facts such as when people lived and died. This is the same authority (the Church)that determines other mysteries and how we are to view them. I will list a few examples:

Gospel of St. Matthew
Date and place of composition
Ancient ecclesiastical writers are at variance as to the date of the composition of the First Gospel. Eusebius (in his Chronicle), Theophylact, and Euthymius Zigabenus are of opinion that the Gospel of Matthew was written eight years, and Nicephorus Callistus fifteen years, after Christ’s Ascension–i.e. about A.D. 38-45. According to Eusebius, Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew when he left Palestine. Now, following a certain tradition (admittedly not too reliable), the Apostles separated twelve years after the Ascension, hence the Gospel would have been written about the year 40-42, but following Eusebius (Church History III.5.2), it is possible to fix the definitive departure of the Apostles about the year 60, in which event the writing of the Gospel would have taken place about the year 60-68. St Irenæus is somewhat more exact concerning the date of the First Gospel, as he says: “Matthew produced his Gospel when Peter and Paul were evangelizing and founding the Church of Rome, consequently about the years 64-67.” However, this text presents difficulties of interpretation which render its meaning uncertain and prevent us from deducing any positive conclusion.

Immaculate Conception:
…Proof from Scripture
Genesis 3:15
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. But the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer.

 

[PaulDupre]

The first one is what sources do you use to determine the dates that each chapter of the Bible was written?

The bible was not written in chapters. The books of the bible were not divided into chapters until about 1200 AD. The division into chapters is commonly credited to Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, who died in 1228 AD.

 

[PJM]

=Protestant101;5029631]Are you sure the dates would make no difference? Is this what your Church officially teaches?

My dear friend!

In Christ?

Your fishing in a pond that ain’t got no fish!

There is super-abundant hard evidence that the entire New Testament was written by the end of the first Century. (Year 100 A.D.)

It was translated from Greek, Hebrew and Ameriac by St. Jerone into the Latin Vulgate roughly arounf the year 350 A.D.

May I suggest dear friend that you may want to fish in a new pond

Love and prayers,

 

[emarc]

Thanks! Your post is the best one so far! This is the kind of thing I am looking for. I have book-marked the link you gave and will take a couple of days to look it over, and I WILL BE BACK! LOL… (THAT LAST PHRASE IS DIRECTED AT “CHESTERTONRULES” and anyone else who thinks I am “Catholic Baiting!”)

One thing I have always been interested in is HOW to study something…I do enjoy discussing this kind of topic; but more on that later, and thanks to those who are trying to have a good discussion here. My questions about Bible chronology are just a part of a bigger picture, when we look at the central theme of the whole Bible. I am looking forward to this discussion, and hearing how Catholics see the Bible…

I will be most interested in learning the sources of your thinking, rather than on whos right or worng about something. There are other threads where you can do some serious debate with me if you would like!

hi - does sda have forum similar to catholic.com where non sda could log in? i’m interested to participate if non sda is welcome. thanks.
God bless.

 

[Protestant101]

There is a lot of cross-over in the scholarship. I think the important point to remember is to make sure to listen to qualified scholars, on this issue. (For example if someone is telling you that Adam and Eve were keeping a diary, you should not believe them, since writing itself was not even invented until some time around 2000 BC. The Book of Genesis was not written any earlier than the time of Moses - and it is possible that people were still editing it as late as the Babylonian Captivity.)

The Catholic Church doesn’t have anything dogmatic on this issue that we are “required” to believe, but at the same time, we need to make use of our own common sense, as well. We know that at least most of the books of the New Testament were available to St. Ignatius of Antioch to quote from in his letters, and we also know that he died no later than 110 AD. So, anyone who tells you that the books of the New Testament were written any later than that is not using good scholarship.

I am currently investigating my own church’s views on this question; so I cannot yet answer anyone who has asked me about it; but as far as I know, most Churches do not have anything “dogmatic” on this issue.

It was originally because I am inquiring into what my own Church has taught on the matter, that I thought to inquire about it here.

It does strike me as very odd that so many denominations don’t seem to have any real recommendations on where to look, what to trust, regarding when the various books or chapters of the Bible were written. If you have ever studied in-depth with Jehovah’s Witnesses, for eg., you would see that there are some very real differences in certain dates.

Because the Bible, as we currently have it, is not always written in chronilogical order, it becomes very interesting and enlightening to know when various passages were written.

 

[Protestant101]

I have another question I’d like to ask Catholics about the Bible. What is an official Catholic definition of “private interpretation?”

 

[rtconstant]

I have another question I’d like to ask Catholics about the Bible. What is an official Catholic definition of “private interpretation?”

Below is the official position on interpretation of both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Hope it helps.

Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions

83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.

Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.
III. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE HERITAGE OF FAITH

The heritage of faith entrusted to the whole of the Church

84 The apostles entrusted the “Sacred deposit” of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. "By adhering to [this heritage] the entire holy people, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing and professing the faith that has been handed on, there should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful."46

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48

87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”,49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms. - Catechism of the Catholic Church (English Translation) Section 1, Chapter 2, Article 2

 

[Protestant101]

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:

Dan 7:1 In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.

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

 

[koranist]

here is the one I use I do not know if it Cathloic are not
The following dates are not always exact, but are very good estimates.

Old Testament

Book Author Date Written
Genesis Moses ? - 1445 B.C.
Exodus Moses 1445 - 1405 B.C.
Leviticus Moses 1405 B.C.
Numbers Moses 1444 - 1405 B.C.
Deuteronomy Moses 1405 B.C.
Joshua Joshua 1404-1390 B.C.
Judges Samuel 1374-1129 B.C.
Ruth Samuel 1150? B.C.
First Samuel Samuel 1043-1011 B.C.
Second Samuel Ezra? 1011-1004 B.C.
First Kings Jeremiah? 971-852 B.C.
Second Kings Jeremiah? 852-587 B.C.
First Chronicles Ezra? 450 - 425 B.C.
Second Chronicles Ezra? 450 - 425 B.C.
Ezra Ezra 538-520 B.C.
Nehemiah Nehemiah 445 - 425 B.C.
Esther Mordecai? 465 B.C.
Job Job? ??
Psalms David 1000? B.C.
Sons of Korah wrote Psalms 42, 44-49, 84-85, 87; Asaph wrote Psalms 50, 73-83; Heman wrote Psalm 88; Ethan wrote Psalm 89; Hezekiah wrote Psalms 120-123, 128-130, 132, 134-136;
Solomon wrote Psalms 72, 127.
Proverbs Solomon wrote 1-29
Agur wrote 30
Lemuel wrote 31 950 - 700 B.C.
Ecclesiastes Solomon 935 B.C.
Song of Solomon Solomon 965 B.C.
Isaiah Isaiah 740 - 680 B.C.
Jeremiah Jeremiah 627 - 585 B.C.
Lamentations Jeremiah 586 B.C.
Ezekiel Ezekiel 593-560 B.C.
Daniel Daniel 605-536 B.C.
Hosea Hosea 710 B.C.
Joel Joel 835 B.C.
Amos Amos 755 B.C.
Obadiah Obadiah 840 or 586 B.C.
Jonah Jonah 760 B.C.
Micah Micah 700 B.C.
Nahum Nahum 663 - 612 B.C.
Habakkuk Habakkuk 607 B.C.
Zephaniah Zephaniah 625 B.C.
Haggai Haggai 520 B.C.
Zechariah Zechariah 520 - 518 B.C.
Malachi Malachi 450 - 600 B.C.

New Testament

Book Author Date Written (A.D)
Matthew Matthew 60’s
Mark John Mark late 50’s
early 60’s
Luke Luke 60
John John late 80’s
early 90’s
Acts Luke 61
Romans Paul 55
1 Corinthians Paul 54
2 Corinthians Paul 55
Galatians Paul 49
Ephesians Paul 60
Philippians Paul 61
Colossians Paul 60
1 Thessalonians Paul 50 - 51
2 Thessalonians Paul 50 - 51
1 Timothy Paul 62
2 Timothy Paul 63
Titus Paul 62
Philemon Paul 60
Hebrews (Paul, Apollos, Barnabas…?) 60’s
James James, half brother of Jesus 40’s or 50’s
1 Peter Peter 63
2 Peter Peter 63 - 64
1 John John late 80’s
early 90’s
2 John John late 80’s
early 90’s
3 John John late 80’s
early 90’s
Jude Jude, half brother of Jesus 60’s or 70’s
Revelation John late 80’s
early 90’s

The Gospel were written during the disciples era. These were the copies of the disciples works so the dates are much earlier. The Gospel of Paul was written while Paul was alive and this can be seen clearly from the scriptures. Yes they were not the originals but they are exact copies of them. These dates give the impression that they were written after their deaths.

 

[Harland]

I have another question I’d like to ask Catholics about the Bible. What is an official Catholic definition of “private interpretation?”

Why are asking about bible interpretation? Catholics are free to read and interpret the bible as the Holy Spirit leads as long as it doesn’t go against official Church teaching. Such as the bible isn’t to be used for fortune telling ( trying to prodict the end of the world), Matt 16, 18, Peter being name change and being commissoned fist Pope, John chapter 6 just to name a few.

And why is it important when the books of the bible were written?

 

[jmcrae]

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?”

To show the political climate at the time - the people were looking forward to a new future with a new King; things were changing, the stock market was going up, etc. It sets the scene. Kind of like at the beginning of a movie, you see the skyline of a city, and it shows you what city you’re in, what time of day it is, and so forth - it sets the scene and contextualizes the action that follows.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Hi Bill,

Do you have the internet link of this information?

jakaski, No I do not in fact I don,t even remember making this post. I had the disk Welcome to the Cathloic Church and it got burn up, I may have got from it,just do not know. Can you believe something I do not know HMMM let me think about this(smile) have a great night and may God Bless you,SORRY

 

[Protestant101]

Why are asking about bible interpretation? Catholics are free to read and interpret the bible as the Holy Spirit leads as long as it doesn’t go against official Church teaching. Such as the bible isn’t to be used for fortune telling ( trying to prodict the end of the world), Matt 16, 18, Peter being name change and being commissoned fist Pope, John chapter 6 just to name a few.
And why is it important when the books of the bible were written?

LOL; the Bible itself predicts the “end of the world,” but as instructed by Jesus, no one can name the exact “hour.” We can only know that it is “near.”

I am asking because I am interested to see what the Bible means in it’s various references to time. It doesn’t sound like you feel it is too important; and that OK; I am interested to hear opinions and facts on all sides of this question.

The “first year” of this King that I cited in the above text would be a different time frame than just when that particular book of the Bible was written, so that to me makes it an interesting item of research.

When you said Catholics are free to interpret the Bible whatever way they want, so long as it does not interfere with official Catholic teaching; you reminded me of the charge Catholics keep making to Protestants of “private interpretation.” What you just said, is no different. It is the Catholic version of “private interpretation.”

Jmacrae in his post above, I think, came the closest to why it’s important to research into specific dates mentioned or referred to in the Bible. It helps to contectualize a verse or passage so that we understand more fully the Bible writer’s intent.

I would appreciate some specific references to official Catholic teachings that actually say Catholics can interpret the Bible whatever way they want, as long as it does not interfere with Catholic teachings. Perhaps, this is something we could all understand better?

 

[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.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I notice you avoid post #42 and probably several others that address your questions, but I guess you have your reasons

LOL; the Bible itself predicts the “end of the world,” but as instructed by Jesus, no one can name the exact “hour.” We can only know that it is “near.”

I am asking because I am interested to see what the Bible means in it’s various references to time. It doesn’t sound like you feel it is too important; and that OK; I am interested to hear opinions and facts on all sides of this question.

The “first year” of this King that I cited in the above text would be a different time frame than just when that particular book of the Bible was written, so that to me makes it an interesting item of research.

In the book “Where we got the Bible” by Henry G. Graham you would get a catholic perspective, there is a similar book by a Protestant from Harvard which actually deals with the Torah but answers your question directly. (if you are actually looking for answers)

When you said Catholics are free to interpret the Bible whatever way they want, so long as it does not interfere with official Catholic teaching; you reminded me of the charge Catholics keep making to Protestants of “private interpretation.” What you just said, is no different. It is the Catholic version of “private interpretation.”

?? and what logic is that? Protestants can believe anything in the bible is actual verses allegorical not so for Catholics, again it would seem you desire to dismiss important issues

Jmacrae in his post above, I think, came the closest to why it’s important to research into specific dates mentioned or referred to in the Bible. It helps to contectualize a verse or passage so that we understand more fully the Bible writer’s intent.

I would appreciate some specific references to official Catholic teachings that actually say Catholics can interpret the Bible whatever way they want, as long as it does not interfere with Catholic teachings. Perhaps, this is something we could all understand better?

Who is “we”? It does not seem you desire to learn actual catholic teachings, after all the catechism is a worldwide book of the catholic teaching. It is cheap and readily available so why not read it?

 

[happilycatholic]

I would appreciate some specific references to official Catholic teachings that actually say Catholics can interpret the Bible whatever way they want, as long as it does not interfere with Catholic teachings. Perhaps, this is something we could all understand better?

Hi Protestant101:

You’ve been on this forum long enough to know that the Holy See has a copy of the Catechism on their site. Go there and find it for yourself. Why play this game?

**Edit:

Here, I’ll do it for you: vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm

This will tell you what you need to know.

Peace Be With You Always through Christ.

 

[Protestant101]

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.

I will opt out of this thread since you have this kind of opinion. I am not the slightest bit interested in anything like this.

 

[happilycatholic]

I will opt out of this thread since you have this kind of opinion. I am not the slightest bit interested in anything like this.

Oh wow. Didn’t know I had that kind of affect.

Right.