Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible

Times (UK) ^ | October 05, 2005 | Ruth Gledhill

[MeanWestTexan]

THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true. The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

[badpacifist]

The day I see a bunch of one armed one eyed fundamentalists running around will be the day I stop yelling "Hypocrites" at those who attack the Catholics.

[Milly]

I bet you did . I used to think they were old hags.They told the parents everything, but they were never mean to us. Yes I think we learned alot from them not just religion.
Must have been the NYC heat and humidity that got to them.

[murphE]

For instance, Jonah literally in the belly of a fish for three days? Come on. Jonah's story is an allegory prefiguring Christ in the tomb for three days. Were some of Christ's parables embellished by the Gospel writers? Probably, in fact, very likely

Sinkspur, we believe God became man. Omnipotent, no beginning, no end, creator of all things visible and invisible God, the Alpha and Omega, became man. Virgin Birth. Rose from the dead. Wrap your mind around that. If God did that nothing else is really that unbelievable, certainly not Jonah.

"All of the books that the Church accepts as sacred and canonical, in their entirety, and together with all theirs parts, were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, it is utterly impossible for the least error to be divinely inspired. In fact, by its very nature inspiration not only excludes all error, but makes its presence as utterly impossible as it is for God, the supreme truth, to be the author of any error whatever."

Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, November 18,1893.

[sinkspur]

St. Jerome, in the fourth century, pulled together biblical books and issued the Vulgate version of the Bible. There were no "Catholics" then, just Christians, but there is no doubt that Jerome did this.

Catholics have been anti-semitic, it is true, and it is deplorable.

But there was no greater anti-semite in the Middle Ages than Martin Luther, an apostate Catholic. Just read his stuff.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Paul makes it very clear in his letter to the Romans 3:19ff-

Paul was not Yeshua...

[TXBubba]

Thanks. I wasn't necessarity saying the days had to be Friday to Sunday. But since that is the way we celebrate them today those are the days I put in my post. I was trying to point out (which you helped verify) that the number of days were counted a certain way and that this way of counting is not how we count our days currently.

[Waryone]

Acts 4: 19b asks whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you [evolutionists] more than to God, you judge.

I myself will continue to believe that God's Word, the Bible is true.

As it says in First Corinthians 1: 18 - 25

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

[sinkspur]

I am not going to argue with you, murphE. Jonah was an allegory, not a recounting of the experiences of a living human being.

Leo XIII's pronouncement in this regard could not have anticipated historical criticism, which was recognized as a valid biblical research method by Pius XII.

[safisoft]

Comments anyone?

"Jew" originally meant having come from the region of Judah. It does NOT, nor has it ever meant being OF the tribe of Judah. That is a common misunderstanding. Many "Jews" today are in fact Levi and Kohen (tribe of Levi, and line of Aharon).

Spend some time in the book of Esther where the term is first used. You will soon discover that this term apples to ALL Israelites after the Babylonian invasion. In addition, if you read the Apostolic Scriptures (especially the Gospel of John) you will see the term "Jew" is being used not ethnically, nor religiously like it is today, but regionally. A 'Jew' in the Gospel of John is someone from the region of Judean.

The principle reason why 'Jew' became the term for all members of Israel was because Jerusalem was in Judah, and all the tribes were represented there by the 6th Century BCE. So, it is quite accurate to say that "Jews" wrote the Bible. An exception might be Luke and Acts, and possibly Hebrews (although there is some evidence that Luke may have been a Proselyte to Judaism).

Christianity is Messianic Judaism

Not so fast. I am a Messianic, but 'Christianity' is not Messianic Judaism. 'Christianity' seems to be a distinct religion that formed in the Second Century as DISTINCT from Judaism. The fact that it feels it MUST define itself as OTHER THAN Judaism makes this self-evident. On the other hand, even a cursory reading of Acts will show that the First Century believers were VERY much a PART of normative 'Judaism' - and not separate or distinct. That did not happen until the early Second Century when Gentiles out polled Jews in the believing assemblies and departed from their Jewish roots.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

the 'OLD TESTAMENT'...

You really meant the FIRST TESTAMENT...

[joesnuffy]

We are long past the days of believing that the world was created in six 24-hour days.

You must have a mouse in your pocket...

[badpacifist]

"He who is joined to the chair of Peter is accepted by me!"
Letter of Jerome to Pope Damasus, 374 A.D., 16,2 J1346a
"I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but Your Blessedness, that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails."
Letter of Jerome to Pope Damasus, 374 A.D. 15,2 J1346

[safisoft]

But there was no greater anti-semite in the Middle Ages than Martin Luther, an apostate Catholic. Just read his stuff.

