Do you think the Bible (or parts of it) is true? If not, why not? If so, why? Is all truth the same?
Alright well after doing the two readings my opinion is still relatively the same. I personally believe that only parts of the Bible are true. The reasoning behind my belief is that even through it is stated multiple times that the Bible is influenced by the Holy Spirit and God, it was written by human hands and humans are notoriously flawed and corrupt. Also, a lot of the language written within the Bible is up to interpretation and should not be taken at the literal meaning. Finally, the last reason I believe this is that I believe the Bible(like many other religious texts) was written primarily as a set of written morals. This pattern is repeated in the majority of the world’s religions and mythology; a story is constructed in order to teach people morals.
As for the second question, there has to be one ultimate truth. However, the majority of the time, what we consider to be truth is usually relative to a specific point of view, with the possible exception of science.
I look forward to checking out everybody’s own view on these questions!
Charlie Clunk
The ways people regard the Bible are very different. Some consider it the absolute divine word; the total authority over how one should live his life. He takes it very seriously, following the exact wording. Some other people look at the Bible as more like a book of suggested guidelines, stories, and curious explanations for why Christians believe what they believe. Ultimately, though, the Bible is a written work meant not only to explain the Christian faith, but also to amuse, inspire, and at times guide Christians through their lives.
The ways people regard the Bible are very different. Some consider it the absolute divine word; the total authority over how one should live his life. He takes it very seriously, following the exact wording. Some other people look at the Bible as more like a book of suggested guidelines, stories, and curious explanations for why Christians believe what they believe. Ultimately, though, the Bible is a written work meant not only to explain the Christian faith, but also to amuse, inspire, and at times guide Christians through their lives.
That being said, the Bible was not written by God. It was inspired by God, but written by man, who (as Karen Armstrong says) is not perfect, and subjected to inherent flaws. Therefore, Christians cannot look at the Bible as the most perfect word. Instead, as Dei Verbum explains, individuals are supposed to interpret the Bible in a way that helps explain God’s message to them. Understanding is possible, but a translation of the Word is necessary for that understanding to happen.
I would have to agree with this view, mostly because religion has become more about individual’s interpretation now days. Not all Christians believe the exact same thing, down to the most minute of details; this is because each Christian, while accepting Christ as their Savior and God as their Father, also has their own opinion of what kind of life they are supposed to live. That comes from individual interpretation of the Bible, and accepting that those interpretations might be inaccurate or different on occasion. These differences should be celebrated, however, because the entire nature of the Bible is human and unique in each story.
Alexa
In my opinion I believe that parts of the bible are true.Just like Charlie said "it was written by human hands and humans are notoriously flawed and corrupt", I believe that the bible are laws made by an perfect infinite creator and translated by human beings. A perfect translation would not be possible because human beings are greatly flawed and many of the times are motivated by observer bias, which is a term in psychology that says : evidence is distorted based on the personal motivation and expectations of an individual.Over time human beings have not only displayed their positive side, but have also shown the crudeness of personal motivation, therefore we cannot be sure that the Bible is not merely a set of rules manufactured by individuals who have set out to change the society through our belief system.
ReplyDelete- Jewel Alli
I believe that the Bible was not written to be interpreted literally but more figuratively. The Bible is a compilation of stories that are meant to inspire and teach lessons. Because of this I do not believe that everything in the bible is true. There is no way to prove that the events or stories are completely false but the Church has recognized and encouraged people to not take everything in the Bible literally. The Karen Armstrong article also agrees with the notion of not taking the Bible literally. She said that we should interpret the sacred texts and scriptures and relate them to our own experiences and allow them to help us find meaning in struggles we may face.
ReplyDeleteFor the second part of the question, I agree with Charles. I believe that there is a supreme truth for the majority of circumstances, but I also believe that our judgment of truth can be clouded by specific opinions or even the opinions of others.
-Nicole Dillon
I believe that the Bible was created in order to give us an idea of what to believe. I think that parts of it are true, but other could be fabricated or exaggerated. Most people believe what they are taught or what society believes. I think that each reader is going to get a different idea of what the Bible is trying to say. This is why Karen Armstrong tells us to not take the Bible literally. We all have our own beliefs so after reading the Bible our minds may think in different ways. What we believe is the truth, may not be what someone else believes is the truth. The truth depends on what you are taught, what you believe, and what you see. I believe we all believe in a different truth. But overall we have a basic understanding for what is real and what is not.
