Who needs it anyway? Accrding to a certain poster, it is historical speculation that errs.

Who, then, told you about Jesus? God? The Holy Spirit? 

Don't go quoting the Bible, it is inapplicable here.

Even if I said I haven't, which I have, what difference does it make to you?

Point out where I have erred in posting Scripture that was innaccurate or not to be taken literally in the "eyes" of the Church, which has now become convenient for your use, I see. And skip the sarcasm remarks, your posts teem with the stuff you so easily point out. 

You should heed your own advice.

Flies are better caught with honey than with vinegar.  I just don't know which one of you is the fly.  

Peace --

There is a wide range of techniques for biblical interpretation that are perfectly orthadox withing the church.

Certainly the bible is a historical work and based on actual historical events.

Certainly the actual historical events occured , and were of intrest to thuch choosen to record, because they had a meaning that was much deepered then what physically occured.

Weather or not everything happened exactly as it is put down is a matter for much speculation , did judas burst open when he fell headlong in a field ( Peters words) or did he hang himself? Both perhapse?

There are valid points of reasonable contention in these things , but please don't devolve into name calling and sarcasim as they are most unproductive.

David -- I learned about Jesus God and the Spirt from the community of faith which I am a part of Known in it's totality as the Roman Catholic Church.  What I learned was Tradition , which paul directs us to hold fast too,  the bible is a significant part of that tradition and was written down to record the most essentail and important parts.  The bible gets it's authority from the church and not the other way around.

The credibility of the church is re-enforced by it's written records just like my diary re-enforces the memory of my own life. 

The bible espcially the NT is a record of real historical events and presents itself as such. That does not preclude also seeing a spiritual meaing to those events.  For instance the parting of the red sea pre-figures baptism.  The less imporant details should be treated as ... well. less imporant... and there is nothing wrong in admitting there are things we find hard to understand.

How old was Jesus when the wise men showed up? The bible doesn't say , but herod killed all childern 2 years and yonger so maybe he was as old as 2.  There are all kinds of questions that remain unresolved?

When did Luke's sensus occure? How does it fit known real history?

How do your resolve the synoptic problem ( there are more then a few very good schools of thought).

 The point is all of these things are perfectly valid to question and until the magistarium makes a final degree on one or the other there is no sin in holding a range of even conflicting opinions because human knowledge is not what saves us.

We should not be unnessarily agressive towards one another because we agree , if we are in mature disagreement.

I am not offended, I know I can be sarcastic, just as I know also that you are capable of the same.

I also know Dei Verbum and many other Church documents.

I'm still waiting for any Scripture that I have posted that is innaccurate or not to be taken literally...

...and are you going to answer the question?

bhokuto, 

Your post interests me. People like to hear testimonies about a spiritual conversion.  Please share more about your background.  Are you in full communion with the Catholic Church?  Were you a member of the Mormon faith or another denomination?  We you involved in a charismatic fundamentalist group?  Please share your story.  I think it would help CE readers to follow your thoughts.  Thank you.

God bless you.

bh,

What is meant by "an altar in your soul?"

My thoughts turn to redemptive suffering.  We can offer to God our daily trials, suffering and disappointments in reparation for our past sins.  Each of us has a daily cross to carry.  God uses our pain to bring us closer to Him.

May the peace of Christ be with you.

I read somewhere about Sancta Sanctorum and I asked a priest what this Latin phrase translated to in English. He said Holy of Holies.  Then I read on.  As I was reading, the Old testament depiction of the Holy of Holies flashed by, and then I stopped reading.  Then I opened the pages in the Old testament referring to the whole setup of the temple.  The three rings outer inner and dead center where the Ark of the Covenant sat with the Mercy seat.  I got a bit carried away and I thought nah it can't be! So I let it go, after awhile it came back and I realized it wasn't me doing the show and tell.  Then God said you have an altar where I belong put Me there.  Eh? I think it's the heart to be honest with you, at first this is what I thought, No it's in the center of your being where I come to dwell.  I got confused because, Revelations says "behold I stand at the door and knock" if you open the door and let me in I will come and dine with you and you with me.  

To expand a bit, when we consume the Host, Christ comes to dwell there on the altar, now how this all breaks down is unknown and I'm sure God will explain it later.

The scriptures show us so much over time as we mature.  Incredible. at the root of the scriptures is God sitting there.  Drilling down into scripture seeing beyond the print. Down to the very core God is smiling saying you found Me now I'll show you what it's all about.  This doesn't seem like it is possible but it is, Moses, Prophets already knew and understood, now we who were not his people share in the mystery.

Maybe you have a better representation? 

Peace

Whiles bhokuto offers some good thoughts to ponder, his words are akin to listening to someone "speaking in tongues."  I guess I'll leave it at that.

Christ is present in the eucharist in many ways.

The standard way of explaining it much deeper then accurate then most people give it credit for.

 The matter ( atoms pieces) of the bread and wine are replaced by the matter of christ body, the aspects ( color , smell, ect) all left as a protection for many who would be weakend by having to eat bloody flesh.

When you take the eucharist you are in more intimate contact with christ then a husband and wife are with one another.  His physical body , which cannot be seperated from his soul, divinit , whole person , enters your body and transforms it.

To All: May I re-direct this post back to its origins.

Garrison sought to stimulate discussion about the Bible by saying that someone on this site - guess who! - regarded Bible as " historical speculation that errs."

Now that is a real conversation starter if I ever heard one.

Let me begin by saying that the Bible is not - nor did I say - an bunch of historical speculation that errs.

But Garrison's comment does focus our attention on the question of the Bible's historicity. Even the term " historicity" is a word with different meanings to different people.

One meaning of historicity especially pertinent to the topic here is the question of video tape truth, I call it. [ There are other more fruitful meanings of the term historicity that might engage us later on, the most important meaning having to do with historical form criticism.] Later.

Back to the "conversation starter " historicity question : This would ask the very simple question of whether a professional video recorder person who had followed and recorded Jesus every day, twenty four hours a day from 30 to 33 A.D. ....what would we have recorded of sight and sound......namely, would we have recorded all the events in the Bible just as they are recorded in the NT? 

If not, try to answer why not and answer what then are the implications for probing the more fundamental question, " Exactly what kind of document is the Bible anyway? "

Perhaps we can start here and see what unfolds in our discussion.