The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:
Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.
Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.
No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.
Interesting and informative posts, thank you. Have you by any chance come across anything on this topic directly from the vatican website (which if I am not mistaken is the only source of the official teachings of RC? (The times I have ventured to that site the difficulty of navigating it and finding relevant information gives me a migrain and I give up)
I have yet to find anything in the bible that is inaccurate.
Of course you haven't.
Well on that we can agree. It's nice to find common ground.
Have a nice day,
JW
In case someone actually mistakes this snippet for my actual post, here's the rest of it...
Of course you haven't. Because whenever an inaccuracy is pointed out, you will forcibly interpret it to make it sound accurate.
Did you take me out of context just to deliver a zinger for your own amusement, or are you actually misguided enough to think I sincerely agree with you on this?
The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:
Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.
Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.
No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.
Interesting and informative posts, thank you. Have you by any chance come across anything on this topic directly from the vatican website (which if I am not mistaken is the only source of the official teachings of RC? (The times I have ventured to that site the difficulty of navigating it and finding relevant information gives me a migrain and I give up)
RESPONSE: Once again,you are mistaken. The Vatican website is hardly the "only source of official teachings of the RC."
We are all called to different things...Romans 12:3 For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you.
4 For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function,
5 so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.
6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith;
7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach;
8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.
Not all are called to be apologists nor scholars.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
I have yet to find anything in the bible that is inaccurate.
Of course you haven't.
Well on that we can agree. It's nice to find common ground.
Have a nice day,
JW
Question, JW. Does God's existence depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?
If so, why?
And does your faith in God depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?
If so, why should that be so?
Also, if both of these things are so with you, don't you think such such pre-determination hinders you from having an objective view of the Bible?
I mean, considering what's at stake.
My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
"The full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, this second edition of the international bestseller has been significantly expanded, enhancing both its content and usability. Revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1997, the second edition now includes more than a hundred additional pages, offering such new features as a glossary of terms, an index of citations from sources and in-brief texts on core teachings. The essential elements of faith are presented in the most understandable manner, enabling everyone to read and know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life."
I think you may have misunderstood what I was asking, I was just asking apart from the vatican website, is there a website (perhaps one that contains the universal caticism) that one can go to for authoritive (official) catholic teachings.
I am not challenging anything you said at all, I'm just asking since you seem to know a bit about the Catholic faith.