ReplyDelete-Lindsey Ritter
I think the historical aspects of the bible like people's names are true; however, the stories about people turning into salt and brothers putting their sibling in a lion's pit and him surviving seem a little fictional like. Like the reading from "dei verbum," the bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit when written. I also agree with the reading when it said "the interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express..." The stories in the bible I feel are there only for interpretation and like Charles said, they're for us to grasp the morals. This also correlates with the other reading by Karen Armstrong. She argues that there are two cultural parts, which include "logos" and "mythos". Both are essential in living, learning, and acquiring knowledge. I agree with her about how the bible is more mythos in that there are stories/tales we are supposed to interpret, not take literally.
ReplyDeleteI think the morals and interpretations we acquire from reading the texts are true. I also think they help us with the ultimate truth like if God truly does exist. I agree with Armstrong about how this is constantly being left behind... We take these stories so literal that we no longer look to them. We're leaving mythos behind and replacing science and logos in its spot more and more. If mythos provides us with an ultimate truth, and we're completely replacing it with science and logos then wouldn't that ultimate truth eventually be lost? Why? Because it seems like our new way of life of solely "logos" and science isn't quite there with giving us that "truth".
-Katie Lamb
No, I think only some parts of the bible are true. I think this because some of the stories are exaggerated, and make no scientific sense. I think something has to have proof, or evidence for it to be real. I also think only some of the bible is true because there are facts behind some of the stories. Another reason some stories are not true is because there are many stories that are the same but have key parts that disagree with each other. I do not think all truths are the same. I think there is such thing as religious truth, and historical or scientific truth. The difference lies in the facts that other truths give us.
ReplyDelete-ELISE ARIENS
I think that the Bible is filled with many things that in my perspective, are true and aren't. In the Bible there are things that I can believe easily and there are some that I find very hard to believe. When i read passages, it seems to me that some parts are fake and not believable, like they are over exaggerated. The passages that i read that i think are true is because i have been taught to understand them in CCD classes and such, other passages that i have read and i believe are not true it is because they don't have enough background information about it.
ReplyDeleteMary vogt
My perspective is that, as the Church teaches, all of the Bible contains truth, but only some (like the Gospels) are meant to be taken entirely literally. Other books, such as Tobit and Esther, are meant to be interpreted as parables to teach us important life lessons.
ReplyDeleteThere is a set and standard of universal truths, but there are different ways those truths are made evident. In this particular example, there's truth that's given to us literally (like in the Gospels) and truth that's presented in a more 'roundabout' way, like in parables. Ultimately, both truths are still true, but they differ in presentation.
-- Chelsey Sterling
I agree with what Nicole said, the Bible itself might not have stories that are true but it creates a truth in the mind. As Karen Armstrong explains, “The myth of the hero, for example, which takes the same form in nearly all cultural traditions, taught people how to unlock their heroic potential.” I think this quote sums up my view of the bible: the stories, although maybe not be true or for certain by any means, are not useless- they help the reader to employ a correct or moral way of being. Even the Pope’s work alludes to this when he says “in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, [the reader] should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended.” The Pope is making it known that the Bible is a piece of important literature that religious followers should interpret, rather than take literally as facts to follow in day-to-day life.
ReplyDeleteTori McAllister
I will not waste time and thought putting forth my personal opinion or saying what I think. My beliefs are the beliefs of the Catholic Church, and they are relative to no one. In any case, first off, the Bible is the Word of God. It was composed by human authors, but it's origin is God nonetheless. It is not a compilation of stories or lessons put together by someone(s) to teach morals or subjugate people to a specific religion or set of beliefs. It is God's word, Living and True, and Present to us.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, as far as its truth goes, it as all entirely true. There are stories in it, yes, but they are true. Now, I don't mean down to the minute letter and occurance for all of it. The Bible contains all kinds of literature, so not all of it is meant to convey fact. There are poems, for instance, that do not. But the stories in the Bible are true. They were not composed by anyone for some lesson, and they are not myths in the way that we have Greek or Norse mythology. They are true, and they did happen. Moses really did save the Israelites from slavery by the might of the Lord, and Kind David really ruled in Jerusalem. We must not disrespect the Word of God by relegating it to simply human terms. It is a divine entity, given to us because we could not reach it in human terms. It is vastly complex, and hearkens to itself in numerous places. Above all, it must be remembered that the Bible is like no other composition in existence. It is the Sacred Word of God and is His invaluable Gift to His people, the Church.
