“A myth can’t survive 2,000 years.”
Have you maybe heard of Buddhism?
There were many Buddahs and not a one claimed devine birth and not a one said he would die and come back from the dead.
I am specifically talking about Jesus’ resurrection.
It ain’t a myth and it’s not a religion.
Have you maybe heard of Buddhism?
See post 102 above. Those for whom Scripture is the assured Word of God and supreme transcendent standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims (as is abundantly evidenced to be therein) are the best defenders of it.
Rome at best sends a mixed message, with one of the post V2 controversies being whether " the sake of our salvation" refers to only to plenary faithful transmission of salvfic truths, in CCC 107: "the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures." - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm#104 cf. PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS
Which sees differing interpretations with the Roman community.
And for decades Rome has taught and teaches liberal revisionism via its sanctioned notes in her New American Bible, such as,
Genesis 2 (Adam and Eve and creation details) and Gn. 3 (the story of the Fall), Gn. 4:1-16 (Cain and Abel), Gn. 6-8 (Noah and the Flood), and Gn. 11:1-9 (Tower of Babel: the footnotes on which state, in part, “an imaginative origin of the diversity of the languages among the various peoples inhabiting the earth”) are “folktales,” using allegory to teach a religious lesson.
The story of Balaam and the donkey and the angel (Num. 22:1-21; 22:36-38) was a fable, while the records of Gn. (chapters) 37-50 (Joseph), 12-36 (Abraham, Issaac, Jacob), Exodus, Judges 13-16 (Samson) 1Sam. 17 (David and Goliath) and that of the Exodus are stories which are "historical at their core," but overall the author simply used mere "traditions" to teach a religious lesson. After all, its understanding that “Inspiration is guidance” means that Scripture is “God’s word and man’s word.”
Think of the ‘holy wars’ of total destruction, fought by the Hebrews when they invaded Palestine. The search for meaning in those wars centuries later was inspired, but the conclusions which attributed all those atrocities to the command of God were imperfect and provisional." (4. "Inspiration and Revelation," p. 18)
More .
I myself first became aware of the basic liberal bent in the NAB when reading the notes in the NAB, St. Joseph’s medium size, Catholic publishing co., copyright 1970, which has the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur stamps of sanction. The NAB has gone through revisions, but I have found the same O. T. footnotes in “The Catholic Study Bible,” Oxford University Press, 1990, which also has the proper stamps, and uses the 1970 O.T. text and the 1986 revised N.T. And a Roman Catholic apologist using the 1992 version also lists some of the same errors described below, and is likewise critical of the liberal scholarship behind it (though he elsewhere denigrated Israel as illegally occupying Palestine), while a Roman Catholic cardinal is also crtical of the NAB on additional grounds.
And as noted below, even the 2011 NAB Revised Edition (NABRE) contains some of the errors of liberal scholarship. (http://www.usccb.org/bible/approved-translations/index.cfm)