A question for protestans, Do you read bible commentaries?

[rr1213]

This is true, but doesn’t it also depend on what the time period is we’re speaking of?

France was also on the fringe of the Empire, or course.

Well, the Hugenots were crushed by the King so I suppose the Reformation was ultimately unsuccessful in France, but large portions of the country remained Protestant for many, many years. And France was solidly within the Roman Empire. Remember “All Gaul is divided into three parts…”?

 

[Teflon93]

Well, the Hugenots were crushed by the King so I suppose the Reformation was ultimately unsuccessful in France, but large portions of the country remained Protestant for many, many years. And France was solidly within the Roman Empire. Remember “All Gaul is divided into three parts…”?

I would probably quibble with the “solidly” part—it is relative, and the conquest of Gaul came comparitively late in the history of the Western Empire.

Your point regarding the Huguenots remains; I think the larger point of why the Reformation occurred where it did is still largely explained by recourse to the Roman Empire’s influence.

 

[mapleoak]

in my opinion it may be dangerous to read the bible alone, because many people claim to be guided by the holy ghost even if they completely differ in interpretations with each other.

It is interesting to note that since God is all truth and cannot deceive, this would mean the Holy Ghost cannot possibly be giving individual Bible readers their own personal infallible interpretations. It is reasonable to say that two people reading the very same thing may interpret such very different, in fact even coming to opposite conclusions. If two people come to the opposite conclusion, only one can be right (or both be wrong). The Holy Ghost would have to be deceiving one or both of them.

 

[Teflon93]

It is interesting to note that since God is all truth and cannot deceive, this would mean the Holy Ghost cannot possibly be giving individual Bible readers their own personal infallible interpretations. It is reasonable to say that two people reading the very same thing may interpret such very different, in fact even coming to opposite conclusions. If two people come to the opposite conclusion, only one can be right (or both be wrong). The Holy Ghost would have to be deceiving one or both of them.

Of course, the Devil deceives THEM, while the Holy Spirit enlightens ME.

That’s how The Atomic Church of Me functions.

 

[Janet_S]

I was Protestant for far longer than I’ve been Catholic. . .
The folks who don’t think that you should read commentary are those who believe in an “inductive” approach to Bible study, in which scripture is supposed to be interpreted by each person individually with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Although I don’t agree with this approach, I did like the inductive study Bibles that have wide margins for writing in one’s own commentary. Are there any Catholic Bibles that have wide margins for making notes?. .

I don’t know of any Bibles with wide margins, but you can always use a separate journal.

What you are describing sounds similar to the ancient practice of Lectio Divina (Divine Reading), a method of Scripture reading practiced by monastics since the beginning of the Church. Unlike what you are describing, Lectio Divina does not absolutely discourage the use of Bible commentaries

When we practice Lectio Divina, we are praying the Scriptures. The basic steps of Lectio Divina are reading a small section of Scripture, analyzing (both logically and intuitively) the Scripture, listening to the voice of God, answering God, and, at the conclusion, keeping a written journal.

It takes about 30 minutes for each session.

Here is an article about Lectio Divina:
valyermo.com/ld-art.html

This above article doesn’t mention it, but I was introduced to a method that suggested keeping a journal. The instructions I have are:

“At the conclusion (and not during) of your prayer period you might want to record what happened. Write freely without concern for grammatical structure. Often the Lord will continue to speak with you through your writing.”

 

[Jolly_Joe]

I read commentaries but not a lot. Often the main thing I take from them is the cross references. For instance Wycliffe’s Commentary is very good at cross referencing. For a commentary by itself, I probably like Paul Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary the most. Partly for the reason it is available online and is very easy to check. In addition, he does what some commentaries don’t which is some topics are gone into in more depth.

One commentary I would just love to be able to read better is the Glossa ordinaria. My Latin is just not good enough.

I would just absolutely love to see an English translation done in the same style as the original complete with the apparatus. It is at least of great historical import, having been used over a period of several hundred years as the standard Roman Catholic commentary on the Bible.

Commentaries can be educational, whether or not you agree with them. It’s good to be able to see someone’s reasoning. I don’t read any commentary with the idea that it is the answer to everything. It’s a good way to effectively get discussion when studying by yourself, and a good commentary challenges you a bit. Sometimes the author points out something you did not think of.

So yes, I do read them, but not as an authoritative resource.

Marv

 

[mathematician]

Personally, for the last few years I have been going through a phase of not paying much attention to commentaries, but I have nothing against them in principle, and I have got plenty stacked up on my book shelves.

 

[SyCarl]

I read bible commentaries. While they are not infallible they can help to get a better understanding of Scripture. I presently only have one commentary in hard form but I have a number in E-Sword. I read online as well and find both Catholic and Protestant commentaries useful. I have also been reading commentary by the early church fathers. I am waiting to receive a number of books in the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series recently released by Intervarsity Press.

 

[unacanta]

For every “Protestant” who says this, there are ten others who would encourage you to read commentaries. That’s why Protestants invented Berean Christian Bookstore and Family Christian Bookstore and numerous similar bookstore chains as well as non-chain Christian bookstores.

Invented?? I would suggest the shear demand to know God’s truth placed such a demand that the Christian Bookstores across the nation have opened, rather than were invented. Since the RCC relies on the Teaching Magisterium, it is ah…read one read them all. There is a monopoly by the Magisterium, anything other than their interpretation counts for naught.

Concerning the question. I do read commentary, but again I always weigh them against what scripture is saying and what side of the block the person making the commentary resides.

Blessings,
Len

 

[NotWorthy]

Invented?? I would suggest the shear demand to know God’s truth placed such a demand that the Christian Bookstores across the nation have opened, rather than were invented. Since the RCC relies on the Teaching Magisterium, it is ah…read one read them all. There is a monopoly by the Magisterium, anything other than their interpretation counts for naught.

With this statement, you’ve proven that you haven’t read more than one.