The Two Ways to Read the Bible
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.พ. 2023
- SOCIAL MEDIA:
Newsletter: breakinginthehabit.org/newsle...
Facebook: goo.gl/UoeKWy
Twitter: goo.gl/oQs6ck
Instagram: goo.gl/ShMbhH
Podcast: goo.gl/xqkssG
INTERESTED IN BECOMING A FRIAR?
Holy Name Province: goo.gl/MXKb2R
Find your Vocation Director: goo.gl/2Jc52z
SUPPORT THE MISSION
Order my books: amzn.to/386QDpR
Donate Monthly: goo.gl/UrrwNC
One-time gifts: goo.gl/eKnFJN
MUSIC
Epidemicsound.com
We have to remember that the Bible is NOT a book - it is a library containing a collection of writings from history to poetry to symbolic.
@@ayybeealternative1999 Poetry and all art really touches on morbid topics.
@@ayybeealternative1999My guess is you don't read much poetry...
@@mellieg.7543 in your dirty mind, only
@@ayybeealternative1999 A text without a context is a pretext. Read the whole Psalm. This verse is not a command, it is rather a prediction of the consequences that befell Babylon as a result of their actions.
@@ayybeealternative1999 Fair point. That being said that line has been used by evangelical atheists for some time. Suggest reading that passage with NABRE’s commentary. It doesn’t make it less dark of a line but the more you know right
Before my conversion, I was raised a Southern Baptist. I left the Baptists when I was 18, but did not convert to Catholicism until I was 48.
During those thirty years, I attended a variety of Christian churches, without considering myself a member of a particular denomination.
One thing I have found about Protestants, especially the more fundamental variety, is this.
Many have no interest in deeper theological understanding or historical context. In fact, I have found many to be hostile to the concept.
I never saw the parallel with the Good Samaritan and Jesus. What a beautiful interpretation. Thank you for sharing.
My dear brother in Christ, I am so grateful to have found your videos. Originally introduced to you in "Upon Friar Review", realised you have a. broader TH-cam presence. As a non-Catholic believer, I love the exposure to what and how my Catholic brothers believe. I've learned a lot from you, and set aside a lot of my inaccurate preconceptions about Church history, becoming much more comfortable with ALL my Christian family, Protestant or Catholic. Love and blessings.
Had never heard Augustine’s interpretation of the Good Samaritan. That was amazing.
WOW!
Yet again this evangelical minister is blown away by your work. This is an excellent explanation of how to properly interpret God's Word.
The Catholic Church does not interpret the Bible. She explains it as the Lord did on their way to Emmaus
@@dvdortiz9031 So you disagree with Fr. Casey? Do you not think that your priests and deacons are not taught these principles of Biblical interpretation? Do you actually think that every Catholic theologian agrees on the interpretation of every Biblical text? Do you not think that Catholics need to know how to read and understand their Bibles?
Finally, do you really think that God did such a poor job of producing his WORD that it is impossible for us to understand the essential truths communicated in it without the Church?
@@vincewarde Who determines what are the “essential” tenets of the faith? Is baptism salvific? Is Christ present in Holy Communion? If so, how? How do we know which books are to be considered Sacred Scripture? How exactly is someone “saved”? Rhetorical questions, but seriously, if the church is unnecessary in determining essential matters such as these, then why is there so much disagreement between Protestant sects concerning them? If a person disagrees on an “essential”, then what? They find a new denomination that caters to their presumably erroneous tenets? Is this really what Christ intended? Was he incapable of creating a lasting institution that would guard the truth through time?
Acts 8:30-31
Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone instructs me?” So he invited Philip to get in and sit with him.
1 Tim 3:15
But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
Not looking to debate, just tossing some of the stuff that hit me in the face during my examination of which church to go to after attending various denominations then moving across the state. Gotta get back to watching the kids.
@@sharfshutze75 First I appreciate your spirit.... and I hope I can reply in the same way....
"Who determines what are the “essential” tenets of the faith?"
