5
   

Vatican admits Bible is corrupted...

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jun, 2006 02:58 pm
YOU ARE ? ! ? ! ? ! ?

How do you feel about the inherent right of priests to fondle little boys and girls?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jun, 2006 03:03 pm
Well that seems to be one of those changed rules you've got the New World.

Here, they still are only at free drinks during work ...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jun, 2006 03:05 pm
That wine ! ! ! !


I knew it . . .
0 Replies
 
tin sword arthur
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jun, 2006 03:18 pm
Well, I was brought up in a Lutheran household, and I can tell you that they believe the bible to be 100% god's inspired word, and infallible at that. If there was ever a question that couldn't be answered, it was "The Lord works in mysterious ways." The idea that the bible may be corrupted would blow my family's minds. Not that it would change their beliefs, mind you. They would simply dismiss it as another attack on Christianity.
0 Replies
 
petros
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jun, 2006 02:50 pm
Re: Vatican admits Bible is corrupted...
muslim1 wrote:
Quote:
Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent



THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.



The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect "total accuracy" from the Bible.

"We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision," they say in The Gift of Scripture.

The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.

Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin's theory of evolution in schools, believing "intelligent design" to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country's Catholic bishops insist cannot be "historical". At most, they say, they may contain "historical traces".

The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible.

In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is "God's word expressed in human language" and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.

They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways "appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries".

The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: "We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters."

They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its "intransigent intolerance" and to warn of "significant dangers" involved in a fundamentalist approach.

"Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others."

Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, "His blood be on us and on our children", a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt. Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had "tragic consequences" in encouraging hatred and persecution. "The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians."

As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: "Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come."

In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew's and Edinburgh, explain its context.

They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.

The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. "We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new."

A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It's a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: "There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.

That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching."

BELIEVE IT OR NOT

UNTRUE

Genesis ii, 21-22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man

Genesis iii, 16

God said to the woman [after she was beguiled by the serpent]: "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."


Matthew xxvii, 25

The words of the crowd: "His blood be on us and on our children."


Revelation xix,20

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone."


TRUE

Exodus iii, 14

God reveals himself to Moses as: "I am who I am."


Leviticus xxvi,12

"I will be your God, and you shall be my people."


Exodus xx,1-17

The Ten Commandments

Matthew v,7

The Sermon on the Mount

Mark viii,29

Peter declares Jesus to be the Christ

Luke i

The Virgin Birth

John xx,28

Proof of bodily resurrection



SOURCE

But notice the false propaganda in calling the statements of British Bishops a statement from the Vatican!
0 Replies
 
petros
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jun, 2006 02:52 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
This is hardly news. The Catholic church has long maintained that the bible, though the inerrant word of god, is not necessarily literally true. For examle, Catholics maintain that Adam and Eve were not necessarily real people, but that the story of Adam and Eve is true as a metaphor for the explanation of original sin.

Even if officials in the Church have more recently said that, it has never been Dogma to assert that idea, but rather the opposite has been maintained by the Church Fathers from the first.
0 Replies
 
petros
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jun, 2006 02:56 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
If the Vatican really wanted to help in this regard...it would offer a list of the things in the Bible that are literally true...that can be depended on to be the truth about the nature of REALITY.

But I doubt we'll ever see that.

Again, it wasn't a Vatican statement, nor Papal, nor general Catholic statement at all. What your comment holds in exact meaning escaped me.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jun, 2006 09:22 pm
petros wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
If the Vatican really wanted to help in this regard...it would offer a list of the things in the Bible that are literally true...that can be depended on to be the truth about the nature of REALITY.

But I doubt we'll ever see that.

Again, it wasn't a Vatican statement, nor Papal, nor general Catholic statement at all. What your comment holds in exact meaning escaped me.


Think about it. It ain't that hard to understand.

And I think you are overstating the case for this not being the Vatican speaking. Sort of like listening to an offending edict enacted by the Iraqi legislature during the time Saddam was in power...and arguing that it was the legislature, not Saddam, who should be blamed.

The Bishops represent a significant Roman Catholic heirarchy...and it is not unreasonable to associate it with the Vatican. The word "Washington" is used to denote almost all official US policy...whether originating from Washington or some shyt hole ranch in Texas.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 08:17 am
petros wrote:
joefromchicago wrote:
This is hardly news. The Catholic church has long maintained that the bible, though the inerrant word of god, is not necessarily literally true. For examle, Catholics maintain that Adam and Eve were not necessarily real people, but that the story of Adam and Eve is true as a metaphor for the explanation of original sin.

Even if officials in the Church have more recently said that, it has never been Dogma to assert that idea, but rather the opposite has been maintained by the Church Fathers from the first.

Would you like to provide some evidence for that assertion?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 08:31 am
Frank Apisa wrote:
The Bishops represent a significant Roman Catholic heirarchy...and it is not unreasonable to associate it with the Vatican.


How do you back such?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 08:42 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
The Bishops represent a significant Roman Catholic heirarchy...and it is not unreasonable to associate it with the Vatican.


How do you back such?


How do I back what???

How do I back that Bishops represent a significant Roman Catholic heirarchy...

...or that it is not unreasonable to associate a grouping of Bishops with the Vatican????
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 09:03 am
I suppose, you can associate a certain group of bishops with the Vatican, namely those who are in the curia.

All the others are more national-bishop's-conference oriantated. If at all.
0 Replies
 
Ellinas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 09:33 am
Re: Vatican admits Bible is corrupted...
muslim1 wrote:
Quote:
Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible


The Catholic church does not represent Christianity.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 10:52 am
Quote:
The Catholic church does not represent Christianity.


But Christianity doesn't know what to make of the Bible either. The Catholic Church is not the only Christians group that does not believe in the literal truth of the Bible.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 12:02 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
I suppose, you can associate a certain group of bishops with the Vatican, namely those who are in the curia.

All the others are more national-bishop's-conference oriantated. If at all.


If you feel it is inappropriate to associate a group of Catholic Bishops...speaking as a group...with the Vatican (which, as I mentioned, is often used as shorthand for "The Catholic Church" much as "Washington" "Peijing" and "Tokyo" are used as shorthand for the United States, China, and Japan)...

...be my guest.

I think you are wrong...and I think Petros was wrong.

Different strokes....
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 12:34 pm
It also helps to remember that this thread has been started by a Muslim who is trying to "prove" that Islam is superior to Christianity. The fanatics on either side deserve one another, and i wish we could send them all to a remote island to duke it out with one another.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 12:38 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
.with the Vatican (which, as I mentioned, is often used as shorthand for "The Catholic Church" much as "Washington" "Peijing" and "Tokyo" are used as shorthand for the United States, China, and Japan)...


Might well be that I jump on this, because I don't have such associations.
0 Replies
 
Ellinas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 12:39 pm
Setanta wrote:
It also helps to remember that this thread has been started by a Muslim who is trying to "prove" that Islam is superior to Christianity. The fanatics on either side deserve one another, and i wish we could send them all to a remote island to duke it out with one another.


Islam is based on Judaism and Christianity Rolling Eyes . Which difference leads them to superiority?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 12:40 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
.with the Vatican (which, as I mentioned, is often used as shorthand for "The Catholic Church" much as "Washington" "Peijing" and "Tokyo" are used as shorthand for the United States, China, and Japan)...


Might well be that I jump on this, because I don't have such associations.


Walter...I agree with so much of what you say in this forum...this minor disagreement is like nothing to me.

Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2006 01:03 pm
If a group of bishops, as in this case, make a statement about the Bible they are speaking for the church. They are not allowed to make independent statements that are contrary to the teachings of the church. If this issue was in conflict with the teachings of Rome the Pope would have come out and stated such.

I am unaware of any statements coming from Rome that are in conflict with what these bishops said about the Bible.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 06:52:57