The Bible is wrong! (duh....)
While browsing Teacher Sol's blog, I came across a post and an associated link to a news article that I read in interest. In a nutshell, both are about the Roman Catholic Church's recently released document instructing the faithful that some portions of the Bible are not actually true.
Some excerpts from the article published by the Times Online:
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.
Well. It took them long enough.
While the change in attitude in the Church is welcome, regretably it happened too late for the countless lives who suffered or died in the name of the scriptures, literally taken to be the "word" of God. Consider these passages in the Bible and their legacies to history:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." - Genesis 1:1-5
Effect: Young earth creationism - the belief that the Earth and life on Earth were created by a direct action of God a relatively short time ago. This totally rejects Darwin's theory of evolution despite the fossil record evidence.
"tremble before him, all earth; yea, the world stands firm, never to be moved." - 1 Chronicles 16:30
Effect: Geocentrism - the belief wherein the Earth is fixed and unmoving at the center of the universe. Led to the Church persecution of Galileo Galilei.
For he looks to the ends of the earth, and sees everything under the heavens. - Job 28:24
Effect: the flat Earth theory. Thank God for Christopher Columbus.
"Suffer not a witch to live." - Exodus 22:18
Effect: "The Burning Times" - the Great European Witchhunts (1450-1750) and The Salem Witch Trials (1692)
There are also the attempts of the Church to suppress heresy through the Inquisitions. I could go on, but a detailed historical analysis of the impact of the literal interpretation of the scriptures is beyond the scope of a mere blog post. History is full of tragedies, both in terms of science and humanity, which stem from the word-for-word interpretations of the passages of the Bible. While the Church's softened stance on the veracity of the Bible is good news, one cannot help but wonder why it took so long.
In my humble opinion, the Bible should be regarded as a source of faith, and not as a foolproof source of history or scientific knowledge. While my faith tells me that the Bible indeed has been divinely inspired, it was written down by the hand of man, and it has been given meaning by the mind of man. While God is perfect, man definitely isn't.
I totally agree with Teacher Sol when she said: "I can't easily answer all my questions about life. I just hold on to my faith." If you think about it, if you have faith, you really don't need all the answers. Even science recognizes this. Where science ends, faith begins.
Quaere Verum.
Comments
- F
Again, I say I cannot answer all my questions about life. I just hold on to my faith. My faith is stronger that anything else in me.
Sol & Rain: Just like both of you said, its just a matter of faith. We don't need to know, even though a part of us may strive for that knowledge. All we need to do is to believe.
Keep up with the informative posts Teach. :-)
Ironic, isn't it? :-)
Hi CL. :-)
Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Thank you for visiting, your comments are always welcome. :-)
Very astute analysis!
Would you agree if I repost your comments? It seems such a shame to leave it here in the comments where only a few can read it. :-)
Would I agree if you repost my comments?
Thanks for asking Ronald but I've already consented. :)
I was a bit skeptic at first to post my comments specifically the last one, given that religion is bewildering, controversial, and sensitive topic to discuss but I failed to resist because you’ve created a discussion that is inviting (begins with a question mark) and tempting(I feel the need to throw in my 7 senses). Kudos to you!
Religion unites people with the same common interest. In the same token, it divides the society when the idea of reasoning is blasphemy.
I’ve often restrained myself from making comments each time I come across related subject matters. I’ve avoided religious discussion in my blogs because people cling strongly to the rope of their faith and there is no way around that I would be minutely understood without getting into depth of nit picking on religious verses to support an argument. In the end of the day, it all boils down to a quoted verse “An eye for an eye…” which is found in the three Holy books of the major religions, Christianity, Islam and Judaism – Interpretation: Either a social order (punishments on crimes) or revenge (because the extremist and fanatics managed to unscrew the bolts in their brains). I am certain, we’ve all experienced and seen how this verse was applied before and is after (today). All other religions and even some philosophical studies offer a similar message to protect their interest.
Religion, for centuries has become the above all else, a social order in any given nation however, it cannot be use as the absolute means to stabilize chaos or to move forward as far as development is concerned. The natural laws (religion) and sciences (theories) are relative of each other. I discovered you can’t take religion alone and leave sciences out of the picture and vice versa. The contributions and discoveries from the different branches of science (theories) help us better understand the many things that were hidden from us – knowledge of the universe, the purpose of life, and taking into consideration the social, political, and economic aspects of living.
My personal preference on religion: a personal communication, relationship and worship of a God, in which I need no confession to any human beings nor make any apology because I believed in a supernatural entity of my choice.
“When I do something good, it's a plus (+) and when I think and do away with something that is bad, it’s my own guilt (-). I am accountable of both actions today and what waits after life.
I part by saying, “Will we all get a chance to taste Hell?”
While they are some people who are prudes in the sense that they for some reason or another are reluctant to discuss religion, I really have no problem with it, but I always enter into any discussion or debate on religion with the following points in mind:
1. No one is wrong, anyone can believe whatever he or she wants to believe;
2. I will not even attempt to convince people that I am right, because what I say is a reflection of my own beliefs (see no. 1)
3. There are no bad ideas, only different ones. Its also nice to understand someone else's perspective, and it helps you to understand the person even more.
Religious discussion or debates tend to break down one or both of the parties insist that only he or she is right, to the exclusion of everyone else. That kind of thinking has no place in a religious discussion. A topic like this need open mindedness and tolerance. We don't have similar beliefs. We have to accept that.
Science and religion to my mind are both sides of the same coin...and that coin is the truth. Science can't explain all, that's why we rely on religion.
As for worshiping in our own way, I'm a Catholic, but I have my doubts at times. Not about God of course, but about the organization that I have affiliated myself to profess my faith. I have not been disappointed or disillusioned that badly to the point of abandoning my Church, but I guess its a small consolation that whatever mistakes my Church has made are not God's, but man's.
To acknowledge infallibility to something fallible is not really appealing to me.
We just try to do good in whatever way we can. That's the simplest way. As for hell...well...let's save that for another post. :-)
Thanks CL. Love your comments. They make me think. :-)
Well, why not try dealing with the facts.
First, the true Church (Catholic that is) NEVER promoted flat earth theory. True Lactinius (one fo the many Fathers) did hold it, but he was alone.
Next, geocentrism has not been disproven. If you are serious about seeking truth, man, then open your mind. Read this series on geocentrism on my blog:
http://veritas-catholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/geocentricity-101-part-i.html
http://veritas-catholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/geocentrism-101-part-ii.html
http://veritas-catholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/geocentrism-101-part-iii-scriptural.html
http://veritas-catholic.blogspot.com/2005/10/geocentricity-101-supplement.html
Just to set the record straight, I never insinuated in my post that it was the Catholic Church who promoted the flat earth theory. The flat earth theory was, among other things, an effect of the literal interpretation of some passages of the Bible which point toward that direction.
As for your views on geocentrism, I've scanned your posts, but I haven't read them yet in detail, given their length and depth. I'll reserve any comments I have until I've fully read and understood it.
Given the complexity of that subject, I think I'll probably be making a separate post on it in the days to come. That way, we can give that subject better treatment than it could have in this comment box.
And yes, I really do seek to learn the truth. Perhaps your views are a step in that direction, but I will not make any presumptions at this point. In this case it would be wise to learn more about the subject, your views included, before I even venture an opinion.
Your comments and views are most appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to share them.
Watch this space in the future, I'll try my best to give the subject of geocentrism a fair shake in the days to come.
Again, pretty good points. Just a few short responses to your comments:
I did not mean to insinuate a blanket application of my statement that "no on is wrong." In truth and in fact, not everyone can be right everytime. However I choose to apply this specifically on issues of religion and of faith. Religion is a very touchy subject to discuss, especially between people who may not necessarily hold the same religious beliefs to heart. So as far as this is concerned, I am not in any position to declare the wrongness of anyone's beliefs. I cannot claim to be that learned or knowledgeable. Nor do I have any personal knowledge of what lies beyond life, except my own beliefs. And fighting beliefs with beliefs doesn't really seem to be a good ideas since it pits faith against faith.
Outside religion and faith of course, its another story altogether.
As for ideas, I don't necessarily think that some ideas are constructive and some destructive. Ideas are just that, ideas, and they can used both for good or for evil. Like fire for example. In its good sense it can provide light, warmth, and cook our food. In the evil sense it can render death and destruction.
Ideas for me are tools, neutral concepts. It is man who can be constructive or destructive.
Again, thank you for your comments. Its always a pleasure trading ideas with you. :-)
I am honored that you feel that my entries deserve your sort of insightful commentary. It makes me feel that after a while my posts have reached a level of credibility capable of inspiring serious discussion. :-)
Again, thank you very much. :-)