Benno Zuiddam's View of Catholicism and Creationism · First World History · Is Dei Verbum a Young Earth Creationist Document? · Ambiguous Sentence Found · For Those who Do Take Vatican II as a Valid Council
Lower down in Dei Verbum, chapter III, second half of §11 says:
Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings (5) for the sake of salvation. Therefore "all Scripture is divinely inspired and has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, for reformation of manners and discipline in right living, so that the man who belongs to God may be efficient and equipped for good work of every kind" (2 Tim. 3:16-17, Greek text).
Cum ergo omne id, quod auctores inspirati seu hagiographi asserunt, retineri debeat assertum a Spiritu Sancto, inde Scripturae libri veritatem, quam Deus nostrae salutis causa Litteris Sacris consignari voluit, firmiter, fideliter et sine errore docere profitendi sunt (21). Itaque "omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata et utilis ad docendum, ad arguendum, ad corripiendum, ad erudiendum in iustitia: ut perfectus sit homo Dei, ad omne opus bonum instructus" (2 Tim 3,16-17, gr.).
I do not know what "Greek text" refers to, since the quote is the same that I find in the online Vulgate.
So, one interpretation could pretend "the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings (5) for the sake of salvation" (but not other truths with which only human authors were involved).
But this is an interpretation contradicted by "omnis Scriptura" / "all Scripture" which implies : also the parts that were not directly revealed to save us, but are there around the salvific content, like to give certifications on the circumstances of how it was revealed (we don't only need to assert the Bible is inerrant in saying "Jesus rose from the dead", we also need to assert it is inerrant in telling how the disciples of Emmaus walked with him etc.) or, for that matter, giving evidence to the divine omniscience of its ultimate author.
Therefore, the bad interpretation of the paragraph or the quote is even contradicted in immediate context. For those who can read.
However, this unfortunately doesn't mean it is not towted left and right ....
Or at least was, now it is more often heard that by "genre analysis" the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 weren't really meant as literal.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Theodore of Antioch
23.X.2019
Accessed links:
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire