When did it become fashionable for so many Catholics to see the Bible as a myth

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom_of_Assisi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello Tom of Assisi,

I get nausiated when priests give the homilies on the five loaves feeding four thousand being a myth. They say the new modern scholarly thinking is that Jesus simply got those who were hiding food to dig a little deeper into their pockets and share thier food.

Jesus uses the reality of His multiplication of loaves MIRACLE to prove to the Disciples their lack of faith. Perhaps Jesus is using His multiplication of loaves miracle to display to the world modern Catholic scholar’s lack of faith.

NAB MAT 16:5

The disciples discovered when they arrived at the other side that they had forgotten to bring any bread along. When Jesus said to them, “Be on the lookout against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees”, they could think only, “This is because we have brought no bread.” Jesus knew their thoughts and said, “Why do you suppose it is because you have no bread? How weak your faith is! Do you still not understand? Do you not remember the five loaves among four thousand and how many basket-full you picked up? Or the seven loaves among four thousand and how many hampers-full you retrieved? Why is it you do not see I was not speaking about bread at all but warning you against the yeast of the Pharisees?” They finally realized he was not issuing a warning against yeast [used for bread] but against the Pharisees and Sadducees’ teaching.

Peace in Christ,

Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
 
Tom of Assisi:
I know a few Catholics…and have read commentaries by others who seem to regard parts of the Bible as mythology…akin to Greek, Roman, or Hindu stories. They will assert that the book of genesis is really a myth, or that Christ’s feeding of the 5,000 was just a legend, or that Mary was not really a virgin. These events could not be “real,” it is suggested by some, since they would seemingly violate the rules of nature :whacky: .

When did “intellectual” Catholics start viewing parts of the Bible as just stories or as one Catholic woman said to me: “parts of the Bible are just cultural by-products of very primitve ancient people and should not be understood as authentic history.”

Is the reurrection just a story too, or should we view that as actully having happened?
Click to expand...
If by “myth” you mean a story which teaches theological truth by allegory, much of the Bible is a myth.

The level at which truth is taught by the Bible as a myth is called the sensus plenior or “fuller sense” level.

Most of the time, this mythological sensus plenior level meaning is far more important than the plaintext, or “literal,” level meaning.

For example, in Numbers 21, in the story of the Bronze Serpent, God has Moses construct a bronze serpent and attach it to a pole, so that the Hebrews can look at it and so recover from poisonous serpent bites.

Which lesson is more important: The plaintext level: God will help if requested? Or the *sensus plenior *level: A bloodied one (“bronze,” the red metal) in the form of “Him-Who-did-not-know-sin-Who-was-made-to-be-sin” (“serpent,” a sin symbol) will be attached, up in the air, to a post (the bronze serpent is attached to a pole) so that we can have faith in Him (“look” at him) and so be saved from sins (“snake bites”)?

The information about salvation found in the mythical *sensus plenior *level is often so wonderful that in stories such as those in Genesis whose historicity is most debated – creation, Garden of Eden, the flood – the plaintext level is almost not relevant.
 
40.png
Exporter:
I know there were a few German scholars who lived in the early 1800s who tried to explain away miracles by using natural means.
Click to expand...
That’s what I understand as well.

You know how in the 60s when the Beatles came around, all the kids grew their hair to look like them?

Well, when the so-called Enlightenment came along, many theologians saw it as their ticket to ride.

It was a fad.
 
Sigh.

Some of you folks are still acting like the word Myth is some sort of pejorative.

It is a very broad category that includes all stories used to teach a worldview.

The popular definition of myth may mean “fairy tale” but that is not what scholars mean when they use the word. So if your going to get mad at someone, make sure you know what they’re saying first.

Fables and Parables are subsets of myths and those are the ones that are made-up.

Of course I seem to recall Someone making pretty good use of parables 😉
 
I think it was G.K. Chesterton that referred to the story of Christ, or maybe more generally the Bible, as “the one Myth that was true”, or “the central myth of history”, or something like this - meaning that the story has the characteristics of “myth” as in the first definition that someone posted above, but unique from all other myths in that it can be said definitively to have happened at a specific point in human history. I suggest reading The Everlasting Man for more about this idea. J.R.R. Tolkien and maybe C.S. Lewis also wrote about this idea. (hmm… maybe this idea became popular at the same time as going by your initials + last name became fashionable in England…)
 
I don’t think they had bookstores 500 years ago like they do now. I’m sure part (maybe only a small part) of it is that now we can all read and have spare change and have to shop for other stuff, so we wander into bookstores. There you find a buffet of books, which one ususally picks without a recommend from someone. We read the contents, and we lack a solid basis upon which to judge them. We think we know stuff because we read it.

The sad part is, the person who bought the book (say a bible commentary) was looking to learn more and know more about Jesus, the bible, faith.

If you are talking about high end scholars, well, just ignore them. (By “myth” I assume you are talking about people who deny the resurrection except as a paradigm for our lives, how the thing with Lazarus isn’t that he was raised after 4 days, but that we see our life as change and life in the here and now, etc).
 
Tom of Assisi:
Well I guess if you are defining the Bible as a myth, then some myths must be true…how can you tell the difference–between the real myths and the fake myths?
Click to expand...
As others have noted, “myth” properly refers to allegorical stories which give a philosophical or theological explanation of the way the world and God “work.” The Bible, most notably the Old Testament is a massive collection of eyewitness accounts, poetry, *myth *and revealed law–all of it inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore “true” in the sense that it witnesses to fundamental truths which we can trust with our hearts and intellects.

Tom of Assisi - I am also dismayed by much of the skepticism in modern “Catholic” scholarship that would dubunk especially the stories of the New Testament as myths. The Gospels, in contrast to certain passages and books of the Old Testament, are, I believe, true eye-witness accounts of events that really happened.

However, the Old Testament is a much more varied assortment of (inspired) literature, history and eye witness accounting. The authors there are not four identifiable disciples of Christ; they are literally hundreds of scholars, scribes, prophets etc writing (often under pseudonyms) the scraps of Scripture which over the millenia have been compiled by Judaism and then the Church. The Book of Tobit, for example, IS MYTHIC in the deepest sense; it follows all the so-called “fairy tale” plot lines of the Hebraic stories of its day; and yet it reveals profound truths about God, sin, marriage, love and forgiveness. Compared to the account of Exodus, it is utterly different in form, purpose, style, vocabulary, etc. Same with the Psalms.

Even the most faithful of modern Catholic scholars, such as Luke Timothy Johnson, will acknowledge that not all of the Bible contains day by day accounts of events that actually took place. Some of it is literary. Yet all of the Bible is true. I think this subtle distinction only increases our reverence for and faith in the Word of God in all the forms in takes in Scripture. If Bible scholarship undermines faith, something is wrong with the methodology of the exegites.(sp?)
 
Steven Merten:
Hello Tom of Assisi,

I get nausiated when priests give the homilies on the five loaves feeding four thousand being a myth. They say the new modern scholarly thinking is that Jesus simply got those who were hiding food to dig a little deeper into their pockets and share thier food.

Jesus uses the reality of His multiplication of loaves MIRACLE to prove to the Disciples their lack of faith. Perhaps Jesus is using His multiplication of loaves miracle to display to the world modern Catholic scholar’s lack of faith.

NAB MAT 16:5

The disciples discovered when they arrived at the other side that** they had forgotten to bring any bread along**. When Jesus said to them, “Be on the lookout against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees”, they could think only, “This is because we have brought no bread.” Jesus knew their thoughts and said, “Why do you suppose it is because you have no bread? How weak your faith is! Do you still not understand? Do you not remember the five loaves among four thousand and how many basket-full you picked up? Or the seven loaves among four thousand and how many hampers-full you retrieved? Why is it you do not see I was not speaking about bread at all but warning you against the yeast of the Pharisees?” They finally realized he was not issuing a warning against yeast [used for bread] but against the Pharisees and Sadducees’ teaching.

Peace in Christ,

Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
Click to expand...
If I heard during a homily that the feeding of the four thousand DIDN’T happen - just as it was recorded in the Bible I would so walk out with my four children in tow. The alternative would be of course to sit there and stew and then tell my kids on the way home from church that the Priest was so totally WRONG and we should pray for his lack of faith.
 
Most of the problem is the poor catechisis that Catholics are recieving today.

Just go to the Liturgy & Sacraments topic and read the thread on Should women be ordained? (thats a link to make it easier to get to) and you will seem some forum members who claim to be Catholic but hold to things that go against what the Church Teaches.
 
15 And when it was evening, his disciples came to him, saying: This is a desert place, and the hour is now past: send away the multitudes, that going into the towns, they may buy themselves victuals. 16 But Jesus said to them, They have no need to go: give you them to eat. 17 They answered him: We have not here, but five loaves, and two fishes. 18 He said to them: Bring them hither to me. 19 And when he had commanded the multitudes to sit down upon the grass, he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled. And they took up what remained, twelve full baskets of fragments.

21 And the number of them that did eat, was five thousand men, besides women and children. 22 And forthwith Jesus obliged his disciples to go up into the boat, and to go before him over the water, till he dismissed the people. 23 And having dismissed the multitude, he went into a mountain alone to pray. And when it was evening, he was there alone. 24 But the boat in the midst of the sea was tossed with the waves: for the wind was contrary. 25 And in the fourth watch of the night, he came to them walking upon the sea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top