Catholic Church admits Bible is BS

Originally Posted by Stephen

That link is over 11 years old. Hardly current news. What have the Catholic Church said on the matter recently?

I doubt they’ve said much different, and nor would they. The Bible isn’t a science textbook and doesn’t set out to be. Furthermore, it treats history in the way those who wrote it treated history, which shouldn’t be surprising. Bronze Age warrior kings understood the world in quite different ways than we do. That doesn’t mean that Christians shouldn’t claim the Bible is inerrant, but it does mean they shouldn’t try to make it say things it never intended to say.

For example - certain sections of the book of Joshua claim the Israelites swept through Canaan and utterly destroyed the tribes already living there. Then later on in Joshua and on into the later history, in the book of Judges, it’s clear there are actually plenty of other tribes still in the land. If Joshua was a history textbook you would have to conclude it was pretty useless. But that isn’t what it is. It contains historical detail, for sure, but actually its usefulness lies in the way it discusses the relationships between God and people, and God’s unfolding relationship with humanity. In the middle of all that, its authors express themselves in ways absolutely consistent with the Bronze Age culture in which they lived. If you’re a warrior chieftain of that period, you always claim to ‘utterly destroy’ your enemies from the face of the earth. It would look odd if you didn’t. To return to the point I made earlier, this is why it’s important to maintain the distinction between inspiration (which belongs to God) and authorship (which belongs to people inspired by God). Attempting to emphasise the Bible’s divine inspiration by ascribing authorship to God creates all sorts of problems, because if you do that you suddenly have no means of understanding the extremely human, culturally-rooted ways in which the Bible speaks.

[Jaymoss]

But the bible does say the Earth is suspended in nothing

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

But the bible does say the Earth is suspended in nothing

Bronze Age warrior kings understood the world in quite different ways than we do

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Chris

Horses are actually carbon neutral, so it’s all good

If they're anything like cows they're far from carbon neutral, they're literally dumpers, Greta will be furious with them

Originally Posted by Stephen

That link is over 11 years old. Hardly current news. What have the Catholic Church said on the matter recently?

That is recent for then...

Originally Posted by Hugh

various quotes

Indeed.

Faith based on Bible writers’ apparent knowledge of science beyond their natural ability is no faith at all. Perhaps some of them had divine insight into the mechanics of the universe, perhaps they didn’t. It really doesn’t matter.

The Bible is interested, above everything else, in asserting that the God who made the world desires to be in relationship with the people he made to care for it, but went rogue. The developing means of entering into such a relationship are set out in a series of covenants between God and, at first, one family, then later, a whole nation and now, the entire world. The present covenant is the one in which people disciple themselves to the way of Jesus. Such people are called Christians and the collective noun for them is the Church.

The only really important questions are whether the God described by the Bible writers is trustworthy and true, and whether the way of life taught by Jesus and made possible by his life, death and resurrection, works as a means of bringing people into relationship with God and to a new life in what Jesus called the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’. My confession is that God is trustworthy and true, and that the way of Jesus is too. Whether we can use the Bible to do science and history, in the way those things are understood by the modern mind, is an interesting topic to me, but it’s a side issue and not the source of my faith.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

But the bible does say the Earth is suspended in nothing

Which is correct, there's not much out there between us and other planets . . or galaxies

[Dude111]

Originally Posted by Stephen

That link is over 11 years old. Hardly current news.....

Well thats why I didnt post it on the news base.....

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

This is grade-A, some-bloke-down-the-pub-said, nonsense. Beginning with your somewhat odd use of the term “the Church,” as if there’s a single, Pullmanesque Magisterium lurking on every street corner ensuring correct thought. You have heard of the Reformation, I assume? It was a pretty big deal in a lot of places, including the island you live on.

I’ve engaged enthusiastically with religion threads on this board for many years and I can tell you, the arguments we debated in CF’s early days were of a far higher quality than this.

I wasn’t even attempting to have a theological discussion, Chris. I was simply pointing out that the Church (and you know I was referring to the Catholic Church) was making decisions on what and what not to believe.

I find that astounding. Many people of faith read the Bible and believe every word of it. So do some clergy, who paw over every word in various passages as if each word has great significance, despite being (badly) translated several times.

How can people claim the Bible or indeed the Koran are ‘peaceful’ in intent when they contain some pretty violent instructions for the faithful?

I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word of it and I think the decline in the number of believers, with people these days having greater knowledge and able to think for themselves, says it all.

Sorry - that’s not a theological thesis, and it was not supposed to be.

The central message is, however, if we don’t know what is true and what is not true (except what we determine ourselves what is and isn’t true) then what is the point of it? We might as well read stuff on social media. Not as articulate, of course, but the same mishmash of truths and untruths.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I wasn’t even attempting to have a theological discussion, Chris. I was simply pointing out that the Church (and you know I was referring to the Catholic Church) was making decisions on what and what not to believe.

