Biblical Interpretation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KephasAugustine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KephasAugustine

Guest
Hi all,

In a homily last night, the pastor of a local parish said that Jesus may not have actually been walking on the water. I believe that He was, and was wondering if both of these interpretations are approved by the Church.

Also, does anybody know where I can find a good, trustworthy, Catholic Biblical interpretation, approved by the Church?

Thanks:)
 
KephasAugustine said:
Hi all,

In a homily last night, the pastor of a local parish said that Jesus may not have actually been walking on the water. I believe that He was, and was wondering if both of these interpretations are approved by the Church.

Also, does anybody know where I can find a good, trustworthy, Catholic Biblical interpretation, approved by the Church?

Thanks:)
Click to expand...
that’s "jesus seminar " do do.Don’t believe everything those self serving bozos publish- apparently some of our pastors have bought the hype!Google scott Hahn and his ignatius Bible study- good solid stuff- orthodox without a doubt and scholarly.To bad your pastor’s missing the whole point of the story and impact it had and has in people’s lives by trying to look avant-garde and in the forefront of “biblical” theology.These people have been refuted soundly by the vast majority of biblical scholars-these guys are really only a small percentage of thought in biblical scholarship- but their big mouths, personal demons, controversial statements, and great marketing skills have blown these guys all out of proportion of their importance.just because a thing is orthodox doesn’t make it backward or dumb-as something liberal doesn’t means it’s right and forward thinking.🙂
 
I heard the well known Dominican biblical scholar Prof. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, say he did not believe Jesus actually walked on water.

The Bible says he did.
 
There are at least a couple places where you can get an understanding of where the controversies like this arise.

Don’t buy, but get your hands on a copy of the New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Read the stuff by the late Fr. Raymond Brown.

In the chapter on official church pronouncements, he observes that there are actually very few official and definitive church pronouncements (interpretations) of scripture.

The volume is one place where he drives his Mack truck through what you think are the officlal, traditional Church interpretations. He creates the void of interpretation into which he simply declares a new day in which people can go ahead and interpret anything they want.

The Church does not have tons of definitive and final interpretations of scripture. Modern historial critical analysis has poked holes in a lot of literal understandings of the bible.

For a well though-out explanation of this intellectual minefield, don’t just read, read and re-read Pope Benedict’s Jesus of Nazareth. He points out that we need historical critical analysis, but we must realize its limitations. It starts out with skepticism in the first place, looking for validation of everything. Benedict points out that we also need faith, when reading the Bible.

The Bible, for sure, will not make sense without faith. You can’t get past the first verse in the Bible without faith.Remember that, and don’t let the skeptics pull the wool over your eyes. Yes, it’s frustrating. Without official church pronouncements, you’re going to hear a lot of junk exegesis. You have to develop a thick skin about this stuff and keep searching for God and the truth. He’s not lost, we are, as the protestants like to say.

I think it was on April 16 of this year, to the Bishops of the U.S. assembled in the crypt chapel of the National Shrine, his Holiness Pope Benedict XVI told them, that it was up to them to assure “authentic teaching at every level of ecclesial life”.

He wouldn’t have come all the way here and said that unless he saw it as a problem and took the first chance to tell this to the bishops.

Benedict will also convene a synod of bishops in Rome in just a couple months to discuss the role of the scripture in the life of the Church. My expectations are high that the Holy Spirit will be guiding the bishops and the Church to make sense of the Bible and give all of us the spiritual nourishment that we need from scripture.

I don’t like it either, but we have to put up with the nonsense even of some priests and bishops even in these modern times.
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church **116 **The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.”

In the literal sense, Jesus walked on water.

And so did St. Peter, the first Pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top