Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 4/17/2015 10:43:48 AM EDT
In reading the thread on transubstantiation and also on GD about noah, evolution etc, I have some questions.
This is for all members here. I have now learned that there is a strong belief that the words of Jesus are to be taken literally in dealing with his body and blood.  I also know that even people who don't take those words literally take other things literally, like the rapture etc.  So this question crosses theological beliefs.  How can someone justify taking one literally and not taking other things like Jonah, the flood,creation...literally?
Jesus speaks about when God created Adam and Eve.  He speaks about as Jonah was in the belly of the fish for 3 days and 3 nights. He and others speak about the days of noah.  Nowhere does he say the story of....he is speaking literally.  So..how can you justify one as literal and the other as a story? Some will point to a lack of proof..in GD...lack of physical proof does t prove..it just makes you have to rely on faith.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 10:58:04 AM EDT
[#1]
To make sure I'm understanding you, it seems your question is, how could someone take some parts of the Bible literally, like Our Lord's words in John 6, while not taking other parts literally, like the flood or Noah or Job?

Here is my response to that question. There is a long history of biblical interpretation in Christianity. The Bible isn't a book, it is a library of books. You wouldn't go in to a library and pick up a copy of the Lord of the Rings and read it like a newspaper. You also wouldn't read a newspaper like a work of literature. We see this understanding of the Bible in the works of the early Church fathers.  Therefore, it is entirely consistent to read the bible in accordance with the types of writings that it contains informed by the tradition of the Apostles which has been passed down.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 11:06:03 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
To make sure I'm understanding you, it seems your question is, how could someone take some parts of the Bible literally, like Our Lord's words in John 6, while not taking other parts literally, like the flood or Noah or Job?

Here is my response to that question. There is a long history of biblical interpretation in Christianity. The Bible isn't a book, it is a library of books. You wouldn't go in to a library and pick up a copy of the Lord of the Rings and read it like a newspaper. You also wouldn't read a newspaper like a work of literature. We see this understanding of the Bible in the works of the early Church fathers.  Therefore, it is entirely consistent to read the bible in accordance with the types of writings that it contains informed by the tradition of the Apostles which has been passed down.
View Quote


Well said.  In fact, I don't know what I can add to this explanation!
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 11:26:14 AM EDT
[#3]
Jesus said " this is my body"  Jesus said "God created Adam" why would he say that if it were not true? He didn't say in the story.  In fact he goes on to use that to justify marriage between one man and one woman.  And to answer questions on divorce.  If it were just a fiction story, Jesus is using pretty stupid logic to justify God's word by basing it on a man made story.  You would get laughed out of court for that.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 12:54:40 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Jesus said " this is my body"  Jesus said "God created Adam" why would he say that if it were not true? He didn't say in the story.  In fact he goes on to use that to justify marriage between one man and one woman.  And to answer questions on divorce.  If it were just a fiction story, Jesus is using pretty stupid logic to justify God's word by basing it on a man made story.  You would get laughed out of court for that.
View Quote



As a Catholic, I am not familiar with the Church saying that Genesis didn't happen.

If God is supernatural. If God is not bound by earthly physics. Why would it not have occurred?

When reading & studying the Bible, just like what was said above, requires context of the Book being written. Some things are storied metaphors to teach us, like Jesus used parables. Others are literal.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 1:00:20 PM EDT
[#5]
I'm not sure who you have been talking to, but it is dogma in Catholicism that Adam and Eve were real people and committed the original sin and that all humans are descended from them.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 1:10:07 PM EDT
[#6]
I am not making reference to the Catholic church.  I see many people saying they are Christians and that they believe in evolution...or that the flood was local only.  If a Catholic believes this, then maybe I am referring to them, but as a person and not as the teachings of the Catholic church.  Same as everyone else.  I have spoken with catholics, episcopalians, methodist and probably baptist who don't think these things are real but stories.  I'm sure in some cases that they are in disagreement with their church teachings.  Mainly see this in GD but I don't want the train wreck that would occur if I asked there.

I see how in my example it looked like I was addressing catholics.  Did not intend that.  I could have spent more thought before using that example.
Link Posted: 4/17/2015 2:15:21 PM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I am not making reference to the Catholic church.  I see many people saying they are Christians and that they believe in evolution...or that the flood was local only.  If a Catholic believes this, then maybe I am referring to them, but as a person and not as the teachings of the Catholic church.  Same as everyone else.  I have spoken with catholics, episcopalians, methodist and probably baptist who don't think these things are real but stories.  I'm sure in some cases that they are in disagreement with their church teachings. Mainly see this in GD but I don't want the train wreck that would occur if I asked there.

I see how in my example it looked like I was addressing catholics.  Did not intend that.  I could have spent more thought before using that example.
View Quote



I think I figured out the problem.
Link Posted: 4/18/2015 8:02:18 AM EDT
[#8]
Also, here's an example of what happens when we take everything in the Bible literally.  

Link Posted: 4/18/2015 9:20:11 AM EDT
[#9]
So Adam was created before Eve, and Eve was taken out of Adam, that's what the RCC believes, right?
Link Posted: 4/19/2015 9:47:56 PM EDT
[#10]
This is something I struggle with as well.  I find the old testament, especially the Pentateuch, riddled with inconsistencies.  I have yet to find a good answer, but I take comfort in the fact that the Holy Spirit has lead the Church to the correct interpretation.
Link Posted: 4/19/2015 10:18:26 PM EDT
[#11]
Yes. Adam was created first.

Was Eve from his literal rib or is that an allusion to the fact that men have more rib bones then women? Or was there a pre-existing monkey that God infused with a human soul (rational and free) and later another (eve) whom Adam chose to receive the same gift?

As for "how is it possible" - well, for those who believe the incredible diversity of living things all rose in direct genetic lineage from a single celled organism that "spontaneously" rose from inorganic matter 3 billion years ago.... what a silly question!

Now, Eve ate the apple first....but the human race didn't "fall" until Adam ate....thus setting up the need for a male redeemer to restore the race to God's grace.
Link Posted: 4/22/2015 7:18:07 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is something I struggle with as well.  I find the old testament, especially the Pentateuch, riddled with inconsistencies.  I have yet to find a good answer, but I take comfort in the fact that the Holy Spirit has lead the Church to the correct interpretation.
View Quote


Can you share what you find to be inconsistencies?  I would like to see what you are looking at.
Link Posted: 4/24/2015 10:18:06 PM EDT
[#13]



Literal or Literalist? Yes, Catholics DO take the Bible Literally!













Over the last few weeks, I've begun to notice a common refrain from my
Hebrew Scripture and New Testament students. Very often, they will say
things like, "Yeah, Mr. Duns, Catholics don't take the Bible literally." So, then, how do we take it?



You see,
the trouble is that the students are not making a very important
distinction (If they did this already, I'd be out of a job!). The
distinction is between a literal and a literalist reading of Scripture. Allow me to put on my teacher hat and help to bring out the importance of this distinction.



Catholics associate a literalist approach
to the Bible with fundamentalists. On this view, if the Bible says that
the world was created in six days then it was created in 144 hours. If
the Bible says that humans were present at the very beginning of
Creation, then the entire fossil record that shows no presence of human
life for millions of years must be false. One might summarize the
literalist position by saying: "The Bible says it, I believe it, case
closed."



It is, I
fear, the literalist approach to the Scriptures that provides such rich
ground for debates between science and religion, particularly in certain
places where Bible-wielding Christians want evolution taught as "only a
theory" and demand due attention to Creationist accounts of life on
earth. Evolution, which posits a very long, slow process of ever-greater
complexity in living organisms, surely did not take place over the
course of six days. The literalist is thus forced to choose between
science and religion and to advocate that religious faith be taught as
science.



So I'm
glad to report that the Catholic Church chooses a different path, one
that does not have to pit science against religion. Pope John Paul II,
in his encyclical Fides et Ratio, cites with approval the following passage from the First Vatican Council's Dei Filius:



     Even if faith is superior to reason there can never be a true divergence
between faith and reason, since the same God who reveals the mysteries
and bestows the gift of faith has also placed in the human spirit the
light of reason. This God could not deny himself, nor could the truth ever contradict the truth.





Catholic tradition recognizes God as the ultimate source of all that
exists. Our scientific investigations begin with wonder and our
curiosity impels us to probe deeper into the rich fabric of creation in
order to know it better. Whether we explore the intricacies of the cell
or the unfathomable expanses of the cosmos, the truth of science does
not threaten to contradict the truths of our revealed faith, because the
the author of the Book of Nature and the author of Book of Scripture
is, ultimately, the same. Hence the wonderful insight: truth does not
contradict truth.













What, then, is the Catholic approach to the Scriptures? We take it literally!  But literal must be distinguished from literalistic. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:



    "The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation..."(CCC, 116)








The literal interpretation will try to understand what it is that the author wishes to convey the wide assortment of ways used to communicate its message to its readers.










Typically, we are quite adept at making the distinction between literal and literalistic speech. If I said, "That was a brilliant sunset" you would not think that I had somehow tested the IQ of the sun; you would, rather, know that I thought there was an arresting beauty to a natural phenomena. Or if I say that it's raining cats and dogs, you are not seized with a fear that canines and felines are somehow dropping out of the heavens. We know how to recognize metaphors. We take them literally - for they are metaphors - and not as literalist statements of what is happening.











When we approach the Scriptures, we shouldn't be surprised to see that it contains very many different literary forms: letters, histories, hymns, laws, prophecies, parables, genealogies, prayers, etc..! Each of these is a different way of communicating a message. The Bible, Catholics acknowledge, is comprised of many different books each of which shares the Truth of God in a variety of ways.







It is in this way that Catholics do take the Bible literally! We recognize that the Scriptures teach us the truth of who God is and what God has been and is doing in our history. Just as we read a recipe differently from a love letter, or a prayer different from fiction, so must we learn how to read the Scriptures in a way faithful to the many ways it communicates the truth of our salvation.











The Scriptures, Catholics believe, developed over a period of nearly 2,000 years (~1850 BCE - 100 CE) and are the primordial site of our faith and tradition, an inspired and inspiring site where we are drawn more deeply into the drama of salvation history. To understand the Bible literally  frees us to explore the truths of nature because the ultimate author of the Scriptures and the ultimate author of Nature are the same; thus it is that the truth of nature and the truth of faith are not enemies and can, rightly pursued, both give glory to their author and Creator!

 
Link Posted: 4/25/2015 7:17:13 PM EDT
[#14]
Living as Children of Light

17So
this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer
just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, 18being
darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because
of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their
heart;
19and
they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality
for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness.…





Unless one recognizes Whom we belong to, we will wander.  The remnants of worldly understanding of scripture, strictly interpreting it without deference to the mystery and divinity of God  is a blight of the soul. It creates sola scriptura and the literal word for word interpretation that people cling to and believe there is nothing else!



St. Basil....

If we are illumined by divine power, and fix our eyes on the beauty of
the image of the invisible God, and through the image are led up to the
indescribable beauty of its source, it is because we have been
inseparably joined to the Spirit of knowledge.  He gives those who love
the vision of truth the power which enables them to see the image, and
this power is Himself.  He does not reveal it to them from outside
sources, but leads them to knowledge personally, "No  one knows the
Father except the Son,” and "No one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in
the Holy Spirit.”  Notice that it does not say through the Spirit, but in
the Spirit.  It also says, "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him
must worship in spirit and truth,” and "in Thy light do we see light,”
through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, "the true light that
enlightens every man that comes into the world.”  He reveals the glory
of the Only-Begotten in Himself, and He gives true worshipers the
knowledge of God in Himself. The way to divine knowledge ascends from
one Spirit through the one Son to the one Father. (18.47).



Link Posted: 4/25/2015 8:16:08 PM EDT
[#15]
Link Posted: 4/25/2015 8:25:19 PM EDT
[#16]
Everybody thinks their Book of God is the truth

They are all right and they are all wrong.
Link Posted: 4/25/2015 9:36:53 PM EDT
[#17]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:




Great post Twire!  I was attempting to formulate that message but I couldn't find the words.  

View Quote
I wish that were my post! Cut and paste job.



 
Link Posted: 4/25/2015 9:38:26 PM EDT
[#18]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:




Great post Twire!  I was attempting to formulate that message but I couldn't find the words.  

View Quote
I wish that were my post! Cut and paste job. I just know where to find stuff!!



 
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top