I believe that the Bible is completely clear on these matters, as does, in reality, the Catholic Church. That is why the Catholic Church recognizes some groups outside it's organization as Christian, while others are not. I think we can agree that things such as the Deity of Christ, including His virgin birth, His death upon the Cross for our sins, His literal resurrection and His certain coming again are so clear in Scripture as to be impossible to miss.
"Is baptism salvific?"
Not without faith (hence Catholic confirmation). I would say that the Scriptures are clear: Believers are to be baptized. I would even go so far as to say that baptism is a sacrament that seals salvation. However, there are examples - which are not normative - of people being saved without baptism. The early church faced the issue of martyrs who had not yet been baptized and decided that they were baptized in their own blood....
"Is Christ present in Holy Communion?"
Yes!!!!
"If so, how?"
Supernaturally and really.
"How do we know which books are to be considered Sacred Scripture?"
By the evidence - including the witness of the early church. Ultimately, this resulted in the canon.
"How exactly is someone “saved”?"
By faith in Christ, which results in repentance, baptism and a transformed life.
"Rhetorical questions, but seriously, if the church is unnecessary in determining essential matters such as these, then why is there so much disagreement between Protestant sects concerning them?"
As a Wesleyan, I would never say that church tradition is unnecessary. I would say that it must be subject to Scripture. The collective wisdom of the church through the ages cannot and should not be ignored.
"If a person disagrees on an “essential”, then what? They find a new denomination that caters to their presumably erroneous tenets? Is this really what Christ intended? Was he incapable of creating a lasting institution that would guard the truth through time?"
In reality, the differences in evangelical groups are mostly about non-essentials. There is no disagreement between Baptists and Pentecostals about how one is saved. Why? Simple: The Bible is clear about this.....
In closing, let me say that I frequently defend my Catholic brother and sisters. I know that people somehow miss the Gospel in Catholic Churches - but they must be blinded, because I see it clearly every time I visit. I'm sure that some miss the Gospel in evangelical churches and find it in the Catholic Church - I know this because it happened to two of my aunts....
May God bless you!
Vince
^false teacher
Growing up Catholic, we were never encouraged to read the Bible. I finally did it in 2021 with Father Mike Schmitz and the Bible in a Year. He is also a really good teacher who explains the readings of day. I’m now going through it again for the third year! This year Father Mike is also doing the Catechism in a Year. I highly recommend both!
Where did you grow up, brother? 'Cause, I have to say, Catholicism encourage people to read the Bible, just not to interpret it on their own, though [which you may be confusing?]
But it definitively encourage people to study it properly, in qualified Bible reading groups and Pastoral groups and so on, and in every single mass there are readings of the Bible too [including always one of the Gospels], which the priest [or other proper minister] always explains.
Whatever the case, I'm glad you are enjoying your reading now!
I would of never understood..now I do with interpretation. Scripture, tradition, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Father Mike..bless him!
Catholic school (way back in the early 60's), we DID read and study the Bible. There were people who discouraged it, but they were a minority, at least 20th century onwards.
So glad that the Catholicism in focus is back!
God bless you, Fr. Casey will keep you in my prayers.
So grateful to have found this wonderful channel. May the Lord bless all those who seek after Him.
What a gift you are Father Casey!
Such an important video. Thank you, Father Casey.
Thank you Father Casey 😊
This was an amazing lesson, Fr. Casey... so very well explained. Thank you!
Dear Father Casey, You honor me today with this video. The fresco you show at 6:38 is The Good samaritan as you know. It is painted in the St Bavo Cathedral in Haarlem, The Netherlands. The Artist who made it long time ago worked from the 1920's until his dead in 1975 for the diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam in The Netherlands. I know I am completely off topic, but why am I honored? The Artist name was Han Bijvoet and he is my grandfather (fathers side). Seeing one of his Fresco's in your video was very emotional for me. It is painted above the door of the sacristy. Thank you Father Casey. I hope you will react to this comment. Because I was touched by this. I follow you here from The Netherlands, because besides the Bishop and priests here, you are very inspirational.
Awesome video as always!!
Brilliant and informative! Father Casey you are a great teacher!
Thank you Father Casey!
I trust that you will have a great day.
Thank you for this
I love these videos!!!
Your doing a very great job god bless you ✝️🇬🇧
wonderfully made...content is precise and presentation is excellent...glad to see catholicism in focus back in action.
Thank you for clarifying Father!
On point as always, Fr Casey Cole.. Lovely
Many thanks Father Casey!
Very useful and interesting.
GeraPhoto - Casey? He has a title. It is Father. He is a Priest. It is disrespectful to Jesus and to Fr Casey not to use Fr to address His chosen and ordained Priest. It is Fr Casey.
@@Anon.5216 ok, ok, sorry..
Thanks Fr.
I think, this is a good content. And help me to understanding how to read a Bible. Bible make me closer to God.
Thank you Father
Hi Father Casey, I love your work on this platform, and enjoy your explanations of various topics.
I was wondering if you could possibly do a video on Liberation Theology in Latin America? I have been reading up on it recently for some university work, and I feel like it would be of some benefit to have a down-to-earth discussion and explanation of the movement
Very interesting!I fo appreciate your explications
Thanks Father 😇
Your videos have helped me a lot and my girlfriend who’s in RCIA
as always, what a blessing to have you produce these videos! Christ brought the lost spiritual aspect into our faith (I consider Christianity a progression from Judaism), and yet I fear we keep losing it. God has graced us with three consecutive Popes who have emphasized this, and I fear that we forget that the Bible is alive. Especially in the spiritual sense. We keep looking for codes and rules and aspects of it to fit our viewpoints (easily could do so). Whereas I always found it as a very elaborate love letter from God. Poetic, dramatic, thrilling, frightfully awe-inspiring all at the same time. And in a very real way the multitude of saints (known and unknown) continue to add to the Bible like these great sermons from Fr. Casey.
Amazing!
watched the funny facts and chose this for my second (third actually also the rapture one) your sister in the faith thanks you
Very important to remember the two authors.
good information
Amen!! 🙏
Fra Casey good guidelines ❤❤❤ it
Father Casey, you taught me a new word today: anagogical. Thank you for making this video.
Thanks from Eire 🇮🇪☘️👍🙏you
Thanks father tell about bible ✝️🙏❤️🔥
All right - you win, Father Casey . 🙂
Pray for me father, a sinner from Portugal that loves your videos, Sorry my bad English. May Our Lady of Fatima bless you
Still planning on reading the bible. I'll keep these words in mind, going forward.
Perhaps a bibliography or source notes, next time? But great show, overall.
I want to say is thank you I wasn't religious or even understood Christianity but after watching you on TH-cam I'm starting to understand it.
I'm starting to feel like this is the religion for me it just feels right started watching The Chosen I don't know if the shows accurate but there was an episode where Mary was going to throw herself off a cliff she saw a dove and she followed it to jesus.
I feel like you led me to Jesus sorry for the lengthy just wanted to get off my chest..
Lol. I'm still on Joshua 😭 now I gotta read spiritually
Thanks fr. Casey I'm a brazilian, lay, but member of a catholic congregation, Instituto Nova Jerusalém, and we have the carism of biblical studies and contemplation. It would be more easy tô understand the Bible if every cristian knows about the methods of learning it.
Thanks a lot.
É uma pena mesmo que muita gente é biblicalmente literalista demais
As long as we recognize that the Bible is divinely inspired yet handled by fallible humans for a few thousand years. People make mistakes yet the story isn't affected.
God created the entire universe with ease, but needed humans to help him write a book.
In reality, today we have a text much closer to the original than were have had since the time of the Apostles and the early church. All modern translations, including those does by and with our Catholic brothers and sisters, are based on Greek and Hebrew texts that are literally thousands of years closer to the originals than translations done before about 1875.
