Scripture and Historical Truth

[Ron_Conte]

LAMENTABILI SANE
Pius X July 3, 1907
[my comments in brackets]

[The list in LS is a list of errors to be rejected, not a list of doctrines to be believed.]

1. Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.

[This error continues today in the form of claims that the assertions of the Bible on matters other than faith and morals are not true assertions, but are merely fictional teaching stories, or literary genres in which a falsehood is used to convey a greater truth.]

1. If he wishes to apply himself usefully to Biblical studies, the exegete must first put aside all preconceived opinions about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture and interpret it the same as any other merely human document.

[This is a common opinion among Biblical scholars today, that the Bible should be interpreted without faith, without regard for the teachings of Tradition or Magisterium, and should only be interpreted by means of critical methods.]

1. The Evangelists themselves, as well as the Christians of the second and third generation, artificially arranged the evangelical parables. In such a way they explained the scanty fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.

[The error is still found today among scholars who claim that the assertions in the New Testament are from the understanding and practice of the early Church, rather than the other way around.]

1. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.

[The more clever way of stating this error is to claim that, because a passage is a particular literary genre, that none of its plain assertions (whether literal or figurative) need be taken as true, and that the authors used fiction to convey the more profitable truths.]

1. Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.

[To the contrary, all of Sacred Scripture is Christ speaking to us.]

1. The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.

[This error, in an even larger form, claims that the Bible is not properly history, but merely a presentation of truth concerning the mystery of salvation, by means of fictional literary forms.]

1. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word Incarnate.

[The idea is condemned that any exaggeration was used to describe the historical truth about Christ’s miracles; therefore, the worse claim that any such descriptions of miracles is a fictional literary form is also condemned.]

1. John claims for himself the quality of witness concerning Christ. In reality, however, he is only a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of Christ in the Church at the close of the first century.

[Scholars often claim that John did not write the Gospel of John and/or that he was not a witness to the public ministry of Christ.]

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Please answer this one now, Ron…

Which tree is “in the middle of the garden”?

9 Out of the ground the LORD God made various trees grow that were delightful to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. Genesis 2:9. Here it is The Tree of Life.

1 Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the LORD God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?”
2 The woman answered the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden;
3 it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’” Genesis 3:1-3. Here it is The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Note that both the narrator in 2:9 and Eve in 3:3 use the tree’s middleness to identify it – to distinguish it from other trees.

Clearly we have a pure contradiction. Which is true?

Here is another, out of Jesus’ own mouth…

Humanity can be divided into three groups: (1) WITH Christ; (2) NEITHER; (3) AGAINST Christ.

30 Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. Matthew 12:30. That means that those in Group #2, the “NEITHER-ites,” are AGAINST Christ, because they aren’t WITH Christ.

40 For whoever is not against us is for us. Mark 9:40. That means that those in Group #2, the “NEITHER-ites,” are WITH Christ, because they aren’t AGAINST Christ.

Which is true?

Gymnastics time!!!

The answer is, relax. The Bible is not reliable history.

 

[rcjones]

If one looks for contradictions, one finds them because of the hardness of their own hearts.

There were four statements made by the serpent:

1. You will not die
2. Your eyes will be opened
3. You will be like God
4. You will know good and evil

Through the eyes of the flesh the serpent told the truth

1. Adam lived for 900 years
2. They saw they were naked
3. God said they had become ‘like’ him
4. And they now knew sin where before they had only known good.

But the flesh calls God a liar…

Look again with the eyes of faith:

1. Adam died that day spiritually, separated from God
2. Mankind was blinded so that in seeing they did not perceive
3. Rather than being Holy like God, they became detestable to Him so that they could not remain with Him
4. Rather than knowing ‘good and evil’ they now became slaves to sin.

It is the old serpent that is the liar… just as the eyes of flesh are.

In the Bible, water destroys and it gives life, fire destroys and refines, and the two trees are one. The tree of Life is the same tree as the tree of death and it is Christ, both redeemer and judge. In Revelation the one tree has a split trunk. Justice and Grace are reconciled in Christ.

Looks like a perfectly reliable history to me.

 

[Nita]

Please answer this one now, Ron…

Which tree is “in the middle of the garden”?

9 Out of the ground the LORD God made various trees grow that were delightful to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. Genesis 2:9. Here it is The Tree of Life.

1 Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the LORD God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?”
2 The woman answered the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden;
3 it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’” Genesis 3:1-3. Here it is The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Note that both the narrator in 2:9 and Eve in 3:3 use the tree’s middleness to identify it – to distinguish it from other trees.

Clearly we have a pure contradiction. Which is true?

Why do you think there is a contradiction? Both trees are in the middle of the garden.

Here is another, out of Jesus’ own mouth…

Humanity can be divided into three groups: (1) WITH Christ; (2) NEITHER; (3) AGAINST Christ.

30 Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. Matthew 12:30. That means that those in Group #2, the “NEITHER-ites,” are AGAINST Christ, because they aren’t WITH Christ.

40 For whoever is not against us is for us. Mark 9:40. That means that those in Group #2, the “NEITHER-ites,” are WITH Christ, because they aren’t AGAINST Christ.