Believe me, I have. Dispicable stuff. I am an avid reader and probably the only person on FR to have read Calvin's Institutes - and not be a Calvinist. Nearly all the reformers were hatefully anti-Semitic. Some notable exceptions were Tyndale and also the Puritans.

[nosofar]

I never realized my belief in God and his word was an embarrassment to Christianity.

You are confusing believing in God and the Bible with idolizing a book and interpreting everything in it literally without thinking.

[safisoft]

In a theological sense, Christians are still bound by Mosaic Law - - Yeshua followed Mosaic Law

I agree completely. Read my tag-line. I would simply say, practically, all believers in Yeshua are to imitate Him - and He was completely faithful and obedient to the Torah of Moses. The definition of a false prophet in Deuteromony 13 and 18 is one that leads people away from the Torah. Theologically, this is what the 2nd Century antenicean 'fathers' did when they persecuted believers for obeying G-d's commandments. They showed themselves to be false prophets.

[sarasmom]

Er...so?
The current popular printed version of the "Holy Bible", generally assumed by Protestants in the USA to be the only official recognized version, is the "King James" edition, and is only just that, the King James edition of the "Holy Scripture".
The above is not an opinion open to theological dispute, its just simple factual information.

Many might be offended by the above, but oh well!

[murphE]

Leo XIII's pronouncement in this regard could not have anticipated historical criticism

Ah, the "we moderns know so much better now" argument...

If you believe God became man, (which all Catholics must) what's so hard about Jonah?

AND Leo XIII's pronouncement stands in stark opposition to this statement of yours:

Were some of Christ's parables embellished by the Gospel writers? Probably, in fact, very likely.

[safisoft]

You really meant the FIRST TESTAMENT

Or better yet, refer to it by the same names that Yeshua and His disciples did:

The Scriptures.
The TaNaKh = Torah, Na'vim, Kituvim (Torah, Prophets, and Writings)

[TXBubba]

But there was no greater anti-semite in the Middle Ages than Martin Luther, an apostate Catholic. Just read his stuff.

Oh please, not this stuff again. Yes, Martin Luther said horrible things about Jews. But again, he is slandered without acknowledgement of the historical context in which he wrote. He was speaking about one set of Jews and not against the whole race. Much the same as speaking against one set of minority inner city youth without condemning the whole race from which they come. He also said as vulgar things about Germans but is never said to be anti-German. I'll try to research a link to an article about his writings that was posted on another thread just recently.

And why is the historical perspective important. Why there are those who say our own constitution must be interpreted by today's standards. Without holding to the historical perspective in which it was written then it can become a living document. You can't take words written by a man regarding a certain event and use them to slander him without acknowledging the context of his words.

[Just mythoughts]

""Jew" originally meant having come from the region of Judah. It does NOT, nor has it ever meant being OF the tribe of Judah. That is a common misunderstanding. Many "Jews" today are in fact Levi and Kohen (tribe of Levi, and line of Aharon)."

I am familiar with the fact that "Jew" can mean from a specific region and not necessarily from the tribe of Judah.

"Spend some time in the book of Esther where the term is first used. You will soon discover that this term apples to ALL Israelites after the Babylonian invasion. In addition, if you read the Apostolic Scriptures (especially the Gospel of John) you will see the term "Jew" is being used not ethnically, nor religiously like it is today, but regionally. A 'Jew' in the Gospel of John is someone from the region of Judean."


I have spend time in the book of Esther, who penned that book?

I have also read Genesis where each tribe is name and what their blessing and inheritance would be. There are 12 of them and the generations will not fit into that tiny piece of real estate called Israel.

"The principle reason why 'Jew' became the term for all members of Israel was because Jerusalem was in Judah, and all the tribes were represented there by the 6th Century BCE. So, it is quite accurate to say that "Jews" wrote the Bible. An exception might be Luke and Acts, and possibly Hebrews (although there is some evidence that Luke may have been a Proselyte to Judaism).:The principle reason why 'Jew' became the term for all members of Israel was because Jerusalem was in Judah, and all the tribes were represented there by the 6th Century BCE. So, it is quite accurate to say that "Jews" wrote the Bible. An exception might be Luke and Acts, and possibly Hebrews (although there is some evidence that Luke may have been a Proselyte to Judaism)."

There was a "civil" war and the Northern Kingdom 10 tribes, who decided that it was too far away to travel to Jerusalem for feast days started their own tradition. They the l0 tribes, went a whoring after other gods and the Heavenly Father DIVORCED them and sent them into captivity. Now those 10 tribe were scattered to the four corners of the planet and most of them have no clue who they are, as it is written.

Now those two House have NOT been rejoined just as it is written and will not be until Christ Himself rejoins them and they will not all fit in that tiny piece of real estate.


Lot of people are called gentiles that are not IN FACT gentiles.