Myth vs. Reality

The Holy script has been dubbed as the all-time bestseller and most widely read book, with 2 billion printed copies around the world. It is composed of a disposition of ancient manuscripts that served as basis for any(prenominal) of the worlds religions. The out of date Testament (OT) of the leger has twenty-four books written in Hebraic (except for a few releaoceanges in Aramaic) and is often called the Masoretic text. At the time of Reformation, the Hebrew books were rearranged and some were divided and so became thirty-nine in all. Roman Catholics, same Protestants, divide the argueion into an Old and a sore Testament.The Roman Catholic Old Testament (OT) contains 46 books (most of them from the Hebrew sacred scripture). Some are called approved or authoritative others deutero fundamentonical, secondary, entirely nonetheless(prenominal) authoritative. Protestants term the deutero finishonical books The Apocrypha and consider them to be away(p) the Canon of Scriptur e. For its Old Testament, Catholics follow the list of books included in the Septuagint, a Greek version that was the lineage of the Latin Vulgate translation. The following map lists the agreements and differences amidst the order and content of the books of the Hebrew Scripture among Jews, Catholics, and Protestants.Some Eastern Orthodox communities include 1 Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and 3 Maccabees as fragment of their Old Testament fannyon. Catholics and Protestants are in virtual agreement on the 27 books of the New Testament (Flinn, 2007). No doubt, the Holy Bible is the introduction umteen religious doctrines. In fact, the Bible is constantly studied to entrust clerics not just with the basis of his doctrine but to a fault with an dateless repertoire of examples which served to illustrate their positions. Since the Bible contains both diachronic and literary texts, many people have their own interpretation of what they read in the Bible.Not to menti on, the Bible has been translated many times from Hebrew and Aramaic to Latin to present-day languages. In view of the discrepancies in interpretation and translation, the veracity of what has been written is constantly debated by many religious pundits. Are words written in the Bible legality or is just a collection of ancient myths? How can people detect truth in the Bible? In this paper, we will try to delve deep into the veracity and authority of the Bible as a factual source of historical and religious events. Baring the loyalty in the BibleIn an article, Bob George (2005) proclaimed that the Bible is the only source of truth about Jesus Christ and immortal. He argued that Christianity is root in historical truth because the Bible presents objective, concrete factsnot fanciful tales or mythical legends. George (2005) proved that persons, places, and times has factual basis. For example, he said that when Caesar Augustus was governor of Syria (Luke 22) he ordered a census of the empire, so Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem (Luke 24).John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ, began his ministry in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 31). All these events can be traced bandaging with historical data available. Trembath (1987) agreed by citing theologian John Warwick capital of Alabama as he presented a deductivist historiography according to which the truth of the Bible can be inferred from the historical accuracy of the gospel authors in recording the manner of Jesus. Another theologian Edward John Carnell understood that the inspiration of Bible is what accounts for its systematic consistency of the Bible.For Carnell, the truth of the Bible rests on the fact that it is Gods rendering of both logic and history (Trembath 1987, p. 9). The Bible is a miscellany of genres story, history, law, prophecy, song, poetry, and letters, make up a religious encyclopedia which has for centuries been a prime source of reading finishedout the world. The different genres of the Bible tended to make it into a historical, homosexuale document whose truths might be relative rather than absolute. This is why some enlightened scholars began to interpret biblical language as symbol or allegory.They assumed that although the literal meaning of biblical stories might be rooted in historical scene, these stories nevertheless conveyed deeper universal truths. However, biblical inspiration has sometimes been misunderstood as simply synonymous with inerrancy or immunity from hallucinationa view that creates impossible difficulties for those who cherish the Bible. One should prefer to discuss truth rather than immunity from phantasm and, even more importantly, estimate that truth is a result or consequence of inspiration.Despite a robotic view of inspiration that highlighted the role of the Holy Spirit as dealer author and hardly allowed for the sacred writers being genuine huma n authors. This is why, pope Leo XIII in his 1893 encyclical letter Providentissimus Deus clarified the distinction between biblical inspiration and truth the Bible is inspired, and therefore it is true (Ocollins & Farrugia 2005, p. 111). Defending Inconsistencies It cannot be denied that errors and inconsistencies can be found in the Bible. Like for instance, the account of the worlds creation being ideal in a week (Gen.1 1-2 3) looks incompatible with the findings of cosmogony and the theory of evolution. The psalm and other OT books reflect in places the view that the earth is a tied(p) disc and the sky above is a solid vault back up by columns at the ends of the earth. Add too the fact the Bible gives us conflicting accounts of the same episode. How did the Israelites elude their Egyptian pursuers? In describing the escape through the Red Sea, Exodus 14-15 offers three versions. Moses stretched out his hand and &8212 as in the Cecil B. de Mille movie depicted &8212 the w aters piled up like walls to let the Israelites pass through.Then the waters flooded back over the Egyptians (Exod. 14 16, 21, 22, 27, 28). In a second version, an east wind proved decisive. It dried up the sea for the Israelites, while the Egyptian chariots got stuck. Then God stopped the Egyptians with a regard and threw them into the sea (Exod. 14 21, 25-6). Finally, an angel of the Lord and the column of cloud no longer went in front of the Israelites, but behind them. As a result the pursuing Egyptians could no longer take hold of their quarry, who thus gayly escaped (Exod. 14 19-20). Then who killed GoliathDavid or Elhanan (1 Sam.17 2 Sam. 21 19)? Did the site of the Jerusalem Temple cost David 50 shekels of liquid or 600 shekels of gold (2 Sam. 24 24 1 Chr. 21 25)? In short, factual inconsistencies and errors of a historical, geographical, and scientific nature turn up frequently in the scriptures. Faced with such evident factual, moral, and religious errors, OCollins and Farrugia (2005) explained the biblical truth in recalling three interconnected points the intentions of the sacred authors, their presuppositions, and their modes of expression.Thus, the authors of the opening chapters of Genesis could be defended. They intended to teach a event of religious truths about the power and goodness of the Creator God, about the sinning of human beings, and so forth they did not intend to teach some doctrine of cosmogony and cosmology. They simply did not aim to describe coherently and in scientific detail the origins of the universe, our earth, and the human race. In recalling the second feeler of Jesus, Paul did not intend to communicate a timetable of its arrival but to encourage a full and urgent commitment to Christian animation.In sum, it is cheating(prenominal) to accuse biblical or any other writers of falling into error by ignoring the difference between the points they really wished to communicate and those that lay outside any such intent ions. Second, OCollins and Farrugia (2005) justified that some biblical authors show that they shared with their contemporaries certain false notions about cosmology and astronomy. But, their acceptance of a flat earth, for instance, remained at the level of their presuppositions it was not the tooth root of their direct teaching.The Bible was not artificially protected against geographical, cosmological, and astronomical errors to be found in the presuppositions of the sacred authors. Similarly the view that genuine human life ends at destruction formed a presupposition for the drama of stock and not the direct teaching of that book. At a time when death was believed to end all, how could an innocent person interpret and cope with massive pathetic? Job did not debate with his friends whether or not there is life after death, but whether undeserved suffering can be conciliate with the existence of an all-good and all-powerful God.Third, OCollins and Farrugia (2005) cited Pope P ius XIIs1943 encyclical letter that pointed out how alleged errors are often simply no more than legitimate modes of expression used by biblical writers In many cases in which the sacred authors are accused of some historical inaccuracy or some inexact recording of certain events, on interrogative it turns out to be nothing else than those customary forms of expression or register style which were current among people of that time, and were in fact quite legally and commonly used (OCollins and Farrugia 2005, p.113). Conclusion Bishop J. W. Colenso wrote that he did not see any conflict between divine revelation and human reason, and the Bible had to be approached scientifically and logically. Colenso assumed that scientific reasoning is privileged, not in opposition to Gods revelation but as itself a gift of God. Thus, it depends on the reader of the Bible is back up to employ whatever resources are available &8212 mathematical skills, history, philosophy and relative religious texts, in the firm belief that truth is one and belongs to God (Sugirtharajah 2001, p.144). In detecting the truth in the Bible, we should take into consideration context in which biblical language had been spoken. It was recognized that the meaning of words or stories might depend on the broader cultural environment in which a given text had been produced. Furthermore, it was supposed that meanings might have been lost or blurred in the course of history as cultures changed to make them less apparent. Finally, we should all remember that truth is subjective.When semantic, systemic, logical or empirical truths fuck off into conflict, theorists urge that we believe that truth as such has no cognitive valuethat we literally should not care whether our beliefs are true or false, but only whether they enable us to achieve more crucial goals such as happiness and well-being. Thus, we should believe that the Bible speaks the truth because it can serve as our moral and spiritual guide t o attain a spiritually sound and happy life. References Flinn, F. K. (2007). The Bible. Encyclopedia of Catholicism, Encyclopedia of World Religions. New York Facts On File, Inc.George, B. (2005). Conservative Christianity Is a scriptural Relationship with God. In M. E. Williams (Ed. ), opponent Viewpoints Constructing a Life Philosophy. San Diego Greenhaven Press. OCollins, G. & Farrugia, M. (2003). Catholicism The Story of Catholic Christianity. Oxford Oxford University Press. Sugirtharajah, R. S. (2001). Bible in the Third World Precolonial, Colonial, Postcolonial Encounters. Port Chester, NY Cambridge University Press. Trembath, K. R. (1987). Evangelical Theories of Biblical Inspiration A Review and Proposal. Cary, NC Oxford University Press, Inc.