You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Should I Read or Consume Non-Catholic Devotional Or Bible Study Materials?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
F
fermat
Guest
It depends. If you are strong on your faith then you can certain look into other sources. If you are not strong, then stay away.
B
bscastro
Guest
I guess I would focus on Catholic material because there is so much of it, there is a very low chance you can exhaust everything before having to look elsewhere. Just my opinion.
God bless,
Bryan
God bless,
Bryan
J
johnnyc176
Guest
My opinion also. And from what I have read and listened to it is excellent material too.I guess I would focus on Catholic material because there is so much of it, there is a very low chance you can exhaust everything before having to look elsewhere. Just my opinion.
God bless,
Bryan
C
Crumpy
Guest
In its landmark article, “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church” the Pontifical Biblical Commission says that the body of Jewish scripture study is an “asset.”
In “The Jewish People and their Scripture in the Christian Bible” Pope Benedict XVI and the Pont. Bibl. Commission again say that the Church should not ignore centuries of Jewish scholarship on the Bible.
St. Jerome and Martin Luther (for example) learned Hebrew from Jews.
Etc.
The New Jerome Biblical Commentary is a big, expensive book. Deep inside it quotes Vatican documents that say that it’s alright to look at non-Catholic resources, but that we should avoid those with anti-Catholic messages.
The Jews have some strongly worded polemical arguments against the Christian religion. Take for example the American book, Why the Jews Rejected Jesus. That’s not a book to read when your stomach is a little queazy. I got about half-way through it, until I set it aside as being too biased and ridiculous, at that.
There’s a lot of Protestant literature that is decidedly anti-Catholic, but here and there I have found some interesting Biblical information.
I’ve heard the Vatican is a treasury of great Bible information, but a lot of it is out of touch to most of us, because it is in Latin.
In contrast to modern Jewish Bible study, the Talmud and Midrash Bible studies start from the standpoint that the Bible (in this case, the Old Testament) is true. That is a refreshing place to start, wouldn’t you say?
While your average Catholic or Protestant Bible study is focused on whatever translation they prefer, the Jewish Bible studies are often the best when they look at the original languages. For example, the Hebrew word “malakah” is the word that says what is forbidden on the Sabbath. This is most frequently translated (even by Jews) as “servile work” in Catholic Bibles and commentaries, but the fact is, nobody knows what malakah means. how do you like those apples?
The root of the problem is that ancient Hebrew has no vowels, no punctuation, no footnotes, no parenthetical remarks,etc. that we are accustomed to in English (for example). So, they look at a word that is written r-t and they have to figure out if it means root, rot, rut, rat, or something else.
This is quite the joke on Protestants who eschew “tradition” because so much tradition and precedent is required to translate the Bible into English, in the first place. You (and I) take a whole lot for granted when we pick up our English Bibles for “study.”
Modern Jewish Bible study is hard pressed (to itself) to even state what is Jewish about Jewish Bible study, because they consider themselves very open to every form of exegesis (a scientific method of studying the bible) that exists. There is, by the way, no central authority in Judaism, so Jewish bible study materials are anthologies of comments from rabbis who often differ in interpretation. The same lack of central authority exists in islam, by the way.
I’ve read the essays in the (very interesting) Jewish Study Bible and the authors admit that Jewish scholars sidestep anything that is too Christian, like typology. The kabbalists say that the Torah is the incarnation of the word of God – which sounds a lot like something you heard in the New Testament, no? Jewish scripture studies over the centuries were written in Hebrew and Aramaic, so it’s not easy at all to discover what they have to say.
In “The Jewish People and their Scripture in the Christian Bible” Pope Benedict XVI and the Pont. Bibl. Commission again say that the Church should not ignore centuries of Jewish scholarship on the Bible.
St. Jerome and Martin Luther (for example) learned Hebrew from Jews.
Etc.
The New Jerome Biblical Commentary is a big, expensive book. Deep inside it quotes Vatican documents that say that it’s alright to look at non-Catholic resources, but that we should avoid those with anti-Catholic messages.
The Jews have some strongly worded polemical arguments against the Christian religion. Take for example the American book, Why the Jews Rejected Jesus. That’s not a book to read when your stomach is a little queazy. I got about half-way through it, until I set it aside as being too biased and ridiculous, at that.
There’s a lot of Protestant literature that is decidedly anti-Catholic, but here and there I have found some interesting Biblical information.
I’ve heard the Vatican is a treasury of great Bible information, but a lot of it is out of touch to most of us, because it is in Latin.
In contrast to modern Jewish Bible study, the Talmud and Midrash Bible studies start from the standpoint that the Bible (in this case, the Old Testament) is true. That is a refreshing place to start, wouldn’t you say?
While your average Catholic or Protestant Bible study is focused on whatever translation they prefer, the Jewish Bible studies are often the best when they look at the original languages. For example, the Hebrew word “malakah” is the word that says what is forbidden on the Sabbath. This is most frequently translated (even by Jews) as “servile work” in Catholic Bibles and commentaries, but the fact is, nobody knows what malakah means. how do you like those apples?
The root of the problem is that ancient Hebrew has no vowels, no punctuation, no footnotes, no parenthetical remarks,etc. that we are accustomed to in English (for example). So, they look at a word that is written r-t and they have to figure out if it means root, rot, rut, rat, or something else.
This is quite the joke on Protestants who eschew “tradition” because so much tradition and precedent is required to translate the Bible into English, in the first place. You (and I) take a whole lot for granted when we pick up our English Bibles for “study.”
Modern Jewish Bible study is hard pressed (to itself) to even state what is Jewish about Jewish Bible study, because they consider themselves very open to every form of exegesis (a scientific method of studying the bible) that exists. There is, by the way, no central authority in Judaism, so Jewish bible study materials are anthologies of comments from rabbis who often differ in interpretation. The same lack of central authority exists in islam, by the way.
I’ve read the essays in the (very interesting) Jewish Study Bible and the authors admit that Jewish scholars sidestep anything that is too Christian, like typology. The kabbalists say that the Torah is the incarnation of the word of God – which sounds a lot like something you heard in the New Testament, no? Jewish scripture studies over the centuries were written in Hebrew and Aramaic, so it’s not easy at all to discover what they have to say.
J
johnbres2
Guest
The only non-Catholic work I read regularly is “The Collected Works of Oswald Chambers” which is a treasure trove of wonderful, inspired Christian literature.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
How do we know what our Catholic kingdom looks like for real, unless we’ve seen it from both inside and outside?
B
Bible_Reader
Guest
My opinion: if you are interested in academic study and factual issues, then it is fine to consult non-Catholic academic sources. We do not insist, for example, that our dictionaries only be compiled by Catholics; we trust Webster (or your favorite dictionary) even though it had non-Catholic authors.
We read history books written by non-Catholics, and ancient classics written by pagans, and classic literature written by people of all faiths.
Similarly, if you are reading serious academic commentaries, or studying Hebrew or Greek or Latin or Aramaic or Coptic, I think it is find to use non-Catholic authors.
On the other hand, for devotional or theological material, I think it is better to rely on Catholic materials, unless you are conducting a comparative study.
We read history books written by non-Catholics, and ancient classics written by pagans, and classic literature written by people of all faiths.
Similarly, if you are reading serious academic commentaries, or studying Hebrew or Greek or Latin or Aramaic or Coptic, I think it is find to use non-Catholic authors.
On the other hand, for devotional or theological material, I think it is better to rely on Catholic materials, unless you are conducting a comparative study.
G
gubernova
Guest
Excellent:thumbsup:How do we know what our Catholic kingdom looks like for real, unless we’ve seen it from both inside and outside?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.