The Bible is much more than the word thinks

[BrunoMaria]

---

• patrick457 wrote:
  Let’s face it. The Gospels, for all their inspiration and holiness, simply aren’t the best pieces of literature there are from a modern viewpoint…*

---

The Bible; here the New Testament, is NOT a novel, prose work or tale of ancient history. Not written for entertainment or teaching. The Gospel is written under the supervision of the Holy Spirit.
Even though the Gospel is a book of greatest historic relevance and our (Europe’s and all America’s) European history, education and civilization bases on the Gospel, is NOT a novel, prose work or tale of ancient history. Not written for entertainment or teaching
The Gospel far more so preaches far away from entertainment or teaching history, the saving event of Jesus Christ:
Jesus’ teaching and revelation of God for our better understanding of God’s reality and Jesus’ taking this part of our sins upon Himself, that excluded us from heaven, (our problem if we add new ones). This from Jesus birth through Holy Mary, up to Jesus’ teaching and deeds, to Jesus’ way to the cross under Pilate and Jesus’ resurrection and appearance after His resurrection to many - once even over 500 (1Kor 15.6).​

• patrick457 wrote:
  aside from a number of people such as Pilate (who is given a personality by Matthew and John), a lot of the characters are rather dry and flat. We are not given any motives for, say, Judas’ betrayal.*

---

The Bible is neither a portrayal of involved Characters, who all of them mirror our today. It far more so is a book as modern and valid for our present life, as can be. This is one of the miracles about this book. There where great epos even older then the 2000 years of the Bible, like the Epic of Gilgamesh, or Odysseus and Troy, and countless real great books of modern times. None of them ever reached nor ever will reach the edition and circulation as the Bible did and will do.​

• patrick457 wrote:
  They simply record it because that was what happened.*

---

Any “simple recording of what happened”, would be forgotten after 2000 years or just known to some scribes. The Bible though is NOT man-made, but edited by the Holy Spirit and so eternal in existence and value and validity.​

patrick457 wrote:
John (who as mentioned earlier has more skill as a writer in that his characters generally have more vibrant personalities than in the Synoptics)​

John was the favorite disciple of Jesus and he had the deepest insight, so his words and his life as scriptures are God nearer than others. He also was later even granted insight of Revelation.​

patrick457 wrote:
Jesus the good guy is cornered by the baddies, Jesus manages to tell them off, rinse and repeat.​

let’s beware of speaking in any floppy way about God.

Goethe wrote in one of his great literary monuments in 1823: “Human spirit will never get beyond the sovereignty and ethical culture of Christianity as it gleams and shines in the Gospels. May all congregate in the arms of our all-loving divine Father”.

Yours
Bruno

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Can I ask just what the whole point of this thread is? Your correspondent isn’t exactly invalidating the Bible for all it’s worth, just the fabricated entertainment value that uber-religious tend needlessly place upon it.

 

[patrick457]

Thanks for taking the time to build a thread.

And you’re correct. The Gospels shouldn’t be expected to read like modern novels. That’s EXACTLY my point. In fact I don’t really see anything here I would disagree with!

And Lost Wanderer has a point as well. I’m not implying that just because, say, Mark’s Gospel cannot reach up to the epic heights of the Iliad or the Ramayana (now y’all have finally known just how much of a geek I am) that somehow the message is nullified. Far from it. I mean, look at Leviticus. That’s another Inspired book, but many people have trouble wading through it because in essence, it is just a collection of ordinances, more like a how-to manual. And not many people read instruction manuals with the same diligency they may read novels or whatnot. It is admittedly a tedious and boring read for many of us but that doesn’t make the book somehow less inspired.

But it is a fact that many people don’t realize just how episodic and stark the Synoptics are, since we have had 2000 years to build up a more novelistic view of the Gospels. There have been countless retellings and expansions of the Jesus story over the centuries, which attempted to add personality and motive. We may not even realize it, but our brains automatically add details whenever we read the accounts. But take that away and you’ll actually find the accounts are rather bland, straight to the point, just giving out the bare facts. Perhaps the Evangelists themselves purposely shaped the pericopes in this way in order to make their point: they pruned out irrelevant material, keeping only what they thought was necessary. The consequence of this is that the pericopes have become two-dimensional, having lost much of their contexts.

Again, I would like to stress that this is NOT saying that the Gospels do not have power and force as they are or are not eternally relevant. Only that given the starkness of our primary sources, we cannot create a “Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” in the modern sense, or expect from it entertainment value (but then again why should we?).

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Patrick457

Let me join you in thanking Bruno for building this thread. Good job, Bruno:thumbsup: Now, on to the work at hand…

I guess where I am having difficulties here is in the implied comparrison of the Bible to other writings.

From a previous thread and post you complained about the Sacred Writers not giving enough detail about Pharisees (but also other antagonists in The Story of Our Salvation by Jesus Christ) And because of this omission, we have all (or, at least most of us) bought into this ‘myth’ about the Pharisees being plotting and devious murderers.

In my opinion, the Bible is like no other literary work. Most other literary works had as their goal to be published, sell and hopefully make a difference in the world of ideas - and, maybe of deeds. Admittedly, there were a few authors who had as their (at least stated) goal to change society (“The Jungle” by Upton Sinclare comes immediately to mind.) But, I think when it comes to all books published - money and fame were the driving forces. The principal author of the Bible had a diffeent goal - and I think it could be summarized as: God loves us very much and wants us to be with Him if we choose to join Him.

Criticizing the Bible for lacking character development, plot and adventure when one reads Leviticus is simply misplaced criticism. You know, we were not born with ‘Owner’s Manuals’ yet we are not only complex beings but '…wonderfully made…" (Ps 149:14). I would be the first to admit that Leviticus is dry reading - but, maybe Proverbs or Ecclesiastes would be more appropriate for this type of instruction. ( links attached for your convenience: usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/#Proverbs , usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/#Ecclesiastes )

I think there is an abundance of Character Development and Real Adventure as the New Testament unfolds Christ to our weary eyes. But, you know this already. More time, I think was spent on Christ and the Apostles and their work - than on the Pharisees - because we are talking about the life of our soul - and learning even more about those who opposed and plotted the murder of Christ - is simply a distraction from the intent of the Priancipal Author.

God bless

Thanks for taking the time to build a thread.

And you’re correct. The Gospels shouldn’t be expected to read like modern novels. That’s EXACTLY my point. In fact I don’t really see anything here I would disagree with!

And Lost Wanderer has a point as well. I’m not implying that just because, say, Mark’s Gospel cannot reach up to the epic heights of the Iliad or the Ramayana (now y’all have finally known just how much of a geek I am) that somehow the message is nullified. Far from it. I mean, look at Leviticus. That’s another Inspired book, but many people have trouble wading through it because in essence, it is just a collection of ordinances, more like a how-to manual. And not many people read instruction manuals with the same diligency they may read novels or whatnot. It is admittedly a tedious and boring read for many of us but that doesn’t make the book somehow less inspired.

But it is a fact that many people don’t realize just how episodic and stark the Synoptics are, since we have had 2000 years to build up a more novelistic view of the Gospels. There have been countless retellings and expansions of the Jesus story over the centuries, which attempted to add personality and motive. We may not even realize it, but our brains automatically add details whenever we read the accounts. But take that away and you’ll actually find the accounts are rather bland, straight to the point, just giving out the bare facts. Perhaps the Evangelists themselves purposely shaped the pericopes in this way in order to make their point: they pruned out irrelevant material, keeping only what they thought was necessary. The consequence of this is that the pericopes have become two-dimensional, having lost much of their contexts.

Again, I would like to stress that this is NOT saying that the Gospels do not have power and force as they are or are not eternally relevant. Only that given the starkness of our primary sources, we cannot create a “Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” in the modern sense, or expect from it entertainment value (but then again why should we?).

 

[po18guy]

The History Channel, of all things, recently aired an episode on the Vatican as a City-State. Of course, any such report had to encompass a far greater variety of subjects than just governmental organization or relations, since the Vatican is the smallest, yet most complex and profound governmental entity that has ever existed, as its head is the Ambassador both from and to Christ.

In an interview regarding the scientific involvement of the Vatican, one Priest made a very telling comment: “The first thing you know about any science book is that it is outdated in ten years. The bible is not a science book, and you do it no favors by treating it as one”.

Indeed, the bible is a collection of works of many writers, many of whom never spoke the words they wrote. Some were probably not literate, such as Amos, the herder-prophet. Yet, its source and Author is God Almighty, Who seeks to present, preserve and propagate His relationship with all of creation.

 

[patrick457]

Hi, Patrick457

Let me join you in thanking Bruno for building this thread. Good job, Bruno:thumbsup: Now, on to the work at hand…

I guess where I am having difficulties here is in the implied comparrison of the Bible to other writings.

From a previous thread and post you complained about the Sacred Writers not giving enough detail about Pharisees (but also other antagonists in The Story of Our Salvation by Jesus Christ) And because of this omission, we have all (or, at least most of us) bought into this ‘myth’ about the Pharisees being plotting and devious murderers.

In my opinion, the Bible is like no other literary work. Most other literary works had as their goal to be published, sell and hopefully make a difference in the world of ideas - and, maybe of deeds. Admittedly, there were a few authors who had as their (at least stated) goal to change society (“The Jungle” by Upton Sinclare comes immediately to mind.) But, I think when it comes to all books published - money and fame were the driving forces. The principal author of the Bible had a diffeent goal - and I think it could be summarized as: God loves us very much and wants us to be with Him if we choose to join Him.

Criticizing the Bible for lacking character development, plot and adventure when one reads Leviticus is simply misplaced criticism. You know, we were not born with ‘Owner’s Manuals’ yet we are not only complex beings but '…wonderfully made…" (Ps 149:14). I would be the first to admit that Leviticus is dry reading - but, maybe Proverbs or Ecclesiastes would be more appropriate for this type of instruction. ( links attached for your convenience: usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/#Proverbs , usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/#Ecclesiastes )

I think there is an abundance of Character Development and Real Adventure as the New Testament unfolds Christ to our weary eyes. But, you know this already. More time, I think was spent on Christ and the Apostles and their work - than on the Pharisees - because we are talking about the life of our soul - and learning even more about those who opposed and plotted the murder of Christ - is simply a distraction from the intent of the Priancipal Author.

God bless

Tqualey, nice to see you again.

Now that we come to it, I realize that I’m a very lousy writer, for which I apologize. I was not so much complaining “about the Sacred Writers not giving enough detail about Pharisees” (I wouldn’t expect them to do so after all since that is NOT their main focus). In essence, what I was just trying to say was that (1) in the Passion narratives in all four Gospels, the Pharisees which so figure prominently in the earlier half of the story vanish/are reduced to bit roles once Jesus enters Jerusalem, with a new group - “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people” - appearing to assume the role of Jesus’ opponents up to His death; and that (2) some retellings in popular media has tended to confusingly conflate these two groups together, which could give the (not-so-accurate) impression that the Temple priesthood are just the Pharisees by another name. But being the writer I am, I only managed to articulate that now, of all times, after the damage is done!

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Patrick457,

Maybe trying this a different way may throw it into another light. So… here goes…

What do you think would be the net result if the Scriptures adtually gave not only a better description of the various groups and their roles (either joined, overlapping only at times, divergent, etc) leading up to Christ’s Crucifixion? We only know the names of two Pharisees while Christ was on earth - and we must wait until after the Ascension to fine Paul being the third! We do not know the names of any Sadducees (well maybe 2 or 3: Annas, Caiaphas, and Ananias.) or Herodians or Lawyers or Scribes. But, again, just imagine that we had that kind of information and what they were doing to condemn or defend Chrst - at least for the major characters. So, once we have this, what do we do with it? Honest.

In my opinion, this ‘new and improved’ version of the NT would have more in common with a Russian novel (multiple characters that add little to the plot and just get confused when the writer throws in their nick-names!) than providing us with the clear path to Christ and His Mission.

I really do not understand this apparent defense of the Pharisees. There really is nothing that we can do to change any of the obvious facts. The Sadduccees, Herodians, Scribes and Lawyers have long since vanished from the pages of history - only the Pharisees have remained. But, during the time of Christ, a significant number of each group plotted, suborned witnesses and through outright fraud did their best to murder Christ and discredit the Resurrection. Those members of the groups were guilty. Today’s Pharisees were not a party to this and can not be judged as guilty of such terrible deeds, all in violation of God’s Law.

One last note, none of this took place without the foreknowledge of God - and had Christ not died on the Cross, His Mission would not have been fulfilled! We really can not judge by man’s standards in such a matter.

God bless

Tqualey, nice to see you again.

Now that we come to it, I realize that I’m a very lousy writer, for which I apologize. I was not so much complaining “about the Sacred Writers not giving enough detail about Pharisees” (I wouldn’t expect them to do so after all since that is NOT their main focus). In essence, what I was just trying to say was that (1) in the Passion narratives in all four Gospels, the Pharisees which so figure prominently in the earlier half of the story vanish/are reduced to bit roles once Jesus enters Jerusalem, with a new group - “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people” - appearing to assume the role of Jesus’ opponents up to His death; and that (2) some retellings in popular media has tended to confusingly conflate these two groups together, which could give the (not-so-accurate) impression that the Temple priesthood are just the Pharisees by another name. But being the writer I am, I only managed to articulate that now, of all times, after the damage is done!

 

[BrunoMaria]

ooops - when I posted it, it told me:
The text that you have entered is too long (7945 characters). Please shorten it to 6000 so I shortened the quotes as all read them anyhow already before

patrick457 wrote:

…countless retellings…​

Let’s be assured by our Catholic Church, that the original Gospel is not only cleansed from all subsequent adds, but as near to the original scriptures as can be - nearer than any time in Church-History before; for two reasons:
The continuous research work Church does on the Holy Scriptures…
The strong influence God; the Holy Spirit, just causes with the Bible.
Never forget St. Paul’s strong words and warning in Gal 1,9:
As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. whih sounds in my German translation far stronger, for here the word “accused” reads “condemned”!
Keeping this in mind, we see how much God’s concerned about the correct wording and translation of His word and teaching.​

patrick457 wrote:
COLOR=“Blue”]rather bland, … .​

Bland?! Bible then had not changed the world, nor would these verses have prevailed the whole western literature; outlasted 2ooo years and will til Christ will return second and last time. Every single verse encloses a world of contents, movements and divine statements valid in eternity. Countless monastery-contemplations are upheld over single Bible-verses of this invaluable great treasure we own: THE GOSPEL that can’t be bland, nor give out bare facts, for each verse encloses universes. The very bare facts behind, we can not even fully comprehended - but we all will see.​

patrick456 wrote:
create … why should we?).​

Exactly: “why should we?” The Gospel is not history though historically true, nor entertainment, but the written down love of God. God didn’t have to leave us (across Pentecost) this key to eternity; but in God’s everlasting love He gave us this at hand, and this key is - if we live according to it, the opener of that narrow gate, many will fail to enter - see Lk 13.24​

tqualey wrote
…God wants us…​

That’s he point. Almost all who wrote the gospel had “the award” to be tortured to death, but now are Princes of Heaven. God’s Holy Spirit gave us Pentecost; His spirit to make it possible for the very simple fishermen Peter on whom Jesus founded His Church, tentmaker Paul, who “made” the Church. Further more the Evangelists: The tax-collector Matthew (Symbol an Angel), Mark (Symbol the Lion) the young guy who fled naked into the night, when at the taking of Jesus a Soldier held him on his coat, John (Symbol Eagle) the very youngest and closest to Jesus who understood Jesus best at Jesus’ lifetime (John 21,20.24), who in high age was given the wording to Revelation, and the only higher educated doctor Luke (Symbol Bull) who wrote last, in most sophisticated diction his Gospel.
Though all say same thing, its a world of differene to match John’s gospel to the Gospel of the Synoptics. He doesn’t tell anything else, but far deeper understanding of Jesus Christ. An immense help to get closer to God here on earth.
I often read as first step another Evangelist; as second step John’s Gospel.
Yes, John leaves away much of other’s points. Never because this would be unimportant, but John’s task is, to specify Jesus’ divinity.​

po18guy wrote:
…any science book is outdated soon.​

Here we are. If we had just one book -The Bible- read in there every day, it would take us a lifetime to get all stated an revealed there in every single verse. For it’s God Himself revealing Himselfe in there. God though, we never comprehend - not in all eternity - neither do Saints nor the Angels.​

tqualey wrote:
COLOR=“Blue”] We only know the names of …​

Exactly. The Gospel leaves away what’s ballast, insignificant for our salvation. But one iota is redundant in the bible. All directs our eye to the main chance - our salvation with the precondition BELIEF.​

tqualey wrote:
…all took place with God’s foreknowledge​

That’s one of the greatest revelations of the Bible. All that happened around Jesus’ salvation, had in detail been predicted in the Psalms and elsewhere. Even the fact that Jesus bones where not smashed after crucifixion as essential to all being crucified by the Romans. (They smashed the crucified legs, so they couldn’t be freed and flee - often they hang even for days until they died).
There are very many books (like “the Bible is right after all”) proving ithe absolute truth of all statements in the Bible; and many atheist books trying to disprove the Gospel with hell’s help. All will see the very truth of the Holy Scripture one day!

Yours
Bruno
PS.:
I also send this into our little MailCircle of friends of deep belief (14 members across the USA unshortened)
but there I inserted a picture of the Evangelists, which I did not manage here to ​

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Bland?! Bible then had not changed the world, nor would these verses have prevailed the whole western literature; outlasted 2ooo years and will til Christ will return second and last time. Every single verse encloses a world of contents, movements and divine statements valid in eternity. Countless monastery-contemplations are upheld over single Bible-verses of this invaluable great treasure we own: THE GOSPEL that can’t be bland, nor give out bare facts, for each verse encloses universes. The very bare facts behind, we can not even fully comprehended - but we all will see.

Yes the Bible has history, yes it has profound truth. That does not automatically grant it high entertainment value. What, just because there are many math and physics seminars regarding Einstein’s famed equation, you’d think the subject is more entertaining than, let’s say, a video game where you fight endless zombies or a comic book retelling of Romeo and Juliet?

Let’s take another example: Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. It’s something that’s been taught in biology classes for over a hundred years. That won’t keep me from wishing I was writing a fantasy novel instead of boring my brains out in a science class.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Lost,

I am still confused whay anyone would seriously criticize any of the writings in the Bible as falling short when it comes to common literary works of art.

And, then to present an idea that somehow, because this reader thinks Pharisees and Sadducees may have been inappropriately combined - that the Pharisees were misjudged for actively plotting the death of Christ along with the others.

Since the publication in about 400AD, humanity has been very fortunate to have the divinely inspired Word of God available.

God bless

Yes the Bible has history, yes it has profound truth. That does not automatically grant it high entertainment value. What, just because there are many math and physics seminars regarding Einstein’s famed equation, you’d think the subject is more entertaining than, let’s say, a video game where you fight endless zombies or a comic book retelling of Romeo and Juliet?

Let’s take another example: Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. It’s something that’s been taught in biology classes for over a hundred years. That won’t keep me from wishing I was writing a fantasy novel instead of boring my brains out in a science class.

 

[BrunoMaria]

That does not automatically grant it high entertainment value.

It’s hard to believe anybody would judge the Gospel after it’s entertainment value. To think that entertainment is purpose in life, seems like a sheep who’s one and only thought is to eat. Would we criticize God when we see Him, for not having been entertaining?!
Yes, actors, entertainers, show biz make incredible money. But who is the most celebrated movie-star compared with the least of all Saints? A little nobody!

Darwin’s Theory of Evolution taught in biology classes for over a hundred years. That won’t keep me from wishing I was writing a fantasy novel instead of boring my brains out in a science class.

Who ever feels bored in subjects others are highly interested in, doesn’t have to listen nor read. Whoever feels bored in the Gospel, must let himself be asked, if his brain-capacity at all can conceive anything else beyond plain entertainment?
Apart from this, respect and love - subject only known by humans replete with soul and spirit - asks to recognize what to others is their highest. This to Christians, is God and His revelation in the Bible. To disbelievers both is of no entertainment value. But educated ones, at least respect their next’s belief, which indeed owns more foundation, than any worldly truths which all will vanish. So - don’t be a LOST wanderer, but one who at last did find his destiny and way after all .

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

It’s hard to believe anybody would judge the Gospel after it’s entertainment value. To think that entertainment is purpose in life, seems like a sheep who’s one and only thought is to eat. Would we criticize God when we see Him, for not having been entertaining?!
Yes, actors, entertainers, show biz make incredible money. But who is the most celebrated movie-star compared with the least of all Saints? A little nobody!

It’s not hard to believe when I’ve had to deal with obnoxious fundamentalists and fanatical Traditionalists alike who think the Bible is the best book for leisure and think they should all make a big bonfire out of secular books like Harry Potter, Les Miserables, or even Lord of the Rings.

Now nowhere in my post have I even suggested that entertainment is the end-all of existence. I’m just stating a fact that the Bible isn’t a fun thing to read. You sound like as if the lack of entertainment value is somehow a problem for you. Now that should be the real concern here.

Furthermore, in defense of entertainment, it’s like food. We’re not emotionless machines built to just worship and work 24/7. Everyone has a right to enjoy themselves. There’s a time to read the Bible… and there’s a time to read 300.

Who ever feels bored in subjects others are highly interested in, doesn’t have to listen nor read. Whoever feels bored in the Gospel, must let himself be asked, if his brain-capacity at all can conceive anything else beyond plain entertainment?

Of course he can, he’s just realistic enough to know that though a lack of entertainment should not be a stumbling block to knowledge and truth, that does not negate the said lack of entertainment value.

I may know the importance of reading up on the Sacraments for my Theology class. That does not make studying any less boring.

I may know the importance of washing my dishes. That does not make the task any less dreary.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Lost,

It sounds like you have been spending too much time in the company of those who still suppoirt Girolamo Savonarola (21 September 1452 – 23 May 1498) … Maybe you should re-read the post of BrunoMarie’s - I saw nothing offensive in this material, or one advocating extreemism in evaluating Scripture.

Recall, this shift in the thread was based on one of the posters being critical of Scripture for not measuriing up to secular literature - and in tranmpling on his view of the good reputation that the Pharisees should have held in Scripture. I did my best to address this misdirection … but, apparently it keeps on popping up…

There is certainly nothing wrong with secular literature - the problem that I was addressing was in trying to compare it to Scripture when the intent and focus of both of these writings is quite different.

God bless

It’s not hard to believe when I’ve had to deal with obnoxious fundamentalists and fanatical Traditionalists alike who think the Bible is the best book for leisure and think they should all make a big bonfire out of secular books like Harry Potter, Les Miserables, or even Lord of the Rings.

Now nowhere in my post have I even suggested that entertainment is the end-all of existence. I’m just stating a fact that the Bible isn’t a fun thing to read. You sound like as if the lack of entertainment value is somehow a problem for you. Now that should be the real concern here.

Furthermore, in defense of entertainment, it’s like food. We’re not emotionless machines built to just worship and work 24/7. Everyone has a right to enjoy themselves. There’s a time to read the Bible… and there’s a time to read 300.

Of course he can, he’s just realistic enough to know that though a lack of entertainment should not be a stumbling block to knowledge and truth, that does not negate the said lack of entertainment value.

I may know the importance of reading up on the Sacraments for my Theology class. That does not make studying any less boring.

I may know the importance of washing my dishes. That does not make the task any less dreary.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

It sounds like you have been spending too much time in the company of those who still suppoirt Girolamo Savonarola (21 September 1452 – 23 May 1498) … Maybe you should re-read the post of BrunoMarie’s - I saw nothing offensive in this material, or one advocating extreemism in evaluating Scripture.

No, more like I’m a dragon whose peace is often disturbed by radical, pious peasants thinking he’s a demonic monster from hell waiting to devour human souls (oh and princesses, for some reason ). Honestly, every time a thread on fantasy fiction comes up over in Popular Media, it always draws such people and such people always like to hold up the Bible as having superior entertainment or literary value.

Look, I’m merely citing a situation where one could easily come to criticize the Bible’s fabricated entertainment value. It’s just that from reading your responses, I get the impression that you think such a criticism has no purpose or is unlikely. From what my preferred brand of literature attracts from the worst of religious followers, believe me when I say it is very likely.

There is certainly nothing wrong with secular literature - the problem that I was addressing was in trying to compare it to Scripture when the intent and focus of both of these writings is quite different.

Look I know that difference as well which is why I repeat again the reason this thread leaves me in a bewilderment.

Nobody’s denying the value in Sacred Scripture. Nobody’s trying to disprove of all its worth to our Faith. A person is simply criticizing it for its lack of entertainment value. Now depending on the context, such a criticism could have varying degrees of worth but nobody’s specifying it here.

Maybe I should ask again: What’s the point of this thread?

 

[patrick457]

Hey, Mr. “one of the posters” reporting. Frankly like Lost Wanderer I don’t even know why this thread exists anymore.

Scripture: All I said/wanted to say was that you can’t expect the Gospels to read like and resemble secular literature, a point which I doubt all who posted in this thread will dispute. Sure I might feel that it may not match up with some popular works from a literary perspective, but that’s hardly an attack on the depth, power and impact that the Scriptures have, or at least I strongly think that it shouldn’t be an attack. If my comments came off as anything other than that then I do sorely apologize.

About Pharisees: I do have Tqualey to thank for his comments. It’s so easy, when trying to combat gross caricaturizations, to fall to the other side and come off as whitewashing and glossing over actual faults. Sure, many of the Pharisees in the Gospels aren’t ‘good’ guys, but again they’re not demons incarnate either: a balanced view is necessary, and I think I myself was on the verge of falling to extremes. So, tqualey, at least you have something on your credit. Your comments have been duly appreciated. That being said I still doubt that they were the grumpy, frowning, dark-robed old men of the movies though, and I still think we need to make proper distinctions.

That’s my excuse, at least. Feel free to discard when necessary.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Patrick457,

Thank you for your kind words.

Now, you and Lost have come up with a really interesting question about ther appropriateness of continuing on with this thread. I must confess … I have seen the shift and am wondering if staying on is really the best approach.

If things remain the same, I think I will exit by Friday. If you and Lost would keep me posted as to what link you travel to…

God bless

Hey, Mr. “one of the posters” reporting. Frankly like Lost Wanderer I don’t even know why this thread exists anymore.

Scripture: All I said/wanted to say was that you can’t expect the Gospels to read like and resemble secular literature, a point which I doubt all who posted in this thread will dispute. Sure I might feel that it may not match up with some popular works from a literary perspective, but that’s hardly an attack on the depth, power and impact that the Scriptures have, or at least I strongly think that it shouldn’t be an attack. If my comments came off as anything other than that then I do sorely apologize.

About Pharisees: I do have Tqualey to thank for his comments. It’s so easy, when trying to combat gross caricaturizations, to fall to the other side and come off as whitewashing and glossing over actual faults. Sure, many of the Pharisees in the Gospels aren’t ‘good’ guys, but again they’re not demons incarnate either: a balanced view is necessary, and I think I myself was on the verge of falling to extremes. So, tqualey, at least you have something on your credit. Your comments have been duly appreciated. That being said I still doubt that they were the grumpy, frowning, dark-robed old men of the movies though, and I still think we need to make proper distinctions.

That’s my excuse, at least. Feel free to discard when necessary.

 

[BrunoMaria]

Pharisees - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They thought (and where concidered by most) to be the most religious ones among all within Judaism - but Jesus said to them in Mt 23,33: You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?

It’s most worth-while to read the whole Mt 23 verses Mt 23,1-39

Some here say: “I don’t even know why this thread exists anymore”. I wonder what other your Priest is talking about in his sermon, but the Bible - the Holy Gospel. Please do ask him why he doesn’t talk about other themes and why our Church connects everything with the Bible and Gospel

The Bible is the written statement of God and therefor the most important thing we own. Not worth while to make it subject of talks and comunication in a Catholic forum?

Yours
Bruno

 

[patrick457]

Mr. “Some” here.

No, I’m just in the dark as to what exactly are talking about/what we should be talking about here…no offense meant, but can you please give us a review?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Some here say: “I don’t even know why this thread exists anymore”. I wonder what other your Priest is talking about in his sermon, but the Bible - the Holy Gospel. Please do ask him why he doesn’t talk about other themes and why our Church connects everything with the Bible and Gospel

Of course a Priest has every right to talk about the Gospel during Mass. It’s Mass!

 

[BrunoMaria]

Of course a Priest has every right to talk about the Gospel during Mass. It’s Mass!

That’s sadly enough a real strong misunderstanding of this thread.
Ok - I admittedly missed the letter l and wrote -word- instead of -world-.
I was (obviously in vain) trying to invite for a meditation over the fact; that as well as our local Church, also the Holy See keeps talking about the Bible only, because the Bible is eternal and in fact the one and only thing that keeps all people alive and the one and only thing that’s of real value. It’s contents keep the world go around - not money, nor anything else. All dogmas, all teaching, all encyclicals, all books the Holy See releases, consolidate the Bible in our understanding and insight.
The Bible is determining the life of every Christian, but also of every disbeliever; if people accept this or not. The Bible is universal and contains the one and only foundation of the world. The Gospel reaches into every little aspect of our life - yet into every single breath we take - even that of any atheist.
Nothing the Church proclaims, teaches, preaches, is not Gospel-sourced. Nothing Jesus ever did or said, was not of God’s will, not founded upon God as Jesus is God in the Most Holy Trinity. Since Jesus is our one and only way, truth and life, every second to our life is against the background of the Bible. So - of course The Bible is much more than the world ever will see not the word an ever tell. If it would, wed sink down on our knees and stumble as Thomas did: MY LORD AND MY GOD!

Yours
Bruno