I find that astounding. Many people of faith read the Bible and believe every word of it. So do some clergy, who paw over every word in various passages as if each word has great significance, despite being (badly) translated several times.

How can people claim the Bible or indeed the Koran are ‘peaceful’ in intent when they contain some pretty violent instructions for the faithful?

I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word of it and I think the decline in the number of believers, with people these days having greater knowledge and able to think for themselves, says it all.

Sorry - that’s not a theological thesis, and it was not supposed to be.

The central message is, however, if we don’t know what is true and what is not true (except what we determine ourselves what is and isn’t true) then what is the point of it? We might as well read stuff on social media. Not as articulate, of course, but the same mishmash of truths and untruths.

There’s a ton of stuff here, any of which could result in a very long response. I’ll try to be brief.

1. Decisions on what to believe: there is a creed to which all Christian denominations subscribe* and have done so since the matter was finally resolved in the 4th century AD. A lot of what you interpret as the Catholic church’s attempt to continue developing belief is actually an attempt to bring faith based convictions to bear on modern ethical issues. To a greater or lesser extent all churches do this, but the Roman Catholic Church remains the single largest denomination and is also the most centrally controlled of them all, so it tends to stand out. Despite this there’s quite a lot of variation in how Catholic moral teaching is actually received and acted on (or not) in the various parts of the Roman church around the world. Even the Pope doesn’t pretend he can rule the conscience of every individual, though many of his predecessors may have tried.

2. This is your some-bloke-down-the-pub moment. Can you please explain how you came to the conclusion that the Bible has been “(badly) translated several times”? I’m not even sure what that means, but if you’re suggesting that present English versions don’t properly convey the meaning of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, could you give some examples of where it’s gone wrong, and what it should say instead?

3. ‘Peaceful intent’ - well that’s quite a segue from your earlier comments. Can you explain what it is you’re summarising about other people’s claims when you use the phrase ‘peaceful intent’? While I’m waiting, please let me assure you that nobody is trying to hide or minimise what are generally known amongst theologians as ‘texts of violence’. They’re the subject of much debate and writing. I can talk on that subject if you like, although with the caveat that short, forum-friendly posts on the subject can’t really do it justice and risk sounding glib. That’s not my intention.

4. I disagree, profoundly, with your claim that people have rejected the Bible because they can ‘think for themselves’ - Christianity is growing in South Korea, for example, from a standing start to almost 30% of the population over the last century. It’s not a country known for lack of intelligence. A South Korean probably built your phone, or failing that, at least one other piece of high-tech kit in your house. It also continues to grow in many other places, notably in Africa and also in China, although much of that is underground as the State continues to try to suppress and control religion. Being engaged in Christian ministry I frequently talk with people about faith issues. I find that the vast majority of people in this country have a spirituality of some sort, expressed in a variety of understated ways (and often only overtly at times of great distress, such as the death of a loved one). There has been an atomisation of belief in this country and organised religion has suffered along with a great many other things perceived as being traditional. What tends to cause occasional reverses in that situation is when people are confronted with their own frailty and mortality. Most churches of my acquaintance have new adherents as a result of the last 18 months of covid. Up until this point, people have been comfortable, they have been given plenty of other things to fill their attention - the latest iPhone, social media, you name it - and progressively throughout the latter 20th and early 21st centuries people who would have gone to church out of family habit have ceased to do so. Those of us engaged in evangelism accept this as a challenge but are not dismayed. All that has really happened is that those of religious habit have lost the habit. Those of enduring faith are still on board. It’s easier to do this work when you know who is working with you, and who you need to reach out to.

Incidentally, I just got a degree in Theology at a mainstream British university. A first, as it happens. The academic standards of research and presentation are every bit as rigorous in Theology as they are in English, History or Geography. I trust you don’t have a problem with me assuring you I am quite capable of thinking for myself.

5. Truth … a very good point, and one I’ll pick up with you again later if you want. As you rightly point out, it can be difficult to fully agree with anyone on the nature of absolute truth. Many people claim absolute truth doesn’t exist, or is unattainable. I say that’s a bit of a side issue: I worship a God who is eternal and therefore beyond my ability ever to fully know, so I’m comfortable with the idea I will never really know or understand the absolute truth. However I do contend that it is possible to follow a way of life as taught by Jesus, and to find that the results of doing so are faithful to his promises. I can’t assert, or empirically prove, the absolute truth of these things, but I can and do confess that I have found what Jesus said to be true and trustworthy, and I live my life by it and am happy to commend it as the best, in fact the only truly fulfilling way to live.

Sorry, much longer than I intended.

*Actually the Eastern Orthodox churches disagree with one word on one line but it’s a bit esoteric and needn’t bother us here. The substance of it is undisputed.