I think that what Chelsea said about how the not all Sacred Scripture should be taken literally really ties into what Karen Armstrong was trying to say about the fundamentalist movement in America. Because there will always be an element of mystery to the divine, we will never fully understand God's truths in the clear, tangible English language we know and use every day. In a way, this is why I am so glad we have books like Proverbs and Psalms in the Bible; their poetic style emphasizes the various meanings God buries within each verse.
ReplyDeleteIf we took away that mystery from our faith, we would not be able to grow. It is an integral aspect of our beliefs and our written Scripture that we would be lost without.
-Sophia Pileggi
I believe that the Bible is true. However, while it is all true, not all parts of the Bible should be taken literally. Things, such as the world being created in 7 days, should be taken more figuratively rather than literally. I also believe that all truth is the same, something is either true or it is false, in my opinion. There are not multiple truths.
ReplyDeleteTom May
I agree with Pope Paul VI, Karen Armstrong, and pretty much who everyone who has commented before me. That is that the Bible, and religion as a whole, is based on both literal and figurative wtritings. Each part of the bible is designed to help someone feel closer to God and to help make uncomprehensible principles more accessable to the human understanding, and there are many ways in which to do that. Music, liturgy, and art are expamples of this. There is not a set way to express oneself in these genres, and the same goes for books in the Bible; there are many different interpretations. As long as they are made in order to seek the truth of God, then they are all legitimate ways in which to worship.
ReplyDeleteI do believe much of the Bible is true because I have faith. With faith as a reason behind belief I do not question the Bible but rather accept it for what it is. I am fully aware that there is no definite evidence to support the stories and events behind the Bible, yet they are there for the purpose of guidance in teaching us the significance behind the religion and how to live rightfully through God. Truth is not always the same; what one believes to be true can be false to someone else. So when concerning religion, can their ever be one definite truth? Truth is faith behind belief; through faith we will each accept and live within what we believe to be true.The Bible may not be entirely accurate but its lessons speak to the meaning of truth, and how we interpret the lessons of truth and use them is up to us.
ReplyDeleteSamantha Smedley
I believe the Bible to be true. I believe it is where God reveals himself to us and sends his message of love and salvation. However I think when reading the Bible it should be approached with the idea that it is not always presented with total historical accuracy or truth that is that things did not happen exactly as described. In some instances we need to accept a balance between facts and the telling of God's story figuratively. I think the word or spirit of God comes alive in the Bible through stories some of which are meant to be taken literally and others symbolically. Christ's Crucification, Burial and Resurrection are to be taken literally and are examples of truth. I think the Bible illustrates that not all truth is the same. I think there are truths that cannot be literally proven here on earth, they are spiritual truths. Many of the stories in the Bible may not be literally true but they are used as vehicles to teach us a higher truth.
ReplyDelete-- Carolyn Spero
I remember learning in my religion class in 7th grade that most of the Bible is indeed true but that parts of it are meant to be more of metaphors to show God's true meaning. More importantly, the metaphors are there to teach us about what is morally correct and how to grow in our faith. It is foolish to believe everything that is in the Bible. I think that much of the Bible is true so therefore I agree with Pope Paul VI and Karen Armstrong. My interpretation of Catholicism and the Bible can be different from someone elses view but that is the beauty of faith. God will not love us any less if we view his message different from one another.
ReplyDelete-Tara Costello
I think the Bible is a book full of truths but since everyone can not have the same belief or opinion on one matter, these truths are interpreted differently. In the Dei Verbum, Pope Paul VI states the term "interpretation" a few times. The pope of this time understands that everyone has a different train of thought. All the Church can really do is state the Word of God in the most "truthful" way and guide its followers towards the right path the way they see fit but it's up to the individual his or herself to figure out if they believe the bible and in what way do they believe it. And because every person has different mindsets and beliefs, truth is not the same to everyone. Something could be completely and totally true or correct but not accepted as a truth because of diverse minds.
