@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;56509 wrote:I was only responding to your statement that there is no necessary distinction between Fundamentalists and Catholics, nothing else.
However, you don't really think the entire Bible was taken completely literally throughout history, do you? That's a very complex issue, and from the start many of the Old Testament customs were not followed (circumcision was deemed unnecessary, for example) but the church as a whole has changed through history as a necessity, because society changes.
Yeah I do think people toook the Bible literally throught history, it's why there were so many atrocities carried out in the name of it and God.
My point is that the only reason large portions of the Bible are no longer taken as the literal fact is because:
A. The more educated people of the 20th centuary were able to make up their own minds based on the 'evidence available.
B. Science produced large swaithes of evidence which showed many of the statements in the Bible to be false, whilst no evidence could be brought forward to support them. Before you write,.....'Just show me any god, one will do it'
Now the Catholic church and it congregation to the literal meaning of the Bible for long periods throught history. Crusades, whitch hunting/ Burning, Inquisition, to name a few. All carried out in the name of god, inspired by the literal meaning the Bible. Do we agree on my last statement?
So if we establish that the Catholic Church did indeed take the literal meaning of the Bible, my two questions stil stand.
At what point in history did the Catholic church decide the bible was indeed not fact and not to be taken literally as Mr Pino has indicated?
Who sanctioned this shift and by who's authority?
Plus i have another.
Why was this shift in 'policy' taken?