Commentary on the Bible/Bible Study Guide

[NoelFitz]

I recommended the Collegeville Bible Commentary and gave a web site that seems faulty.

If you are interested would you like to either do a web search for the Collegeville Bible Commentary or, alternatively, find out about the commentary in Amazon?

I am new to Catholic Answers and have not yet found out how to contribute effectively.

God bless,

NoelFitz.

 

[Cranch]

Would you like to com sider the Collegeville Bible Commentary…

Unfortunately, the link doesn’t work…

I recommended the Collegeville Bible Commentary and gave a web site that seems faulty.

If you are interested would you like to either do a web search for the Collegeville Bible Commentary or, alternatively, find out about the commentary in Amazon…

Try here. This commentary is based on the NAB and uses it for scripture quotations. Nine of the many authors were editors or contributors to the NAB itself. I own a copy of this commentary and consider it to be problematic. It uses all the favorite techniques of modern (and somewhat liberal) biblical scholarship which, for me, sometimes seems to leave faith out of the equation.

 

[NoelFitz]

Try here. This commentary is based on the NAB and uses it for scripture quotations. Nine of the many authors were editors or contributors to the NAB itself. I own a copy of this commentary and consider it to be problematic. It uses all the favorite techniques of modern (and somewhat liberal) biblical scholarship which, for me, sometimes seems to leave faith out of the equation.

I am finding my feet here.

Is CA critical of modern scholarship?

I am trying to read the Pope’s “Jesus of Nazareth”. To me the Pope is a modern scholar of the first rank. He is not negative about modern developments. He is very up to date concerning contemporary studies and is not an enemy of recent scholarship.

The Pope notes that the historical-critical method “had been in use in Catholic theology ever since the door was opened for it by the encyclical *Divino Afflante Spiritu” *in 1943 (p xiv).

How much freedom is given to participants here to discuss the Bible freely?

God bless,

NoelFitz

PS: I have *The Navarre Bible New Testament Compact Edition *in one volume. This may be adequate if funds are limited. NF.

 

[Cranch]

I am finding my feet here.

Is CA critical of modern scholarship?

I am trying to read the Pope’s “Jesus of Nazareth”. To me the Pope is a modern scholar of the first rank. He is not negative about modern developments. He is very up to date concerning contemporary studies and is not an enemy of recent scholarship.

The Pope notes that the historical-critical method “had been in use in Catholic theology ever since the door was opened for it by the encyclical *Divino Afflante Spiritu” *in 1943 (p xiv).

How much freedom is given to participants here to discuss the Bible freely?

God bless,

NoelFitz

PS: I have *The Navarre Bible New Testament Compact Edition *in one volume. This may be adequate if funds are limited. NF.

Welcome to CAF, NoelFitz. You will note that my post expresses my opinion. I can’t speak for CA but the contributors to these forums are certainly not of a single mindset. The only rules are outlined here. I’m sure you will agree they allow for free and wide-ranging discussion.

Am I critical of modern biblical scholarship? Sometimes. Like for instance when the creators of the NAB footnotes say that Matthew was probably the author of half of the Sermon on the Mount (footnote 3, Matthew chapter 5, New American Bible).

 

[Nyika]

I am concerned about Matthew Henry’s Bible Commentary on John 2v1-11.
I would appreciate a catholic interpretation of this passage.

 

[Nyika]

I do not see why some interested in a college book would want an NAB commentary. I would not recommend the second book, since someone reading at college level would probably find the NAB bland and pedestrian. The RSV is a much better translation. Besides, if the OP has read Matthew Henry’s Commentary, he should have no problem with an RSV commentary. Henry’s Commentary is based on the KJV, which is much more difficult to read than the RSV.

From the Catholic perspective,what do you think of Matthew Henry’s Bible Commentary on John2 v1-11?

 

[loydemello]

The best guide for Catholics is the New Jerome Biblical Commentary. You can get it at Amazon.com it’s about $ 50 or $ 60.

The best Bible for Catholics is the Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition. You can get it from Ignatius Press for about $ 40.

Make sure you get the “Second” edition, as it has removed all of the
“thees” and “thous” and is a much easier read. But it is very orthodox and true to Catholic teaching which is not necessarily true for the New American Bible or the Jerusalem Bible.

I am trying to get hold of the 3rd edition or later of NJBC in Canada. Can anyone suggest where I can get one?

Loy de Mello

PS ) reply to: :loydemello@yahoo.ca

 

[Nyika]

Thank you everybody that helped with my query concerning advice on recommended Catholic Commentaries on the Bible.

 

[irenaeuslyons]

My signature link below has a good one that is very easy to use. It has fully embedded commentary, cross referencing, concordance, images, etc.

I would stay clear of Henry or any other protestant commentary. The best commentary is found in the Church Fathers of the first couple of hundred years AD. Their homilies, lectures , apologies, catechisms, liturgies, iconography, etc.

 

[Nyika]

Really like the quote by C.S. Lewis !

 

[Nyika]

Thank you also (iranaeuslyons) for credo bible study link. This is most interesting and helpful!