ReplyDeleteEmma Leary
As many have expressed in previous commentaries, it is really the interpretation of the Bible which can lead to falsities. According to Pope Paul VI's "Dei Verbum," "the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully, and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings" (29). While the Bible portrays absolute truths, humans may, and have, erred in their analysis of its words. It becomes a difficult paradox to grasp; the existence of a text which only offers truth, yet one in which people can so easily form incorrect opinions about. Pope John Paul VI's statement causes one to question Armstrong in her book "The Case for God." She seems to side with theologians who "made it clear that while it was important to put our ideas about the divine into words, these doctrines were manmade and were bound to be inadequate" (X). The Pope would certainly negate the notion of the inadequacy of the Sacred Scriptures, and he seems to have a good reason to. He explains that it is within the fallible human reading the Bible where mistakes are made, not within the authors who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. I suppose passages in the Bible are only as mistaken as the people who read them are.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe that parts of the bible provide historical truth regarding the origins of Christianity, such as the Gospels of the New Testament; however I specially find aspects of the Old Testament to be questionable due to the amounts of translations it has undergone and the way it has been passed down to each generation. According to Pope Paul IV, the old testament was taken from the ancient Greek translation, or "the septuagint" and was then translated into many different versions. Because it is difficult to translate a text into many different languages and the Bible has been translated so many times, I find it hard to not question the validity of the Old Testament. Pope Paul IV also states that the word of God has been taught "either by word of mouth or by letter." This primitive method of teaching also makes me feel hesitant about the Old Testament. Despite these feelings of the Old Testament not being 100% valid or historically accurate, I still feel that it holds many different parables and stories that help Christians find the same divine truth about God that can be found within the New Testament.
ReplyDeleteJay Garrick
After studying the two readings, and based on my previous readings of the Bible, I have come to appreciate the Bible as a partically truthful book. The Bible can be seen as a history book that tells the stories of the past and the relationship between God and the Jewish people. Just as with all history books, the Bible is subject to just as much human error as other accounts of history. Global events that were recorded in Scripture, such as the Great Flood, concur with written history in other religions and cultures as well, so clearly at least some of the Bible is accurate. True, Christians claim that the Bible was inspired by God, yet the object of the writing is not historical accuracy, but rather spiritual growth and relationships with God. So, whether you believe that Eve really gave Adam a piece of the forbidden fruit or not, it is still important to appreciate and understand the writings in the Bible, for their historical, spiritual, and artistic contributions to society.
ReplyDelete~Risa Eskew
The Bible is wholly true, because its author is God. Although the various books of Sacred Scripture differ according to the style of the human writer, they all share the same author in God, who used the different books to achieve specific purposes. As Karen Armstrong explains, there are logos (reason) and mythos (myth) to be found in writings. Some of Sacred Scripture appeals to logos as in the Gospels that present the historical events of Christ's life, specifically the miracles he performed and his death, resurrection, and ascension. However, other parts of Sacred Scripture are not aimed at the historical; rather, they are meant to speak of symbols of the Faith or to teach lessons, as in the parables that Christ tells. Through the study of Sacred Tradition and the interpretations made by the Magisterium, Catholics may come to know how the truth is to be known in the different books of Sacred Scipture.
ReplyDeleteSara K. Smith
I believe the Bible is completely true in and of itself, however, this truth becomes dependent upon the multiple interpretations which the Bible's readers create. As is stated in Dei Verbum Chapter 3.12, "the interpreter...should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers REALLY intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words." Later on in that section it continues to say the interpreter must pay attention "to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking, and narrating...[from] the time of the sacred writer." Karen Armstrong also appears to agree with my view when she says, "you certainly could not read your scriptures LITERALLY, as if they refer to divine facts." (The Case for God p.x) God would not have givin us th wonderous gift of the Bible unless it was the truth; for example, the popes have declared the parts of the Bible to be true, and the popes themselves of infallible. As St. Thomas Aquinas said in the first article of Summa Theologica, "once they [things which are beyond man's knowledge] are revealed by God, they must be accepted by faith." Therefore, I find I believe the Bible is true.
