The Bible: Agree or Disagree and WHY?

[TimothyH]

The Bible is not full of facts, it is full of truth. Some of those truths are also historical facts, some parts of the Bible use other methods to convey truth.

This is important.

Recall what the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation teaches us about Scripture.

Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation. (Dei Verbum, Chapter 3, Paragrahp 11)

The last five words are the most important. Scripture was not written for the sake of historical accuracy, or for the sake of scientific accuracy, but for the sake of our salvation. Truths taught in the Bible for the sake of salvation are without error.

That doesn’t mean that the Bible does not contain historical or scientific facts - it certainly does. It does mean that if there is something that seems to us to be a scientific or historical inaccuracy, it should not cause a crisis in our faith., because historical or scientific accuracy is not the point of the Bible.

If something does seem to be an historical or scientific inaccuracy, then pray about it, don’t worry about it and move on.

-Tim-

 

[Pheonix]

No it isn’t; the Scriptures are, properly speaking, ‘books’ (or ‘scrolls’, if that’s what you prefer).

In other words, the Scriptures/the Bible are/is better referred to as an “anthology,” not simply a “book.”

 

[kbf1970060]

Disagree. God exists. If this is a fact, then why have faith in God? I prefer faith, hope, and love, over fact and therefore, I disagree, that the bible is fact. I enjoy facts; although, they are often ineffective. Some stories in the bible, are told in the present tense. The Greeks enjoyed doing this, while storytelling. It gave the story more relevance, and meaning to peoples lives, that the story was here and now, and alive, rather than dead and in the past. Consider going to the mass. Before the alter, the priest raises the host and says, 2000 years ago, and when the shadows were long, Jesus said, take this all of you, and eat: this is my body, this is my blood. Can you imagine him saying, this was my body; this was my blood, or this will be my body; this will be my blood. Then there’s the song of solomon, how many of us think, that God’s breasts are really great, and her kisses are better than wine, and so - on - and so forth? Solomon was lusty and needed to love God first in his life. A lot of us do, but think about interpreting scripture like a Muslim. Why should I love Jesus more than his Father, when Jesus points to his Father, and to love him; yet, were I to disregard, that God commands me to love him first, then I could only be disobedient, because Jesus came second, and as a Muslim, I would have to resolve the contradiction of whom to love first, by who came last.

 

[hockeyfan]

Dear friend in Christ,

Consider this Bible “fact”

**Do you Agree?

Disagree?

Please share why**.

THERE IS ONLY ONE INFALLABLE RULE FOR RIGHT UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE:

NEVER-EVER MAY, OR CAN ONE PART; PASSAGE OR VERSE MAKE VOID; INVALIDATE OR OVERRULE ANOTHER VERSE, PASSAGE OR TEACHING.

Yes and no. Depends on the perspective you approach my answer from.

I don’t think so. Moses added that rule to the Mosaic law for the sake of the health of the israelite people. They realized that, since they were desert dwellers, the consumption of pork meat (among other food) caused them many diseases, they didn’t know that but they didn’t keep the meat properly, remember a refrigerator didn’t exist back that time for example. Mosaic law was a set of rules valid to a set of circumstances in a set of time.

Don’t know if I would agree with the way you are putting this. It is not so much that Mosaic Law was invalidated. More that it was outgrown. You see, when I was I child my parents set certain rules for me. I couldn’t cross the street without an adult, I couldn’t drink alcohol, I couldn’t play until I was done with my homework. As I grew older and more mature I grew to understand why my parents set those rules. At that point as my wisdom grew the rules were slowly pulled back. I think this is the same as the Old vs. New Testament in the Bible. Jesus’s life was a game changer in human history. The nature of existence changed, especially for salvation. I think Mosaic Law still has an important meaning in our religious wisdom. In it’s proper context it should not be treated as invalid. More so as outgrown.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

God CAN CHANGE laws for man.

During Adam and Eve’s time it was OK for siblings to marry–later it wasn’t.

It was unlawful to eat pork–Jesus made it lawful.

The point that God could CHANGE LAW was reinforced to Peter when he saw the vision of a sheet coming down with all kinds of different foods on it.

Jesus said “You have heard it said or written but I say”

Polygamy was once OK but Christ INVALIDATED that!

So please…don’t say that none of the bible can ever be invalidated–most of it can’t but Christ DID INVALIDATE parts of it and He can do that because He is God and has that authority!

 

[patrick457]

In other words, the Scriptures/the Bible are/is better referred to as an “anthology,” not simply a “book.”

Or “library,” which was how people kept copies of writings before the one-volume book we all know today became current: piles of scrolls (and later, codices).

 

[babs57]

Dear friend in Christ,

Consider this Bible “fact”

**Do you Agree?

Disagree?

Please share why**.

THERE IS ONLY ONE INFALLABLE RULE FOR RIGHT UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE:

NEVER-EVER MAY, OR CAN ONE PART; PASSAGE OR VERSE MAKE VOID; INVALIDATE OR OVERRULE ANOTHER VERSE, PASSAGE OR TEACHING.

If by “right understanding” you mean finding the absolute truth of the verse, passage or teaching, then yes, no other passage, verse or teaching, “rightly understood” also, would contradict it. The scriptures are the inspired word of God, and God speaks truth.

Now, there may be some problem finding “right understanding”! :ehh: