The Old Testament - is it for REAL?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Debora123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ddarko said:
What exactly am I suppossed to address?

The Catechism does not state that you do not need to believe in Adam and Eve.

In fact, church documents were cited enough times on this thread which clearly state that Catholics have NO OTHER option but to believe that Adam and Eve were real people.

So please try to understand what is being said here. Genesis creation account is OPEN to interpretation.

Adam and Eve being the sole parents of the human race IS NOT OPEN to interpretation.

Got it?

So since the Catechism seems to be the only church document getting through to you, pay attention to the bolded section below

“The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents”

So a Catholic is required to believe that Adam and Eve were the first parents. If you have the time, I also encourage you to read Humani Generis.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
All it states is that we do have first parents. Which is stating the obvious, we are here, we are sexual beings, we must have parents. It’s not a great theological revelation.

The primal event is that man sinned. The original sin. That is the only important point in the story. The rest is allegory. Read it a few times. It’s the event, not the people that are important. It states “our first parents” not Adam and Eve. The story is allegory. The event is not.

Again this isn’t a great theological revelation. Sin exists, someone must have committed the first one. People sin, so it must have been the first people.
 
ddarko said:
Hey,

I suggest you get your life on track to match with the church rather than picking what you like and abandoning what you don’t like.

Don’t tell me what I CAN reply to and what I CAN’T reply to. I merely answered questions that were raised while I was away.

Alright?

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
I am not “picking what I like and don’t like” ddarko.

As Catholics we are NOT required to believe that the stories in the OT are historical fact and happened as they are written.

Your interpretation of the Church’s views on the OT is severely incorrect. Everyone here is telling you so.
 
ddarko;8293508 said:
Where and when has the Church taught this? You have pointed to an article that suggest that at least some Church Fathers believed it, which is worth noting and paying attention to. But that is far from the same thing as saying the Church teaches (or taught) it. The Church has no definitive teaching on the historical facticity of the Jonah tale.
Click to expand...
 
jonfawkes said:
All it states is that we do have first parents. Which is stating the obvious, we are here, we are sexual beings, we must have parents. It’s not a great theological revelation.

The primal event is that man sinned. The original sin. That is the only important point in the story. The rest is allegory. Read it a few times. It’s the event, not the people that are important. It states “our first parents” not Adam and Eve. The story is allegory. The event is not.

Again this isn’t a great theological revelation. Sin exists, someone must have committed the first one. People sin, so it must have been the first people.
Click to expand...
Sigh.

Read Humanis Generis.

Our first parents ARE ADAM AND EVE. We have no choice regarding the matter.

Also, I am not sure if you’ve read much of Scripture but there are ample amount of references to the sin of Adam. NOT sin of some first parent.

God Bless 🙂
 
TMC said:
Where and when has the Church taught this? You have pointed to an article that suggest that at least some Church Fathers believed it, which is worth noting and paying attention to. But that is far from the same thing as saying the Church teaches (or taught) it. The Church has no definitive teaching on the historical facticity of the Jonah tale.
Click to expand...
The church has taught what is in TRADITION.

If you bothered to READ the following article that I presented many times

newadvent.org/cathen/08497b.htm

it cites ample amount of teachings from Jewish Tradition, Jesus’s reference to Jonah and authority of the fathers.

So while Driscoll, the author of that article is no where infallible the TEACHINGS he cite are authoritative and it will do you well to listen to it.

Also add to this the fact that PD condemned the idea that Jonah was a fictional narrative and it should be pretty clear to you as a Catholic that you have no room in the matter to decide otherwise.

What you are doing here is starting from the premise that “since Jonah’s story is so supernatural it must be legend/allegory/metaphorical/symbolic” that now you are ignoring EVERYTHING the church has taught.

That’s not how a Catholic operates.

God Bless 🙂
 
Debora123 said:
I am not “picking what I like and don’t like” ddarko.

As Catholics we are NOT required to believe that the stories in the OT are historical fact and happened as they are written.

Your interpretation of the Church’s views on the OT is severely incorrect. Everyone here is telling you so.
Click to expand...
First, not everyone here is telling me so. So please, get that in to your head. You seem to have a severe dysfunction that makes you forget everything that is mentioned contrary to your view and remember only those who agree with you.

Second, I am not the one severely mistaken. I’ve provided articles that cite church teaching. You’ve provided Karl Keating who gives a summary of the existing views on Jonah without ANY reference to a church document, Tradition OR Church father.

With all due respect to Keating, he just hasn’t done his homework on the subject.

Now also with fairness to Keating, I would assume Catholic won’t be so moronic that they will overlook church teaching for Keating’s explanation on the matter. So the fact that you are insisting on believing Keating over Church Tradition and teaching of church fathers really makes me wonder if you properly understand WHO you should believe when it comes to your FAITH.

You shouldn’t believe ME when it comes to matters of faith. Neither should you believe the “fellow Catholics” here who post. YOU SHOULD BELIEVE WHAT THE CHURCH HAS TAUGHT. You find out what the church has taught from TRADITION and Church FATHERS. NOT by Keating’s summary of the existing views on the book of Jonah. 🤷

From Tradition and the way even JESUS spoke of Jonah, it is clear that the story is not fiction. So while there are definitely fictitious/legendary accounts in the OT, Jonah isn’t one of them.

God Bless 🙂
 
ddarko said:
The church has taught what is in TRADITION.

If you bothered to READ the following article that I presented many times

newadvent.org/cathen/08497b.htm

it cites ample amount of teachings from Jewish Tradition, Jesus’s reference to Jonah and authority of the fathers.

So while Driscoll, the author of that article is no where infallible the TEACHINGS he cite are authoritative and it will do you well to listen to it.

Also add to this the fact that PD condemned the idea that Jonah was a fictional narrative and it should be pretty clear to you as a Catholic that you have no room in the matter to decide otherwise.

What you are doing here is starting from the premise that “since Jonah’s story is so supernatural it must be legend/allegory/metaphorical/symbolic” that now you are ignoring EVERYTHING the church has taught.

That’s not how a Catholic operates.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
Its an article from the Catholic Encyclopedia that asserts that some Church Fathers believed that the story of Jonah and the whale is historically accurate. It is not even close to being authoritative Church teaching and it cites to absolutely no authoritative Church teaching. You have criticized others for pointing to Catholic theologians and apologists instead of Church teaching, but you are doing essentially the same by pointing to this article in the Catholic Encyclopedia. The Church has not spoken authoritatively on the historicity of Jonah, and cherry picking one non-authoritative source (the Encyclopedia) is at best no more persuasive than cherry picking other non-authoritative sources (like apologists and theologians). The Church’s actual authoritative teaching on interpretating Scripture is plainly set out in Dei Verbum and the Catechism, as has been discussed ad nauseum.
 
Ddarko, how old are you and what do you do for a living? Do you really think the idea of Christianity is to bully people on the internet day and night? I wouldn’t talk to a dog the way you talked to Debora and others. Maybe it would be better for you to learn a little about respect and how to talk to people than spending all your time on the Internet being nasty to people.

Does it really make you feel good about yourself to insult and berate a woman? That’s very Christian of you, ddarko.
 
jonfawkes said:
Adam nor Eve are mentioned in the whole document - 🤷

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html
Click to expand...
Wow, ok perhaps it is your browser that is acting up. So do this manually. Scroll down to section 37 of that document. What does it say?

Let me reproduce here for your convenience as well.
  1. When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.[12]
Click to expand...
So please, next time, try to be a bit more thorough in your search before saying Adam and Eve are not even mentioned in the document.

God Bless 🙂
 
MulletsAndBeer said:
Ddarko, how old are you and what do you do for a living? Do you really think the idea of Christianity is to bully people on the internet day and night? I wouldn’t talk to a dog the way you talked to Debora and others. Maybe it would be better for you to learn a little about respect and how to talk to people than spending all your time on the Internet being nasty to people.

Does it really make you feel good about yourself to insult and berate a woman? That’s very Christian of you, ddarko.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but no, insulting Debora does not unfortunately give me pleasure. What I have said to Debora is the truth. If you want evidence to back up my claims, I can do so but all you have to do is browse through the thread.

I am here on this forum to present and defend Catholic doctrine. I would do so regardless of how many oppose it and whether it is popular or not.

Please don’t make this an issue of someone trying to berate a woman. I am not sure where you got that from.

As for “internet being nasty”, I don’t think I have said anything nasty here at all. I’ve just said the truth to Debora just as much as you stated your mind to me in the above post.

So the only thing I am guilty of here is the same thing you are guilty of in posting the above post to me.

God Bless 🙂
 
TMC said:
Its an article from the Catholic Encyclopedia that asserts that some Church Fathers believed that the story of Jonah and the whale is historically accurate. It is not even close to being authoritative Church teaching and it cites to absolutely no authoritative Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Are you seriously unable to read a document?

What it cites is church teaching. So while the Catholic Encyclopedia is not infallible, the teaching is cites is AUTHORITATIVE.

The same applies to encyclicals. The Encyclicals by themselves are not infallible. But the teachings they cite ARE INFALLIBLE.

In case you missed it, it also makes reference to Jesus using Jonah as a fact-narrative. Do you want to take the more heretical route and state that Jesus has erred?
TMC said:
You have criticized others for pointing to Catholic theologians and apologists instead of Church teaching, but you are doing essentially the same by pointing to this article in the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Click to expand...
Please, UNDERSTAND what I am saying.

The Catholic Encyclopedia POINTS to teaching by the CHURCH and CHURCH FATHERS and TRADITION. That is what I am trying to get your attention to.

So the fact is, the teaching of the church is that Jonah IS fact-narrative. The opposite view has also been condemned.

Now why you insist that it is not, is truly a mystery.
TMC said:
The Church has not spoken authoritatively on the historicity of Jonah, and cherry picking one non-authoritative source (the Encyclopedia) is at best no more persuasive than cherry picking other non-authoritative sources (like apologists and theologians).
Click to expand...
This is not cherry picking. The document says that NO CHURCH FATHER has taught that Jonah was fictitious narrative.

Now if you have evidence to the contrary, PLEASE PROVIDE IT. Don’t say irrelevant things like “Catholic Encyclopedia is not infallible”. That is obvious and is NOT the point of presenting that article.
TMC said:
The Church’s actual authoritative teaching on interpretating Scripture is plainly set out in Dei Verbum and the Catechism, as has been discussed ad nauseum.
Click to expand...
Listen, stop misusing Dei Verbum.

The point made here is the following.

The church has decided on some passages in the OT as FACT-narrative.

For you to go and object to the Church teaching using Dei Verbum (which is ALSO church teaching) is retarded. So what you have to do is accept church teaching where it exists.

Dei Verbum merely tells you that OT is not 100% fact. It does not however tell you that Jonah is not a FACT OR that you can choose what is FACT and what is FICTION according to your own interpretation 🤷

That is reserved for the AUTHORITY of CHURCH and TRADITION.

God Bless 🙂
 
ddarko said:
Wow, ok perhaps it is your browser that is acting up. So do this manually. Scroll down to section 37 of that document. What does it say?

Let me reproduce here for your convenience as well.

So please, next time, try to be a bit more thorough in your search before saying Adam and Eve are not even mentioned in the document.

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reference -

In

MESSAGE TO THE PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES:
ON EVOLUTION Pope John Paul II

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp961022.htm
In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII has already affirmed that there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith regarding man and his vocation, provided that we do not lose sight of certain fixed points.
Click to expand...
Maybe you are misreading it.
 
ddarko said:
Hey,

I suggest you get your life on track to match with the church rather than picking what you like and abandoning what you don’t like.

Don’t tell me what I CAN reply to and what I CAN’T reply to. I merely answered questions that were raised while I was away.

Alright?

God Bless 🙂
Click to expand...
Nope, nothing nasty about this post at all. :rolleyes:

I can’t speak for Debora, but if you were ever that rude to me I’d have ripped you a new one. You sound to me like one of those wolves in sheep’s clothing that Jesus warned about…you know, someone who would use the guise of religion to berate and insult people.

Jesus said to stay away from those people. 👋
 
I almost hate to enter this, but ‘retarded’ should not be used as an adjective. My daughter is teaching 6th grade religion this year. You know what she told the kids? Think about all of history and what made these so specific happenings significant enough to put into writing.
 
Wow… I got home from work about an hour ago and I guess I missed all the fun. :confused:

Thanks everyone, for contributing to my thread.

Debora
 
A book I purchased about Catholicism (which was not written by Catholics and overall is not a great book about the subject) from Borders states that the following article presented by the Pontifical Biblical Commission to Pope John Paul II on April 23, 1993 was written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

It was definitely written by the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

It does not directly address or answer the OP’s question about Jonah or questions about Adam and Eve, but I thought the article may be of interest to some of you.

I thought the section outlined below was the section most relevant to this discussion:

‘The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church’

catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/PBC_Interp.htm

II. HERMENEUTICAL QUESTIONS

B. The Meaning of Inspired Scripture
  1. The Literal Sense
  2. The Spiritual Sense
  3. The Fuller Sense
 
ddarko said:
Again, the church has decided on the matter of Adam and Eve. It’s done.

So no theological commission is unfortunately going to be able to decide against it. If they did, that is an indicator that the commission has erred.
Click to expand...
So basically then; your position is:
  1. I believe whatever the Church tells me to believe, because the Church is always correct.
  2. How do I know the Church is always correct? Because they say they’re always correct.
Yeah, sorry - but I haven’t undergone a frontal lobotomy so unfortunately can’t buy that.

The simple fact is, the Church has been wrong on matters of science in the past (geocentrism, evolution etc.) so there is absolutely no evidence for your claim that it can infallibly pronounce on matters pertaining to scientific matters and overturn the evidence.

I mean if the Church infallibly declared that there is no such thing as gravity or that the earth was only 6,000 years old - it still doesn’t make it true.
 
razredge said:
So basically then; your position is:
  1. I believe whatever the Church tells me to believe, because the Church is always correct.
  2. How do I know the Church is always correct? Because they say they’re always correct.
Yeah, sorry - but I haven’t undergone a frontal lobotomy so unfortunately can’t buy that.

The simple fact is, the Church has been wrong on matters of science in the past (geocentrism, evolution etc.) so there is absolutely no evidence for your claim that it can infallibly pronounce on matters pertaining to scientific matters and overturn the evidence.

I mean if the Church infallibly declared that there is no such thing as gravity or that the earth was only 6,000 years old - it still doesn’t make it true.
Click to expand...
Ddarko was wrong about what the Church teaches anyway. The Church teaches that we are free to believe the old testament stories are NOT historical fact exactly as they are written.

Ddarko was trying to say we are REQUIRED to believe that most of them are. 🤷

It was weird, but I’m glad it’s over now.
 
Debora123 said:
Ddarko was wrong about what the Church teaches anyway. The Church teaches that we are free to believe the old testament stories are NOT historical fact exactly as they are written.

Ddarko was trying to say we are REQUIRED to believe that most of them are. 🤷

It was weird, but I’m glad it’s over now.
Click to expand...
I haven’t been sure how to proceed since ddarko has been banned, since I don’t want to be arguing with an absent adversary.

But I don’t think his position was weird. He was appealing to the longstanding exegetical tradition as summarized in the CE. The question is: do Catholics need to accept traditional exegetical/historical opinions as Tradition. The CE author, Driscoll, thought so, and ddarko agreed. The majority of contemporary Catholic scholars seem to think not–even the Pope is willing to accept some of the findings of modern historical scholarship, so I don’t think this is by any means a fringe or heretical opinion.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top