ReplyDelete~Caitlin Gorecki
Personally I feel that the readings in the bible are not 100 percent accurate, and agree with Charlie on the fact that you need to look at it and remember that it was written by human hands. I believe that the people who are seen through out the bible are real and some of there actions, but i do not feel that every thing written is true. I feel that Caitlin G. brings up a good point with the quote "the interpreter ... should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers REALLY intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words." I feel that the bible is open to interpretation to all for everyone to decide what they believe in. I believe that in the end there is one ultimate truth that explains everything, but what that truth is is yet to be known and is still open to interpretation.
ReplyDeleteAs many others have said, I believe that parts of the Bible are true, not the entire text. Stories can be exaggerated, or having the story being told from another's point of view can skew what really happened (or what they thought happened). Some stories are created to represent a situation, or give us a better understanding of faith. I agree with what John said, that the Bible is "open to interpretation", because it is all how you yourself see it. In response to the second part of the question, I do not belief truth is all the same. Truth to one could not be a truth for you. It is all based on what we believe and what we were taught on what truth really is.
ReplyDelete-Kate Shannon
What is written in the bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit and is the Word of God, thus it remains infallible. Truth cannot be relative to someone. Thoughts and concepts are either true or not. Everything in the bible is true, however not all of it can be taken literally. Some of it should be such as the transfiguration of Jesus Christ and his life and death. Most of the creation story and a great deal of the Old Testament should not be taken literally, rather as a detailed, smaller understanding of a much greater experience. This does not make these stories any less true. They are the truth at the heart of our beliefs, the ideas and concepts that are developed in them are true, the circumstances in which they take place are a way of expressing this truth.
ReplyDeleteAll truth must be the same to some degree or it would not be truth. Perception of the truth can be different between one person a the next but for something to be the truth it must be the same.
~Nicholas Shields
I dont think that the bible was intended to be true when it was created. The stories in it were made to get points across to people and to teach stories. Obviously a lot fo events that happen in the bible would not be able to happen. The bible is filled with stories about miracles which are hard to believe. But you dont want to just throw these stories to the curb becuase they do hold some values. They are intended to teach important lessons about life and that by acting certain ways certain things will occur in return.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that truth can have more than one meaning. Something may either be true or false there is nothing that may lay in between. Although the bible doesn't tell of true stories, the stories may be important to our understanding of our own faith.
--Nicholas Darin
I think that to a degree factors in each of the stories are true but for the most part they are not true. I believe that the Bible is made of stories to teach us lessons. The stories in the Bible are made to teach us things just therefore its really doesn't matter if every detail isn't true what matters is the lesson behind it. What really matters is if the lesson is getting across in the story and I think that the Bible does get its lessons across very well.
ReplyDelete-Courtney Geary
Dei Verbum and the introduction of Karen Armstrong's The Case for God have in common at least one goal. Each, in its own way, works to enlighten humans about how religious truth, including that truth concerning Catholicism, is to be known.
ReplyDeleteThe approach of each does differ slightly, of course. Dei Verbum, literally "On the Word of God," is an official proclamation from Church authority. As such, some knowledge of and faith in the teachings of the Church is necessarily required. Armstrong's introduction, however, makes mention of many faiths and traditions as well as science and psychology. From this, we can gather that her target audience includes more than just Catholics.
How the author of each of these documents goes about explaining his/her thoughts and who that author's audience is relates heavily to the substance of each. Dei Verbum, accordingly, presents everything from the Catholic perspective. And what I mean by that is that Dei Verbum never deviates from traditional Catholic thought. That is, it seems that the ideas presented in Dei Verbum are more restatements than anything else, things that Catholics ought to know. The descriptions in Dei Verbum of how Catholics are to understand scripture and of how revelation, authority and tradition form the foundation of the divine truth are not anything new and are wholly relevant to only Catholics.
On the other hand, and as aforementioned, Armstrong's introduction aims at a wider audience. In fact, she even intends to present entirely new thought. The distinction she makes between the Greek words "logos" and "mythos" is relevant not only to the "believers" but to humanity in general because all of us struggle with the difficulties inherent to the human condition (death, afterlife?, suffering, vice, etc.). Her frankness-she goes so far to say that human religious thought has become primitive, after all-and hopefulness demonstrate that further discussion of religious thought is still necessary, and will always be necessary. As such, her presentation of religious knowing, by drawing from the Greeks and even modern psychologists, places religion in a broader context. Her plan for knowing truth is a pragmatic one; she plans to dispel the conflict people have with religion itself, dealing with the concept of God and truth outside of one particular faith. Since the human mind can conceives but does not necessarily understand certain concepts, among which include God, her introduction makes a foray into the everlasting questions of life.
-Caleb Capozella
I believe that the stories in the Bible are all true but some are to be viewed figuratively rather than literally. If the entire Bible was to be taken literally, a lot of the anecdotes seem unnecessary. If, though, these stories are to be viewed as metaphors, they would be proven useful. Because the Bible was inspired by God, written by Man, the entirety of it is true.
ReplyDeleteI think that all truth is the same, and you cannot derive from the truth and still call it "the truth". Although some of the advice given in the Bible through anecdotes is to not be taken literally but figuratively, it still comes from a true story.
I believe that several stories in the Bible are true. God made the Bible for us to follow in the example of Christians. Therefore, we should take the stories of the Bible figuratively. Karen Armstrong tells us not to take the Bible literally. The Bible was written by humans, which alters some of the truth and stories that were sent by God. All of the stories in the Bible are examples of how Christians should live out their life. They are messages that hold truth to them of what God expects we should be doing on Earth. Not all truth is the same. I believe there is a pure truth and a general truth meaning that something is absolutely right and then something is understood to be by all people.
ReplyDelete-Katelyn Bockin
It seems to me that there is no truly accurate way to describe an event. If there were ten witnesses to the same crime, there would undoubtedly be ten different recountings of what happened. We tend to remember things differently, or pay attention to certain details instead of others. Sometimes the brain even tricks itself into "remembering" things that never really happened or at least didn't happen quite that way.
ReplyDeleteSince the Bible is composed entirely of poems, songs, and stories that convey many different perspectives about the history of the faith and of Jesus' earthly life, it's nearly impossible to say who is right or discern fact from slight distortion or outright fiction. Some contributors may have attempted to give us an exact account of what happened, while other writers may have seen the use of metaphor as the best way to reach their audience.
What we can ultimately take away from the Bible, then, is to not neccessarily take everything at face value. The stories presented in this holy book require us to look more deeply at our own faith, and at how their morals and lessons play out in our daily lives--and not just make a snap judgement about whether they're factually likely or even possible.
--Kat Hermanson
It seems that the views of Karen Armstrong and Pope Paul VI are somewhat similar, despite their very different approaches. Each appeals to different audiences, as Caleb mentioned, but each proclaims a certain truth about the Bible and what it teaches us. I put my faith in what the Holy Father proclaimed in his official document. Karen Amstrong's article makes a nice attempt to explain Christianity and how the Bible is interpreted within it, but the authenticity of Pope Paul VI is unparalleled by far.
ReplyDeleteI personally view the Bible as a compilation of various types of stories, poems, and perhaps a bit more than just “guidelines” for Christians to live by. I agree with Nathaniel’s statement that these stories are (at least somewhat) historically accurate. However, the truths that they convey to us are much more important than the historical verification. There are certain things that we have no way of knowing for certain, but we can put our faith into God’s divine revelation of the truths the stories teach us.
I've always believed that the Bible a sort of anthology of works that originated from the believers of the known world. Some are inspired by God (such as the laws in Leviticus, practical guidelines for health and things that humans didn't have the technology to figure out), some are poems and songs and prayers, such as Psalms, some are myths that must have been exchanged orally for generations, some are letters from the apostles (which makes up a majority of the New Testament) and some are direct and realisitic stories of Jesus and the prophets. For example, the Old Testament is blatantly human, with many sins recorded by people whom we are expected to respect--so we are called to learn from them, but not imitate them completely.
ReplyDeleteIn my own opinion, I believe that the Bible is the story of God and Jesus. It is a support system for many. However, it is up to us to examine our own understanding of the stories through our daily lives.
ReplyDelete