1.

The Bible is the sole source and authority for God’s revelation
Error: Separation from Tradition

Counter-argument:
Biblical Fundamentalists claim that the Bible is the only rule of faith- meaning that it contains all of the materials that one needs
for theology and even, salvation. They firmly hold that the whole of Christian truth is found within the pages of the bible. With
their strong adherence to the principle Scripture alone, Biblical Fundamentalist separates the interpretation of the bible from the
Tradition.

Tradition, which means the act of handing over plays an important role in Church. Biblical Fundamentalists fail to realize that the
New Testament took form within the Christian Church though the act of handing over by the first Disciples of Christ. Although
tradition has authentically evolved and developed in the community of faith, it has always in union with the sacred scripture
through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Thus, the bible and traditions are equally important in living the Christian faith. Vatican II’s Dei Verbum speaks of “a close
connection and communication and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing
from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For Sacred Scripture is the
word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word
of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that
led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more
widely known. Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has
been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of
loyalty and reverence.”

Biblical Fundamentalists often present themselves as a private system of biblical interpretation. Consequently, they are as Anti-
Church for they give little importance to the Church’s traditions which are essentially rooted from the Sacred Scripture such as:
The Creed, doctrines and liturgical practices. Accordingly, they don’t acknowledge the teaching function and essence of the Church
which draws its and inspiration from the sacred scripture.

2. The meaning and teaching of the Bible is self-evident

Error: Literal Interpretation

Counter-argument:
Biblical Fundamentalists tends to employ a very narrow point of view in reading the bible. It literally accepts the reality of an
ancient world, or an out-of-date cosmology, simply because it is written in the bible. Fundamentalists typically consider as
undeniable realities (according to its plain sense) passages such as the Story of Creation, Noah's ark, and the unnaturally long life-
spans of the patriarchs given in genealogies of Genesis. Fundamentalists believe that, unless a passage is clearly intended by the
writer as allegory, poetry, or some other genre, the Bible should be interpreted as literal statements by the author.

Aside from disregarding the importance of “rereadings” on biblical accounts, this method blocks any dialogue with a broader way
of seeing the relationship between culture and faith. It is narrowly bounded to one sided point of translation, whether old or
present-day. It ignores the problems presented by the biblical text in its original Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek form. Besides, it rejects
the etymological essence of the words. Such non-critical reading of the Bible texts leads to the formation of political ideas and
social attitudes that are marked by the prejudices- racism, for example- quite contrary to the Christian Gospel.

The Catechism of the Catholic teaches that in order for one to interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what
the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words. (CCC 109).

Moreover:
“To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." (DV12)

“the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling,
speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is, that truth, is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in
prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression." (CCC110)

The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular
circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (DV 12)
3. Inspiration assures us that the Bible is written with infallible accuracy.
Error: Biblical Inerrancy

Counter-argument:
Biblical Fundamentalists think that the Bible does not merely contain the Word of God, but every word of it, is the direct, immediate
word of God for they treat the biblical text as if it had been dictated word for word by the Holy Spirit. They also place undue stress
upon inerrancy of certain details in the biblical texts, especially in what concerns historical events or supposedly scientific truth. It
often historicizes material- which from the start never claimed to be historical.

Biblical Fundamentalists refuse to admit that the inspired Word of God has been expressed in human language and that this Word
has been expressed, under divine inspiration, by human authors possessed of limited capacities and resources. Accordingly, “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 for the sake of salvation." (DV11)

However, “since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see
clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and
what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.” (DV 12)

Thus, one should keep in mind that "sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was
written." (CCC111)

4. Only factual history is reliable truth

Error: Biblical Infallibility

Counter-argument:
Fundamentalists believe that every word of the Bible is believed to come straight from God, every part is equally valid. To admit
that any part might not be historically reliable is a challenge to the whole.

They fail to recognize that the inspired text has been formulated in language and expression conditioned by the time and culture
in which it was written.