Which is true?
.

Both are true.

Take more time to examine the actual words.
And, above all, examine the context. The statements don’t just drop out of the blue as some sort of general, stand alone statement. What is the situation that the words are addressing or commenting on? They are two very, very different situations.

Read the whole passage in Matthew (vs 22-30 at least). Those involved are Pharisees who despise Jesus and accuse Him of being in league with Satan. It is a question of whether Jesus is using Satan’s power or God’s power to cast out demons.

Here are a couple quotes from ECF on this verse, as cited in Catena Aurea by St. Thomas Aquinas:
(St. Jerome) *But let none think that this is said of heretics and schismatics; though we may apply it besides to such; but it is shewn by the context to refer to the Devil; in that the works of the Saviour cannot be compared with the works of Beelzebub… *’’

(St. John Chrysostom) …*The Lord also Himself said in another place, “He that is not against you is for you.” To which that which is here said is not contrary. For **here He is speaking of the Devil *who is our adversary–there of some man who was on their side, of whom it is said, "We saw one casting out daemons in thy name."…

The context in the Mark passage is someone who obviously believes in the power of Jesus name and is using it to cast out demons. He does not accuse Jesus of evil as the Pharisees did (in other words, he is not against him), but accepts that His name has power.

 

[juliamajor]

If one looks for contradictions, one finds them because of the hardness of their own hearts.

There were four statements made by the serpent:

1. You will not die
2. Your eyes will be opened
3. You will be like God
4. You will know good and evil

Through the eyes of the flesh the serpent told the truth

1. Adam lived for 900 years
2. They saw they were naked
3. God said they had become ‘like’ him
4. And they now knew sin where before they had only known good.

But the flesh calls God a liar…

Look again with the eyes of faith:

1. Adam died that day spiritually, separated from God
2. Mankind was blinded so that in seeing they did not perceive
3. Rather than being Holy like God, they became detestable to Him so that they could not remain with Him
4. Rather than knowing ‘good and evil’ they now became slaves to sin.

It is the old serpent that is the liar… just as the eyes of flesh are.

In the Bible, water destroys and it gives life, fire destroys and refines, and the two trees are one. The tree of Life is the same tree as the tree of death and it is Christ, both redeemer and judge. In Revelation the one tree has a split trunk. Justice and Grace are reconciled in Christ.

Looks like a perfectly reliable history to me.

It’s very easy to say that’hardness of heart" makes you see contradictions.but I never realized that ‘using the eyes of faith’ requires you to give up thinking!If we aren’t supposed to think why did give us that capacity. IF God wanted us to all think and believe the same- why did he make us individuals?Our capacity to think gives us the capacity to believe and to believe with a strong foundation. Having an intellect is what drives theology and philosophy and makes us see God in terms that encompass Mind, heart &spirit. we are all these and not just one.

 

[rcjones]

It’s very easy to say that’hardness of heart" makes you see contradictions.but I never realized that ‘using the eyes of faith’ requires you to give up thinking!

Hmm… I would think that being able to identify both the alleged contradictions proposed by the flesh AND the unity of scripture as seen through the eyes of faith would indicate a higher capacity to think, than the one who can only proclaim the lies of the serpent.

I would also think that being able to identify the alleged contradiction as well as it’s source would indicate that I also have a nature of flesh, and rather than presuming that I was speaking judgmentally to others, one might consider that, as a sinner, I am quite familiar with the sin nature that would misdirect us.

It is my own hardness of heart that always seeks to accuse God. It is my own hardness of heart with which I struggle to put to death daily.

It is a rather rash assumption that I would claim that one must stop thinking. Think away… But “cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his arm.”

When Eve approached the tree, she approached it in rebellion rather than faith. If one approaches Christ in rebellion, he is the tree of Death, if in faith, the tree of Life.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

If one looks for contradictions, one finds them because of the hardness of their own hearts.

There were four statements made by the serpent:

1. You will not die
2. Your eyes will be opened
3. You will be like God
4. You will know good and evil

Through the eyes of the flesh the serpent told the truth

1. Adam lived for 900 years
2. They saw they were naked
3. God said they had become ‘like’ him
4. And they now knew sin where before they had only known good.

But the flesh calls God a liar…

Look again with the eyes of faith:

1. Adam died that day spiritually, separated from God
2. Mankind was blinded so that in seeing they did not perceive
3. Rather than being Holy like God, they became detestable to Him so that they could not remain with Him
4. Rather than knowing ‘good and evil’ they now became slaves to sin.

It is the old serpent that is the liar… just as the eyes of flesh are.

In the Bible, water destroys and it gives life, fire destroys and refines, and the two trees are one. The tree of Life is the same tree as the tree of death and it is Christ, both redeemer and judge. In Revelation the one tree has a split trunk. Justice and Grace are reconciled in Christ.

Looks like a perfectly reliable history to me.

Oh, my heavens! So if I see what is obviously there, I am EVIL!!!??? Suppose Karl Keating sees them and acknowledges them???!!! He, too, is evil???!!!

You are a funny person!

But, I like you, anyway!