[OLD BOY]

Thank you for your explanation of these matters, Chris, much appreciated. Sorry if I came on a bit strong, but these issues have been annoying me for years.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Chris

There’s a ton of stuff here, any of which could result in a very long response. I’ll try to be brief.

1. Decisions on what to believe: there is a creed to which all Christian denominations subscribe* and have done so since the matter was finally resolved in the 4th century AD. A lot of what you interpret as the Catholic church’s attempt to continue developing belief is actually an attempt to bring faith based convictions to bear on modern ethical issues. To a greater or lesser extent all churches do this, but the Roman Catholic Church remains the single largest denomination and is also the most centrally controlled of them all, so it tends to stand out. Despite this there’s quite a lot of variation in how Catholic moral teaching is actually received and acted on (or not) in the various parts of the Roman church around the world. Even the Pope doesn’t pretend he can rule the conscience of every individual, though many of his predecessors may have tried.

2. This is your some-bloke-down-the-pub moment. Can you please explain how you came to the conclusion that the Bible has been “(badly) translated several times”? I’m not even sure what that means, but if you’re suggesting that present English versions don’t properly convey the meaning of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, could you give some examples of where it’s gone wrong, and what it should say instead?

3. ‘Peaceful intent’ - well that’s quite a segue from your earlier comments. Can you explain what it is you’re summarising about other people’s claims when you use the phrase ‘peaceful intent’? While I’m waiting, please let me assure you that nobody is trying to hide or minimise what are generally known amongst theologians as ‘texts of violence’. They’re the subject of much debate and writing. I can talk on that subject if you like, although with the caveat that short, forum-friendly posts on the subject can’t really do it justice and risk sounding glib. That’s not my intention.

4. I disagree, profoundly, with your claim that people have rejected the Bible because they can ‘think for themselves’ - Christianity is growing in South Korea, for example, from a standing start to almost 30% of the population over the last century. It’s not a country known for lack of intelligence. A South Korean probably built your phone, or failing that, at least one other piece of high-tech kit in your house. It also continues to grow in many other places, notably in Africa and also in China, although much of that is underground as the State continues to try to suppress and control religion. Being engaged in Christian ministry I frequently talk with people about faith issues. I find that the vast majority of people in this country have a spirituality of some sort, expressed in a variety of understated ways (and often only overtly at times of great distress, such as the death of a loved one). There has been an atomisation of belief in this country and organised religion has suffered along with a great many other things perceived as being traditional. What tends to cause occasional reverses in that situation is when people are confronted with their own frailty and mortality. Most churches of my acquaintance have new adherents as a result of the last 18 months of covid. Up until this point, people have been comfortable, they have been given plenty of other things to fill their attention - the latest iPhone, social media, you name it - and progressively throughout the latter 20th and early 21st centuries people who would have gone to church out of family habit have ceased to do so. Those of us engaged in evangelism accept this as a challenge but are not dismayed. All that has really happened is that those of religious habit have lost the habit. Those of enduring faith are still on board. It’s easier to do this work when you know who is working with you, and who you need to reach out to.

Incidentally, I just got a degree in Theology at a mainstream British university. A first, as it happens. The academic standards of research and presentation are every bit as rigorous in Theology as they are in English, History or Geography. I trust you don’t have a problem with me assuring you I am quite capable of thinking for myself.

5. Truth … a very good point, and one I’ll pick up with you again later if you want. As you rightly point out, it can be difficult to fully agree with anyone on the nature of absolute truth. Many people claim absolute truth doesn’t exist, or is unattainable. I say that’s a bit of a side issue: I worship a God who is eternal and therefore beyond my ability ever to fully know, so I’m comfortable with the idea I will never really know or understand the absolute truth. However I do contend that it is possible to follow a way of life as taught by Jesus, and to find that the results of doing so are faithful to his promises. I can’t assert, or empirically prove, the absolute truth of these things, but I can and do confess that I have found what Jesus said to be true and trustworthy, and I live my life by it and am happy to commend it as the best, in fact the only truly fulfilling way to live.

Sorry, much longer than I intended.

*Actually the Eastern Orthodox churches disagree with one word on one line but it’s a bit esoteric and needn’t bother us here. The substance of it is undisputed.

So now you're a first class Bible basher hope you have comfy sandals

Originally Posted by papa smurf

So now you're a first class Bible basher hope you have comfy sandals

Very. Please however let me assure you I only wear them on holiday, and never with socks.

I thought of you as more of a Bible caresser...

Originally Posted by Hugh

I thought of you as more of a Bible caresser...

well, it’s all on the iPad these days so I’m basically a Bible scroller. So new, it’s old …

[tweetiepooh]

Originally Posted by Chris

Very. Please however let me assure you I only wear them on holiday, and never with socks.

I wear sandals as long as I can and never with socks. Still wearing them today.


Nice reply earlier though. I have to work out how to do an essay on Jer 31:31-40 now and then one on our union with Christ and the atonement.