Replies

"If we stop taking Scripture at its clearest meaning and viewing everything within the context, then we leave all of Scripture up to the wildest forms of interpretation. It's exactly that which leads to all forms of heresy."

And, it's why we have hundreds, if not thousands, of denominations of Christianity, each based on some interpretation of Scripture.

The creation story in Genesis could hardly have been written any other way, considering its audience, which had no concept of millions of years, nor could it have understood the idea of evolution in the first place.

The first chapters of Genesis are an allegory. It's that simple.

But, I suppose some folks believe it is, as written, a detailed account of how things happened. That's their privilege, as it is the privilege of other Christians and Jews to see it as allegorical.

Anyone who claims to have a full understanding of the Bible is fooling with you. That's impossible, as those hundreds or thousands of denominations of Christianity affirm.

But, I suppose some folks believe it is, as written, a detailed account of how things happened. That's their privilege, as it is the privilege of other Christians and Jews to see it as allegorical.

Anyone who claims to have a full understanding of the Bible is fooling with you. That's impossible, as those hundreds or thousands of denominations of Christianity affirm.

In other words, you think God intended that all people should just get whatever they want out of the Bible? God didn't have a specific message in mind that he wanted all people to receive?

I believe that God does want us to know the truth. Jesus said, "Sanctify them by the truth, your word is truth." If truth is something that is based on anyone's interpretation, then it is no truth at all. And I reject the idea that an omnipotent God is unable to make something clear enough that it can be understood. I cannot agree with your statement that it is impossible.

The reason there are so many demoninations is not due to the impossibility of understanding. It is due to man's own sinfulness and lack of perfect ability to understand, and his unwillingness to accept what God clearly says.

But once again, I fall back on what I said before: We must take Scripture at its clearest meaning, taking into consideration the context of verse, chapter, book, and entirety of Scripture. In this case, the context makes it fairly clear that we're talking about a normal day, not any great length of time.

Issues such as this are indicative of the necessity in forming scriptural interpretation in the context of the Holy Scriptures and Apostolic Tradition. When Christians began reading the words contained in the scriptures outside of the Apostolic Traditions taught in the Catholic Church, they began generating thousands of interpretations that resulted in absolute confusion.

Brother Consolmagno had one idea correct at least, when it comes to understanding the Bible, there needs to be one boss. Otherwise, there are no limits to the variety of interpretations that can be created. And, as the number of interpretations increases, the amount of confusion increases.

As a Convert to Catholicism, I remember my days growing up in a country Protestant Church. One time a preacher got up in front of the congregation and stated that a person who has an artificial heart could not go to Heaven because God dwells in the heart. And, if a person had their heart removed, then God no longer dwelt within them.

This is insanity. But, without some guidelines (as provided by Sacred Tradition), why not have this guy out spewing all kinds of insanity.

This article is a clear example of how Creationism has become a tool for fundamentalists to try to create their own version of Sacred Tradition. They often equate evolution with evil. But, the Church has never said this.

The first chapters of Genesis are an allegory. It's that simple.

And I think that is how most Christians see it.

It is often pointed out in these threads, that science can neither demonstrate nor disprove the existence of a diety; that is true by definition.

But it is still a problem for some that science can demonstrate that some literal interpretations of the Bible (Adam and Eve, the Flood, Tower of Babel, etc.) simply cannot be true. Personally, that does not challenge my faith, for these allegories have (for me, at least) spiritual significance of a high order even without being 'real' (that is, physical) events. I understand that doesn't wash for the sola scriptura groups; one can only advise them to leave science alone.