It accepts the literal reality of an ancient, out-of-date cosmology simply because it is found expressed in the Bible; this blocks any
dialogue with a broader way of seeing the relationship between culture and faith.

Genre is the defined as the literary “form” or “category of a text”. The bible contained various literary genres such as History,
Poetry, Genealogies, Wisdom Literature, Proverbs, Prophecy, Prayers/ laments, Didactic Fiction, Myths, Gospel, Letters and
Apocalypse. The writer of a particular genre has a specific intention in mind. Poetry for example expresses experiences in language
designed to evoke emotional response in the reader.

The bible is an account of historical events remembered and recounted in ways that were characteristic in the ancient world. The
Court History books of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles, though based on court records and oftentimes penetrating analysis are seen
in connection with God. Events are interpreted theologically and are not factual. The book of Judges, an example of Folk History
was written to teach virtues. It is an expression of something originating from the people or particular group of people typically
reflecting their lifestyle. The book of Exodus, an Epic History though based on historical events focuses on the historical drama of
the experience rather than the details of events. The Book of Genesis for example is a myth. It does not mean that it is false but
it communicates the truth of the fears, values and principles expressed by the author. Thought it does not account for the scientific
evolution of Creation but it does not mean that it is not true. It still holds a reliable truth for it expresses the intention of the author
to present God as the maker of Creation - both heaven and earth and everything begins in Him.

The Bible does record history, but not scientific history. When we were dealing with the problem of inerrancy, we said that there
were 2 sorts of truth. There are similarly two sorts of historicity; “scientific” historicity, which conforms as closely as possible to
the event considered tin itself and for itself, and “empiric” or popular historicity, which confirms to one aspect of the event
considered from the relative point of view to which the writer confines himself. Scientific historicity has only relative truth: it is
 faced with an absolute it can never achieve. Empiric historicity, if it is to exist at all, must have absolute truth: it is limited by the
author’s own aims and it can and must confine itself to those limits. This is the historicity of the Bible. It contains no scientific
history or history for its own sake, but only history that is used to achieve a higher purpose. The Bible’s inerrancy guarantees the
historicity of the events it records to the precise degree in which the writer intends to support his religious teaching on fact.1 The
Bible, in claiming that a given fact has the divine seal, does not do so in the scientific manner. The only thing that interests the
sacred writer is not how things happened but why. Our concern should be to recapture the deep religious awareness of the
ancients, who saw the hand of God everywhere, and recognized his interventions in the course of ordinary and extraordinary
events. 2

In a nutshell, although the bible presents various genres which are not anchored in scientific factual history, it still remains to
be reliable truth because what was written with a theocentric intention. Biblical writers wrote the history to present His –story
(God’s story) and everything was for God. Thus, not only factual history is reliable truth.

5. Biblical prophecy is meant to speak about events for our day and prepare us for the end of time.
Counter-argument:
Fundamentalists see much of the Bible as a matter of prophecy and fulfilment. They consider it essential to determine how prophecy
is fulfilled through events in the world today. They are not so concerned with trying to understand what the passage might have
meant at the time it was written. This end of the world scenario mapped out by fundamentalists has no foundation in the Bible. It is
based on a literalistic reading of selected verses cut from their context and pasted into a specific script describing current events.

In order to properly interpret the bible, the reader needs to discover the intention of the sacred author. He must take into account
the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating the
current. For it is a fact that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and
poetical texts and in other forms of literary expression.3

Three principles are followed in the interpretation of the bible. These principles are Historical, Critical and (Analytical) Method.
Historical because it deals with the “past” and “old things” but also because it seeks to study the historical processes which give rise
to biblical texts and the communities and generations that received and handed them over to the next. Critical because it operates
with the help of scientific criteria that seek to be as objective as possible. And (Analytical) Method is a way of doing things. It treats
biblical texts as it would other ancient texts and evaluates them as “expressions of human discourse.” In following these principles
the sacred texts are not understood literally and thus letter by letter applying it to the contemporary issues but rather, it is first read
and understood in the context and intention of the sacred author at the time of his writing.

Using the Book of Revelation, “Fundamentalist Christians interpreted many of the symbols as prophecies of imminent gloom and
disaster, but nothing happened!”4 To interpret the book properly, certain principles are followed. First, the literary genre of the book
is an apocalypse. Fidelity to the nature of an apocalypse is essential in interpreting this writing. Second, Revelation emerges from a
time of persecution at the end of the 1st century CE. The interpreter seeks to explain the book and particularly its symbols from the
context of its own world, which is rooted in the traditions of the Hebrew Scriptures and the cultural heritage of the Greco-Roman
world. (e.g. Roman empire is symbolized as beast, white color as a symbol of victory, the eyes as symbol of knowledge, horns as power
and lamb as Christ). Third, Revelation appeals to the imagination of the hearer/reader. Fourth, the book forms a unity, but the sections
within it are to be understood in a parallel way. Fifth, the 2 main divisions reveal the intensity and ever deepening of John’s revelatory
experiences and Sixth, it is rooted in symbols in Hebrew Scriptures and must be interpreted in harmony of the rest of the Scriptures.5

The main theological theme of the book of Revelation is hope. John, the seer, is not preoccupied with a timetable (as so many
interpreters of this book tend to be). Instead, he wishes to communicate that God is ruler of the world and will ultimately overcome
all the forces of evil to establish his kingly rule. This rule will bring to an end the suffering and persecution that God’s people are
experiencing. In offering hope to his hearers/readers, John encourages them to persevere in steadfast adherence to Jesus Christ.
Believers face a stark choice: remain faithful and you will attain a blessed reward; abandon Christ and he will abandon you to the
eternal judgment.6
In summary, Biblical prophecy particularly the Book of Revelation must be read in the context that it had been written and therefore it does not mean that it has to be
literally be interpreted as a preparation of the “end of time” gloom but rather serves as a reminder to hope in the midst of difficult circumstances.

1
Don Celestin Charlier, The Christian Approach to the Bible, trans. Hubert J. Richards and Brendan Peters (The Newman Press: Westminster, Maryland, 1965),
228.
2Ibid., 232.
3 CCC # 110
4 Robert Kugler and Patrick Hartin, An Introduction to the Bible (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: Cambridge, 2009), 512.
5 Ibid., 521-522.
6 Ibid.
6. The bible offers secure and certain answers in the midst of life’s complexities.

Counter-argument:
The fundamentalists believe that the bible offers an emotional comfort to help people cope with the ambiguities and confusing choices
offered by today’s world. The Bible is a comprehensive answer that contains all that is necessary for living the life that God wants.

“The orientation necessary for living from the Bible; the Bible is a book of doctrine, not a manual of devotions; a message of love, not
a dogmatic treatise; a book for meditation, not a collection of recipes; a source of prayer, not a collection of prayers.” 7

The bible is not a manual of devotion, but a book of doctrine. It knows nothing of our need for personal stimuli, “ardent
considerations..” The only prompting it knows is that of truth, the only love it feels is that which lies at the heart of truth. It abhors
falsehood and will brook no compromise. It springs from love and leads to love. It is not treated as a thesaurus of practical advice.
There is no quick solution to be found here: the bible requires patience. It does not yield all its secrets at a single reading, but yields
only to those who surrender themselves. The Bible demands that it be received as God made it, in the humility of the letter, otherwise
it will remain a closed book.8 It is an invitation to technical study and loving contemplation, to textual criticism and theological
reflection, to philological investigation and profound faith. All these human approaches must be consecrated and put at the disposal
of the Spirit.9

Therefore, what one must look for in the Bible is a Light and a Spirit. Intellectual effort is required, but this does not make it into a
textbook of science and history. Its claim is to lead us to divine truth, not to be the immediate source of faith, still less to be the only
sacrament of our return to God. It does not implant these mysteries in us, but rather encourages their roots to strike deeper, their
flower to grow and their fruit to ripen. 10

7Charlier, 242.
8 Ibid., 245.
9 Ibid., 246.
10 Ibid., 247.