CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - dogmatic theology
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 18th April 2007, 04:43 PM
AI2001
 
Posts: n/a
Default Old v New Testament

I don't want to mangle this/these question(s), but I am not quite sure how to ask it, so here goes:

When it comes to the Bible, does the New Testament make null & void everything that is contained within the Old Testament?

If not, does the New Testament pick and choose what is still 'valid' in the Old Testament?

Or is the Old Testament considered 100% valid by both the New Testament and the RC Church?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 18th April 2007, 05:03 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

When it comes to the Bible, does the New Testament make null & void everything that is contained within the Old Testament?

No. Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to loosen the law or the prophets. I have not come to loosen, but to fulfill." (Mt 5:17)

If not, does the New Testament pick and choose what is still 'valid' in the Old Testament?

All is still valid, except most of the external precepts of the law. But even these external precepts are still valid in what they teach us symbolically, i.e. in their spiritual level of meaning. For example, circumcision is no longer required, but Paul exhorts Christians to have circumcised hearts.

Or is the Old Testament considered 100% valid by both the New Testament and the RC Church?

The OT is still 100% valid, but some of the external rules and ceremonies have been transformed into greater things. It is analogous to water being changed into wine.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 18th April 2007, 05:24 PM
AI2001
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Ron.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 22nd April 2007, 10:21 AM
Justin Angel Justin Angel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Korea
Posts: 163
Cool The Old and the New

Indeed, Ron, like the old wine skins being transformed into new wine skins.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 23rd April 2007, 02:10 AM
Bernie
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
The OT is still 100% valid, but some of the external rules and ceremonies have been transformed into greater things. It is analogous to water being changed into wine.

Ron,
I guess I don't fully understand how to interpret your comments here. How do I interpret such things as the Corban rule in Leviticus against Mat 15:5-6 "But you say, 'Whoever says to father or mother, "Any support you might have had from me is dedicated to God," need not honor his father.' You have nullified the word of God for the sake of your tradition"". To me this doesn't make the OT 100% valid.
We see in Heb 7:12 that "When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well".

Bernie
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 23rd April 2007, 12:47 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie View Post
Ron,
I guess I don't fully understand how to interpret your comments here. How do I interpret such things as the Corban rule in Leviticus against Mat 15:5-6 "But you say, 'Whoever says to father or mother, "Any support you might have had from me is dedicated to God," need not honor his father.' You have nullified the word of God for the sake of your tradition"". To me this doesn't make the OT 100% valid.
We see in Heb 7:12 that "When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well".

Bernie

Leviticus does not instruct anyone to behave in the manner criticized by our Lord. The scribes and Pharisees, in general, misinterpreted and misapplied Scripture.

Certainly the progression from OT to NT is a change. Things in the OT are not nullified or invalid, they are transformed into something better, such as the NT priesthood, which far exceeds the OT priesthood. But, even though certain externals are no longer in force, the meaning of every verse of the OT is still in force. For example, the OT instructs circumcision; the NT tells us be circumcised in your hearts.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 26th April 2007, 03:09 PM
AI2001
 
Posts: n/a
Default So can it be said that...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
...
Certainly the progression from OT to NT is a change. Things in the OT are not nullified or invalid, they are transformed into something better, such as the NT priesthood, which far exceeds the OT priesthood. But, even though certain externals are no longer in force, the meaning of every verse of the OT is still in force. For example, the OT instructs circumcision; the NT tells us be circumcised in your hearts.


So it can be said that Christians are "Jews, The Sequel", can it not?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 29th April 2007, 03:31 AM
ScarFace
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,756
Default TS 2: The Bible is infallible
Both Tradition and Scripture are infallible.

Bible contains no errors on faith, morals, salvation, or any other subject about which the Bible makes an assertion.

"But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred." (Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, n. 20).

"Divine inspiration extends to every part of the Bible without the slightest exception, and that no error can occur in the inspired text...." (Pope Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, n.21)

"...they put forward again the opinion, already often condemned, which asserts that immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters." (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, n. 22).

Pope Pius X published a Syllabus of Errors, in which he condemned the idea that "Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error." (Lamentabili Sane, n. 11).

"everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit" (Vatican II, Dei Verbum, n. 11)

Now I know that it is a popular idea among many theologians and members of the faithful, to narrow the truths of inspiration to only matters pertaining to faith and morals, or only to what is needed for salvation, but such narrowing of the infallibility of the Bible is contrary to the definitive teaching of the Church.

It may at times be difficult to determine what a verse in the Bible is asserting, but one cannot take the position that it is asserting something false. This includes the entire Old Testament, as well as the New Testament. It includes the well-known and well-liked Gospel sayings and also the unpopular teachings of Saint Paul.

Everything asserted by the Bible is being asserted by the Holy Spirit.
All of Sacred Scripture is Christ speaking to us.

The faithful may have some disagreements, within the limits of Church teaching, as to what the proper interpretation of a passage is, but none may assert that the correct interpretation is that the passage teaches a falsehood or a moral error.




28 APR 07

Reply With Quote

Hello Ron,

Couple questions for you. Which Bible are you referring to when you say that the Bible makes no errors on faith, morales etc.....since there are hundreds of versions of the original interpretations of the Bible. I tend to question the authenticity of a certain Bible simply because of the source that interpreted that version from another version and so forth. To me it seems much deception in certain Bibles, where the wording is so twisted there are many different meanings behind one very sentence. Point being, what Bible do you recommend that is easy to understand and is correct in its writings? Thanks.

ScarFace
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 29th April 2007, 12:16 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarFace View Post
Couple questions for you. Which Bible are you referring to when you say that the Bible makes no errors on faith, morales etc.....since there are hundreds of versions of the original interpretations of the Bible. I tend to question the authenticity of a certain Bible simply because of the source that interpreted that version from another version and so forth. To me it seems much deception in certain Bibles, where the wording is so twisted there are many different meanings behind one very sentence. Point being, what Bible do you recommend that is easy to understand and is correct in its writings? Thanks.
ScarFace

Particular editions of the Bible can have errors particular to that edition, such as translation or editing errors, printing or copiest errors. The Bible is not any one edition, it is every edition in every language. The truths of the Bible persist across different editions, despite the particulars of each edition. By comparing various manuscripts and editions, one should be able to determine what is particular to an edition and what is Scripture.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 29th April 2007, 10:50 PM
ScarFace
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bible

29 APR 07

Interesting outlook on the Bible Ron. I have a Douay-Rheims Bible and it is really difficult to understand. What version or type of Bible do you recommend that is easier to understand? Thanks

ScarFace
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.