The Catholic Perspective (page 3)

sabastious

BTS, I will respond to your post as soon as I can. Gonna take some time to read through it and contemplate.

-Sab

BurnTheShips

No rush, Seabass. This isn't an attempt to proselytize or bash you on my part.

BTS

Mad Dawg

Do I understand you correctly that you are saying "I don't know what the truth is, but that is not it?"

sabastious

Do I understand you correctly that you are saying "I don't know what the truth is, but that is not it?"

Think of it this way:

The original writer of Adam and Eve wrote the story for a very specific purpose. That purpose is what it is. Just as John Stienbeck's Grapes of Wrath had an original purpose for it's existence. Yet if someone were to interpret the Grapes of Wrath a certain way and punished people severely for not accepting that wrong interpretation it would serve as a disrespect to John Stienbeck and his book.

Calling Adam and Eve a historical record is a lie. The lie can be exposed just as if someone wanted to teach that the Grapes of Wrath was about grapes.

-Sab

bohm

"I don't know what the truth is, but that is not it?" <--- an entirely sound position.

Think of it in this way. If i claimed the universe is a big turd laid by the cosmic pink unicorn, i think it would be entirely logical to dismiss that notion without having a fully established idea of how the universe actually came about.

BurnTheShips

If the account of Adam and Eve is true; then, by definition, it is not a legend or myth.

Myth can be true.

Myths, Lewis told Tolkien, were "lies and therefore worthless, even though breathed through silver."

"No," Tolkien replied. "They are not lies." Far from being lies they were the best way — sometimes the only way — of conveying truths that would otherwise remain inexpressible. We have come from God, Tolkien argued, and inevitably the myths woven by us, though they contain error, reflect a splintered fragment of the true light, the eternal truth that is with God. Myths may be misguided, but they steer however shakily toward the true harbor, whereas materialistic "progress" leads only to the abyss and the power of evil.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/arts/al0107.html

BTS

tec

Sab, I think I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree. Perhaps the word 'disrespectful' is bothering me. Unless someone knows the writer's intent, and knows that the writer would consider it disrespectful that this account is taken literal (if it was not intended to be literal), then no one can say that it is disrespectful.

Only I can say if I find something disrespectful to me. Everything else is speculation.

For example, my son said to me the other day, "get to it, woman". Now, had my mother (who was sitting next to us) been his mother instead of his grandmother, she would have smacked him. I could see that in her eyes. But I knew that my son was being a smartass brat and joking. So I laughed, called him as much, and roughed up his hair. Only he and I can know where we stand in our relationship. Everyone else can only speculate. Which is all you can do regarding the writer of Adam and Eve... since you don't personally know them, or their intent.

Another example: Lets say that modern man did not evolve from Neanderthals. I wouldn't think its disrespectful for others to speculate or even to claim this to be so... I would just think its wrong. No need to take offense.

Tammy

sabastious

Sab, I think I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree. Perhaps the word 'disrespectful' is bothering me. Unless someone knows the writer's intent, and knows that the writer would consider it disrespectful that this account is taken literal (if it was not intended to be literal), then no one can say that it is disrespectful.

We do know the original writer's intent. The Genesis account is an allegory, plain and simple. A brief example of the clear evidence of allegory would be women being made from the rib of man. This is way to symbolize something, if you took that literally you'd have to make other equally absurd leaps in other interpretations of the Bible... and guess what! You end up with a dogmatic organized society similar to what have today with modern day Bible cults.

So, it is disrespectful to what the original writer was doing when writing the Genesis account down. He wrote it down to be interpreted as allegory. So if a group were to tell others it is literal, then that is just jacked up.

I hope I am making sense.

-Sab

sabastious

Only I can say if I find something disrespectful to me. Everything else is speculation.

I agree with most cases.

BUT!

There are "no-brainer" cases of which I can safely assume your values have been compromised.

-Sab

tec

I hope I am making sense.

You're making sense - in the sense that I understand what you're saying. I just think you're wrong. But that doesn't mean I think you're being disrespectful.

Also, I don't know how you can say with authority that it is allegory. You can think that is probable, but how do you say certain with authority? I'm also interested in what other absurd leaps you think would be connected. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. Just curious, since I'm not seeing what you're seeing :)

(and I'm going to see Harry Potter soon... so I'll be back later... excited, and scared at just how bad of a cliffhanger its going to end on, since its a two parter - the movie, not your answer)

Tammy

The Catholic Perspective

Share this