 

[rcjones]

Oh, my heavens! So if I see what is obviously there, I am EVIL!!!??? Suppose Karl Keating sees them and acknowledges them???!!! He, too, is evil???!!!

You are a funny person!

But, I like you, anyway!

You have the same presumptive nature as juliamajor… I did not say you are evil.

I can say for certain that you share the same nature of flesh with me. I am sure Keating, who ever he is, also shares that nature.

 

[juliamajor]

Oh, my heavens! So if I see what is obviously there, I am EVIL!!!??? Suppose Karl Keating sees them and acknowledges them???!!! He, too, is evil???!!!

You are a funny person!

But, I like you, anyway!

We are going to need air-conditioning!

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Why do you think there is a contradiction? Both trees are in the middle of the garden.

Hi, Nita. rcjones says that there was only ONE tree, with TWO names. You say TWO trees occupied ONE spot, even though both the narrator and Eve use the middleness as THE characteristic to distinguish the tree they are talking about from all other trees.

Do you see the problem? Though the two of you are trying to validate the historicity of the Bible, two people = two opinions, on that bit of “history.” These verses are worthless, as history.

Any other opinions, in this site?

 

[rcjones]

Under your criteria, there are no historically reliable documents for anything, since it is an easy thing to find multiple opinions of them.

Tons of yellow cake was shipped to Canada out of Iraq and kept secret until the operation was complete, yet people still insist there is no evidence of a weapons program in Iraq… go figure.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Okay, literalist believers in the infallibility of the Bible as a history book, here is your next contradiction…

1 Kings 16:6-8, it says that Elah, son of Baasha, began his reign as King of Israel upon the death of his father, in the 26th year of Asa, King of Judah.

2 Chronicles 16:1 et seq. has Baasha attacking Asa in the 36th year of Asa’s reign.

But he’s DEAD, isn’t he?

 

[rcjones]

Sorry Peter, changing the topic doesn’t help your case.

We have already acknowledged that we can ALL see alleged contradictions because we share the flesh nature. I doubt there is anyone that would deny them.

The real question is if we also share the spiritual nature that can see the unity of the scripture. You have not responded affirmatively to that.

Should spiritual answers be offered in a thousand alleged contradictions, I might suspect that you would not accept them either.

How many men are at the center of a basketball court for the start of the game? You are so determined to cast doubt upon God’s word that you cannot permit the same graces upon the use of language that you give for every day use.

True answers might be one - the ref, two - the players, or three - the ref and the players. All are historically and literally correct answers. If one tree is at the center, and two different people identify it by two different names, there is still one tree at the center. How many or how few people recognize it as such doesn’t change the historicity of it.

Until you can acknowledge the truthfulness of that, it doesn’t make any sense to play anymore.

Addressing your changed topic will just hijack the thread. Ciao.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

I’m not changing the topic. I’m doing the same thing I did in Post #2. I just didn’t address your change.

 

[rcjones]

Then it is easy to see that Asa ruled ten years in peace.

2Ch 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Why in peace? Because his mother was co-ruler. After the ten years, he was recognized as ruling on his own because he started undoing his mother’s work. The two kingdoms (and the two records) reckon the date differently, one from his father’s death and one from the date of his own initiative.

That was a tough one… I thought you wanted to insist upon thinking… you might try a little before copying someone else’s list here as bait. No longer fun.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Well, rcjones, there’s several hundred others, where that one came from. You’re missing the point.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Okay, here’s your next challenge:

2 Samuel 21:19: Elhanan, son of Jair, killed Goliath of Gath.

1 Samuel 17:4-51: David, son of Jesse, killed Goliath of Gath.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Who bought Joseph’s grave in Shechem from Hamor?

Jacob? Joshua 24:32.

Abraham? Acts 7:16.

 

[Nita]

Okay, here’s your next challenge:

2 Samuel 21:19: Elhanan, son of Jair, killed Goliath of Gath.

1 Samuel 17:4-51: David, son of Jesse, killed Goliath of Gath.

I guess in some ways it depends upon where you see the application of the Holy Spirit’s “control” working.

Some of the books that are included in Scripture are historical (the books of Samuel being among them).
Did the Holy Spirit’s “control” come into effect when these historical records were actually being recorded (that is, seeing that the historians would record them accurately in a way that would be clear not only to the people at the time, but to people thousands of years later);
OR - does it mean that the Holy Spirit ensures that the historical records included in Scripture are the ones that were truly written by the historians at the time, as they recorded them? In other words, when you read Samuel, you can be assured that it is the true way in which those events were recorded at the time.

I always have a problem when thousands of years later, some have problems with “conflicts” such as these in the Bible. It appears the Jews at the time did not see the example you cite as a problem or they would have done something to correct it. Perhaps we’re not understanding it in the proper manner. We’re so individualistic nowadays that perhaps we don’t understand the way they viewed the connectedness of people, and the way this carried over into their language and manner of speaking.

The same applies to the supposed conflicts in the same type of areas that get cited in the New Testament. Note, these are not moral or doctrinal areas. When there have been difficulties in those areas (moral/doctrinal), the Church has decreed the proper interpretations.

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Not only is the Bible not a reliable history book, it’s not a reliable science book, either.