Post Reply
Page 1 of 27  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 27 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Did the events described in the Bible really happen?
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 8:42AM #1
LittleLes
Posts: 9,930

To what degree should the Bible be considered historically accurate?  The answer to that question is usually based on your faith group rather than any historical examination of the events described.


But opinions vary from the Bible being historical to only allegorical (Just a teaching story,not historical).


"Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation. " (Vatican II, Dei Verbum,11)


Realizing that it might be in a bit of a bind declaring the bible to be free of any error, the Catholic Church  following Vatican II began to use the "literary forms" explanation.


"To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture." (Vatican II, Dei Verbum, 11)


However, this explanation is general enough to explain such teachings as the Resurrection as being only allegorical rather than a real event.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 10:38AM #2
LittleLes
Posts: 9,930

As an example of the above,


Merriam-Webster- definition of allegorical "having hidden spiritual meaning that transcends the literal sense of a sacred text.” 


Matt 27:50-53 "Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many." (NRSV) 


The next chapter of Matthew's gospel reports: 


Matt 28:5-6 "But the angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid; I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for he has been raised, as he said." 


Are both of these chapters historical (i.e. they happened) or allegorical (a teaching story)? Or one (chapter) of each?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 11:55AM #3
ted08721
Posts: 3,752

As my pastor once said everything is true and some of it really happened.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 12:18PM #4
Buggsy
Posts: 4,732

May 7, 2012 -- 8:42AM, LittleLes wrote:


To what degree should the Bible be considered historically accurate?



The question makes no sense.  What do you mean by degree?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 2:16PM #5
LittleLes
Posts: 9,930

May 7, 2012 -- 12:18PM, Buggsy wrote:


May 7, 2012 -- 8:42AM, LittleLes wrote:


To what degree should the Bible be considered historically accurate?



The question makes no sense.  What do you mean by degree?





RESPONSE:


>>What do you mean by degree?<<


Dictionary: degree  -The amount, level, or extent to which something happens or is present.


(You really should obtain and learn to use a dictionary).Wink

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 2:46PM #6
Buggsy
Posts: 4,732

So you're asking:  How much of the bible should [you] consider historically accurate?  (Even that is unclear - use of the word 'should' is ambiguous)


This is another Littleles set-up.  People will answer the question they want to then you'll say something like "Evidence please".


You really should write more clearlySurprised


Why don't you ask the question properly:  How many of the stories in the bible do you consider historically accurate?  Then your "Show me the evidence" comment falls flat on its face. 


You just like to set up people so you can knock them down.Undecided

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 5:47PM #7
LittleLes
Posts: 9,930

May 7, 2012 -- 2:46PM, Buggsy wrote:


So you're asking:  How much of the bible should [you] consider historically accurate?  (Even that is unclear - use of the word 'should' is ambiguous)


This is another Littleles set-up.  People will answer the question they want to then you'll say something like "Evidence please".


You really should write more clearlySurprised


Why don't you ask the question properly:  How many of the stories in the bible do you consider historically accurate?  Then your "Show me the evidence" comment falls flat on its face. 


You just like to set up people so you can knock them down.Undecided





RESPONSE:


 If you can't address the topic of a thread, or if you can't document your claims, you are really wasting readers' time.


Or, as Eric Berne pointed out in his book The Games People Play, when one encounters game playing, just ignore it and refuse to play.


So I shall.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 6:11PM #8
LittleLes
Posts: 9,930

PRAESTANTIA SCRIPTURAE, Pope Pius X, 1907


"Wherefore we find it necessary to declare and to expressly prescribe, and by this our act we do declare and decree that all are bound in conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine, which have been given in the past and which shall be given in the future, in the same way as to the decrees of the Roman congregations approved by the Pontiff; nor can all those escape the note of disobedience or temerity, and consequently of grave sin, who in speech or writing contradict such decisions, and this besides the scandal they give and the other reasons for which they may be responsible before God for other temerities and errors which generally go with such contradictions.



Response of the Pontifical Biblical Commission,On the Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch,
June 27, 1906


The Biblical Commission answers the following questions:
1. Authenticity — Whether the arguments amassed by critics to impugn the Mosaic authenticity of the sacred books designated by the name Pentateuch are of sufficient weight, notwithstanding the very many evidences to the contrary contained in both Testaments, taken collectively, the persistent agreement of the Jewish people, the constant tradition of the Church, and internal arguments derived from the text itself, to justify the statement that these books have not Moses for their author but have been complied from sources for the most part posterior  (after or subsequent) to the time of Moses.
Answer: In the negative.


Catholics have been required to believe in the Mosaic authorship of the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch.


Is this view supportable by the evidence?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 7:01PM #9
Buggsy
Posts: 4,732

May 7, 2012 -- 5:47PM, LittleLes wrote:


Or, as Eric Berne pointed out in his book The Games People Play, when one encounters game playing, just ignore it and refuse to play.




Relax man, from what I see you're the game player and you do it well. I just see it . . . tell me what you think and then show me the evidence for why you think so - set'em up, knock'em down.  Nice!

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 08, 2012 - 10:21AM #10
jlb32168
Posts: 13,256

May 7, 2012 -- 7:01PM, Buggsy wrote:

May 7, 2012 -- 5:47PM, LittleLes wrote:

Or, as Eric Berne pointed out in his book The Games People Play, when one encounters game playing, just ignore it and refuse to play.


Relax man, from what I see you're the game player and you do it well. I just see it . . . tell me what you think and then show me the evidence for why you think so - set'em up, knock'em down. Nice!


I unblocked LittleLes to see his latest ruminations and discovered that if someone is blocked, even threads that he started are blocked and you never see them.  I counted four threads.  Oooooo! 


In any case, Buggsy, the above game you’ve mentioned that LittleLes plays is one of the reasons I blocked him.  I wanted him to give his opinion on something and then present evidence for said opinion.  He didn’t want to do that – choosing instead to accuse me of playing games. [??]  After experiencing this nonsense several times over the years, I simply blocked him, and for several months now have been LittletLes-free.


You clearly are the most masochistic of posters here presently, Buggsy.  I simply cannot abide LittleLes’ nonsense any longer and will, upon posting this post, promptly block him again.  I have to say that in years and years of posting on Beliefnet, LittleLes was the first poster that I ever blocked and remains to this date the only poster on my blocked list.

Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 27  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 27 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook