Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:44 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:35 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Inerrant = not containing errors.
Bible contains errors, ergo it is not inerrant.
'The underlying message' has nothing to do with it. Either it contains no errors, or it contains errors, 'the message' notwithstanding.
Even the "underlying message" is ambiguous because of the errors, except for the "Worship me or go to hell" part.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
73
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:45 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm by Longhorn.)
(July 12, 2015 at 1:38 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: What this means is it does not contain errors in terms of the overall message being portrayed, etc. But not as far as scientific and historical accuracy. I am not required to believe it was all written in literal form.
Scientific and historical accuracy sites not ever the picture. It cannot get its own story straight, history not withstanding. Paul disagrees with Jesus. Adam is supposed to due when eating the fruit, and then goes on to live a ridiculous life of 930 years. God changes his mind, but doesn't change his mind.
'The underlying message' you're talking about is so vague and devoid of meaning, it has barely anything to do with the bible.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:46 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2015 at 1:50 pm by robvalue.)
What the hell is the overall message of the Old Testament?
God gonna fuck you up?
So many rules you will fail and your ass is mine?
God created the universe but can't persuade goat herders to stop having slaves?
I'm stumped.
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
73
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: ^Exactly this. The big picture, guys! 
No, no, no, no, no.
You don't get to tell me the bible doesn't contain errors and then trout out 'the big picture'.
The big picture is what, exactly?
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(July 12, 2015 at 1:41 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: (July 12, 2015 at 1:35 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: It doesn't.
Inerrant = not containing errors.
Bible contains errors, ergo it is not inerrant.
'The underlying message' has nothing to do with it. Either it contains no errors, or it contains errors, 'the message' notwithstanding.
Damn. Beat me to it.
Yeah...what he said. A text's inerrancy isn't in how much personal value the underlying message has, but whether the text contains contradictions and scientific/historical errors. If we're just ignoring what the text says and extrapolating hidden meanings from it, then it's no different from other literature and should be held in no higher regard.
^Well, while you are certainly taking it to the extreme in proportion to my own beliefs about it, this is partly why we have the Church and why we are not Sola Scriptura.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:50 pm
CL-
It's important to consider the different types of literature which are found in the Bible, and the following snippet from an article at Catholic Answers describes the NINE different types and how they should be understood:
When interpreting the "literal sense" of the Bible, we must distinguish between the narration and the form of narration, also known as genre. Narration is the telling of things that happened and genre is the style used to tell what happened. In all cultures, many different styles and methods are used to communicate messages.
Scholars have listed nine kinds of literary forms in the narrative literature or historical books of the Old Testament:
- fable,
- parable,
- historical epic,
- religious history,
- ancient history,
- popular tradition,
- liberal narrative,
- Midrash (commentary), and
- prophetical and apocalyptical narrative
(John E. Steinmueller, A Companion to Scripture Studies, 33)
Whatever genre is used, the question that must be considered is what the author asserted or intended to communicate by using this style of narration. The answer to this question will supply the literal sense of the passage.
For example, in Micah 3:2-3, we read, "You that hate good, and love evil; that violently pluck off their skins from them, and their flesh from their homes? Who have eaten the flesh of my people, and have flayed their skin from off them: and have broken, and chopped their bones as for the kettle, and as flesh in the midst of the pot." Does the author mean that the enemies of God’s people were cannibals? No: He is asserting that the enemies of God persecuted the people of God. The passage represents a common Hebraic style of writing employed to assert the reality of persecution and war (see also Deut. 32:42; Ezek. 39:17-18; Rev. 17:6, 16). To interpret this passage without considering the Hebrew genre, one would have to conclude that flesh was actually being eaten and blood actually being drunk.
The principle of affirmation or assertion is the key element in Biblical interpretation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words" (CCC 109). Furthermore, "in order to discover the sacred authors’ intention," the Catechism states "the reader must take into account the conditions of their times and culture, the literal genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking, and narrating then current" (CCC 110). Notice that the Catechism implies there are different modes of narrating, i.e., genres. The reason for the variety of genres is found in Dei Verbum, which states, "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression" (12).
Therefore, when we engage in the difficult task of interpretation, the principle of affirmation or assertion, which is connected to genre, must be the guiding principle for the literal sense. The interpretation guidelines for the spiritual sense of Scripture can be found in paragraphs 111-117 of the Catechism.
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:54 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:50 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: CL-
It's important to consider the different types of literature which are found in the Bible, and the following snippet from an article at Catholic Answers describes the NINE different types and how they should be understood:
When interpreting the "literal sense" of the Bible, we must distinguish between the narration and the form of narration, also known as genre. Narration is the telling of things that happened and genre is the style used to tell what happened. In all cultures, many different styles and methods are used to communicate messages.
Scholars have listed nine kinds of literary forms in the narrative literature or historical books of the Old Testament:
- fable,
- parable,
- historical epic,
- religious history,
- ancient history,
- popular tradition,
- liberal narrative,
- Midrash (commentary), and
- prophetical and apocalyptical narrative
(John E. Steinmueller, A Companion to Scripture Studies, 33)
Whatever genre is used, the question that must be considered is what the author asserted or intended to communicate by using this style of narration. The answer to this question will supply the literal sense of the passage.
For example, in Micah 3:2-3, we read, "You that hate good, and love evil; that violently pluck off their skins from them, and their flesh from their homes? Who have eaten the flesh of my people, and have flayed their skin from off them: and have broken, and chopped their bones as for the kettle, and as flesh in the midst of the pot." Does the author mean that the enemies of God’s people were cannibals? No: He is asserting that the enemies of God persecuted the people of God. The passage represents a common Hebraic style of writing employed to assert the reality of persecution and war (see also Deut. 32:42; Ezek. 39:17-18; Rev. 17:6, 16). To interpret this passage without considering the Hebrew genre, one would have to conclude that flesh was actually being eaten and blood actually being drunk.
The principle of affirmation or assertion is the key element in Biblical interpretation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words" (CCC 109). Furthermore, "in order to discover the sacred authors’ intention," the Catechism states "the reader must take into account the conditions of their times and culture, the literal genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking, and narrating then current" (CCC 110). Notice that the Catechism implies there are different modes of narrating, i.e., genres. The reason for the variety of genres is found in Dei Verbum, which states, "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression" (12).
Therefore, when we engage in the difficult task of interpretation, the principle of affirmation or assertion, which is connected to genre, must be the guiding principle for the literal sense. The interpretation guidelines for the spiritual sense of Scripture can be found in paragraphs 111-117 of the Catechism.
Some great info and thorough way of explaining it. Thanks for this post!
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:54 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:41 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: If we're just ignoring what the text says and extrapolating hidden meanings from it, then it's no different from other literature and should be held in no higher regard.[/color]
We're not ignoring what the text says, we're considering what the author intended to convey.
If I say, "It is raining cats and dogs.", what am I trying to convey? That there are a lot of dead animals out on the lawn or that it is raining heavily?
And if the scriptures are inspired by God, then it IS different from other literature and held in higher regard even if the literary forms used to convey God's message is indistinguishable from other literary works.
Authorship matters.
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:55 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:54 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (July 12, 2015 at 1:50 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: CL-
It's important to consider the different types of literature which are found in the Bible, and the following snippet from an article at Catholic Answers describes the NINE different types and how they should be understood:
When interpreting the "literal sense" of the Bible, we must distinguish between the narration and the form of narration, also known as genre. Narration is the telling of things that happened and genre is the style used to tell what happened. In all cultures, many different styles and methods are used to communicate messages.
Scholars have listed nine kinds of literary forms in the narrative literature or historical books of the Old Testament:
- fable,
- parable,
- historical epic,
- religious history,
- ancient history,
- popular tradition,
- liberal narrative,
- Midrash (commentary), and
- prophetical and apocalyptical narrative
(John E. Steinmueller, A Companion to Scripture Studies, 33)
Whatever genre is used, the question that must be considered is what the author asserted or intended to communicate by using this style of narration. The answer to this question will supply the literal sense of the passage.
For example, in Micah 3:2-3, we read, "You that hate good, and love evil; that violently pluck off their skins from them, and their flesh from their homes? Who have eaten the flesh of my people, and have flayed their skin from off them: and have broken, and chopped their bones as for the kettle, and as flesh in the midst of the pot." Does the author mean that the enemies of God’s people were cannibals? No: He is asserting that the enemies of God persecuted the people of God. The passage represents a common Hebraic style of writing employed to assert the reality of persecution and war (see also Deut. 32:42; Ezek. 39:17-18; Rev. 17:6, 16). To interpret this passage without considering the Hebrew genre, one would have to conclude that flesh was actually being eaten and blood actually being drunk.
The principle of affirmation or assertion is the key element in Biblical interpretation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words" (CCC 109). Furthermore, "in order to discover the sacred authors’ intention," the Catechism states "the reader must take into account the conditions of their times and culture, the literal genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking, and narrating then current" (CCC 110). Notice that the Catechism implies there are different modes of narrating, i.e., genres. The reason for the variety of genres is found in Dei Verbum, which states, "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression" (12).
Therefore, when we engage in the difficult task of interpretation, the principle of affirmation or assertion, which is connected to genre, must be the guiding principle for the literal sense. The interpretation guidelines for the spiritual sense of Scripture can be found in paragraphs 111-117 of the Catechism.
Some great info and thorough way of explaining it. Thanks for this post!
![[Image: ani_tiphat.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=forums.catholic.com%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fani%2Fani_tiphat.gif)
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
73
RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 2:02 pm
(July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (July 12, 2015 at 1:41 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Damn. Beat me to it.
Yeah...what he said. A text's inerrancy isn't in how much personal value the underlying message has, but whether the text contains contradictions and scientific/historical errors. If we're just ignoring what the text says and extrapolating hidden meanings from it, then it's no different from other literature and should be held in no higher regard.
^Well, while you are certainly taking it to the extreme in proportion to my own beliefs about it, this is partly why we have the Church and why we are not Sola Scriptura.
It doesn't matter if you're sola scriptura or not. We're not even talking about catholicism, fuxxake.
Is the bible inerrant? It contains contradictions and errors. Ergo, no, it isn't. There really is nothing more to it.
|
