D
Duder
Guest
Hello, I am new to this forum. I searched for this topic all over, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, but with no avail. I could use some help…
I was wondering if anyone could tell me whether or not there is a Catholic Bible that does not have any footnotes or cross-referencing? I have recently begun non-formal (personal) studies in the Bible, and I currently use the one that they gave us for school – The NAB: Fireside Study Edition. While I enjoy reading the Bible to study – footnotes and all – there are times when I don’t feel so gung-ho, and am just looking for strength, or comfort, or whatever it may be. If I choose to read in that way, I still find my eyes going to the asterisks and little letters out of habit.
Is there a good Catholic Bible out there that I can read that is purely textual?
I understand there are issues with interpretation of Scripture. Like I said, I do love to read into the text, as opposed to reading through it. I am a Roman Catholic and do not buy into pure, personal interpretation. However, I would not be using the ‘that’ Bible in the same way as a Bible used for study. I think there is a distinguishing mark in utility.
Thanks!
I was wondering if anyone could tell me whether or not there is a Catholic Bible that does not have any footnotes or cross-referencing? I have recently begun non-formal (personal) studies in the Bible, and I currently use the one that they gave us for school – The NAB: Fireside Study Edition. While I enjoy reading the Bible to study – footnotes and all – there are times when I don’t feel so gung-ho, and am just looking for strength, or comfort, or whatever it may be. If I choose to read in that way, I still find my eyes going to the asterisks and little letters out of habit.
Is there a good Catholic Bible out there that I can read that is purely textual?
I understand there are issues with interpretation of Scripture. Like I said, I do love to read into the text, as opposed to reading through it. I am a Roman Catholic and do not buy into pure, personal interpretation. However, I would not be using the ‘that’ Bible in the same way as a Bible used for study. I think there is a distinguishing mark in utility.
Thanks!