@@vincewarde Would've been nice if God fix that early on.
Obviously you are a heretic protestant!! By the way, only the Church can declare someone heretic, apostate, scizsmatic
@vincewarde sorry, you came kind of too late in the game. The Bible is a Catholic book made by the Church in 382AD!!!
Thank you so much, i had been bothered for awhile with the old testament passages where God seemed warlike and violent, everything makes more sense now 😊
Thanks for this! The typological, tropological & analogical exegesis of Scripture furnishes the fruitful and delightful meditation of the Rosary Mysteries.
The ram caught in the thorns that Abraham sacrifices instead of Isaac has also been interpreted as a type of Christ, crowned with thorns in the Passion (3rd Sorrowful Mystery). Unlike Isaac, the ram was indeed immolated by Abraham. The Father's love for fallen man compelled Him to make the sacrifice Abraham did not make.
good video
The bible is the word of God telling us to repent, put our faith in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ alone for salvation.
Hello Fr. Casey. You mentioned in one of your videos that you fast twice a week. May I know what kind of fasting do you do?
Hi friar Casey if you don't mind could you please say a prayer for me im going through some struggles right now
As a respectful Lutheran I can pick several nits with how Father Casey presents this... (Hey, I'm Lutheran! We pick nits! Read your history on that! :) )
That said this is a fair presentation of how one can/might/should read scripture. What I may debate with Father Casey is less important, in my mind, than the overall truth I believe he is presenting.
Thank you, Father Casey, for doing this and all you do to further the Kingdom of God. Be well. I hope that someday we can meet over a cup of coffee and discuss these matters in full.
The Catholic Church is guided by the Holy Spirit who dwells in her since 33AD. Guides, protects; defends her, and leads her to all Truth as the Lord promised initially!!!
Human nature is timeless and universal.
❤
I find this timing interesting because I was wondering what translation to pick
Before choosing a translation, you should consider the underlying Greek text and the method of translation. Obviously, if you are Catholic, you will want a translation approved by the Church.
Nearly all translations done in recent years use the same Greek and Hebrew texts that give highest weight to the earliest manuscripts - the exception being the New King James.
As for translation method, we must first recognize that some degree of interpretation is always need to produce a readable translation. However, you should have an idea of just how much is used in your translation. For instance, the ESV and NASB are examples of translations that try to be as literal as possible. The NIV and NLT are examples of Bibles that try to be as readable as possible.
This principle is perhaps seen most clearly when it comes to idioms. The ESV and NASB would translate the idiom literally and leave it to the reader to figure out what the idiom means (such as the "raining cats and dogs" example Father Casey used). In contrast, the NIV and NLT will likely interpret the idiom for the reader - which is likely a more accurate translation.
One more important point: Never use a translation done by one person. Nearly all translations are done by committees of scholars - today often including Catholics and Protestants. If everyone on the NT or OT committee cannot agree that a verse is being translated correctly, the minority version will appear as a footnote.
Finally, for deep study, it's always a good idea to read the verses in more than one translation. As an evangelical Protestant, my go to versions are the NIV and NASB - one more and less literal. If you are Catholic, I am sure you can find a couple of approved translations to use.
The NABRE (2011) is very very very good. It has a more poetic ring to it than the NRSV or RSV.
@@cinnamondan4984 It certainly appears to be. A quick check of the underlying Greek indicates that they are using the same Greek text as the ESV, NIV, NASB and NLT. It's translation method leans heavily towards literal, so it certainly fills that bill for Catholics, since it is approved by the Church.
I take it that you are Catholic, what do you recommend to fellow Catholics looking for a less literal version to complement the NABRE? I wouldn't know what to recommend to a Catholic friend, other than versions not officially approved by the Church.
@@vincewarde I’d suggest the CEB (Common English Bible) as it I have found is very readable to non-native speakers which a good test for readability. It includes the deuterocanonical texts. & indeed I am a fellow Catholic.
@@cinnamondan4984 That seems to be a good choice - even though it was sponsored by a group of largely theologically liberal Protestant denominations. Fuller Theological Seminary - an evangelical icon - has adopted it. It uses the same Greek text as the NIV, NASB, and NLT. It uses a dynamic equivalence translation philosophy, which is what makes it readable.
I need a Bible with the deuterocanonical texts, many of which are useful even if one does not consider them to be inspired - so I may pick up a copy of the CEB. Do you know if the Catholic Church has adopted it?
I am your humble "catholic" brother in Christ 😉😉
I wish he was my Bible teacher!
You will never get tjat from a protestant impostor
6:22 For the three spiritual senses, you were basically right.
I don't agree with changing the literal for the anagogic sense in Joshua's conquest, just because the modern reader can feel uneasy. And the twist you put on it, some cynics (I have a particular one in mind) might feel _"great, instead of a past genocide, we get the promise of a future one - hooray!"_
But, you now say the human author cannot have comprehended everything that's in the text at the time.
The Bible is great, but to my knowledge not infinite.
Finite number of passages, each has a finite number of senses, and each author is responsible for only a finite number of the texts - a Protestant who believes in 66 books would claim 40 authors, and we claim that's 7 books short of the Bible, so, perhaps 47?
Hence, any particular passage can have been fully understood, both literal and all three spiritual senses when the human author was writing. St. Thomas says they were given the gift of prophecy - so, Moses, and before him even Abraham and Isaac, would have known the Via Dolorosa was implied in Isaac carrying the firewood for the holocaust.
Also, that another parent would consent to the sacrifice in which a Son died. The Mater Dolorosa is part of what Abraham signifies typologically.
The serpent's head was crushed by both the woman and her seed.
Father Casey, I hope you could make a review with Father Patrick about the movie "The Pope's Exorcist", an upcoming movie with Russell Crowe in the title role. Thank you and God bless always. 🙏🙏🙏
Christ haters always come up with their hate!!!
I wish I could talk to you. Really going through it right now
And the ram in the Issac story had it's head in a thorn bush...
How come the gloria is sung on maundy thursday enough it's still lent
My sister who is a catholic aswell is leaving the church to join a protestant denomination, because the church allows for a interpretation on reason and spirituality and does not push for a literall understanding.
Pls do an alter server tutorial vid
If i'm gonna read the Bible,and read the lost stories,I want every story to be in order,and not just read.
I wish ppl would/could get along when reading the Bible. Not everyone reads all the books, some take it too literally, and sometimes ppl read multiple versions of the Bible so that interpretation becomes more clear.
Hello.
Amein
Very imformative Fr Casey. But what about missing element - the editor? As you say, the Bible was not directly handed down in perfect form; neither was it collected together without context. The Council of Nicea and the Council of Constantinople were both, I would argue as import as the periods of time when the books were written. It's here the line between what is Gospel (literally) and what is gnostic is made.
What you’re talking about is the composition of the Bible, which I have a separate video about. This is simple about understanding the two senses of interpreting scripture.
@@BreakingInTheHabit But what is in the Bible - so what is considered sacred - is informs the historical context and provides an insight into the authors and any divine process. For instance the Catholic bible is read differently to the Protestant Bible given the books that included in the former but omitted in the latter. This is amplified when one considers the omitted content of the Gnostic gospels.
I'm not saying your video is wrong, just that the 'editing process' needs to be included in at the least the historical reading method to add naunce.
"The Council of Nicea and the Council of Constantinople were both, I would argue as import as the periods of time when the books were written."
The problem you run into with that argument is:
1) We have copies of the NT books from LONG BEFORE these councils.
2) The same books are extensively quoted by the Church fathers as much as 200-250 years before the councils.
3) We have fragments of these books that are definitely dated to no later than 125AD and some perhaps as early as 65-70AD
4) Translations of these books into several other languages were done well before the councils.
Furthermore, we know that the Council of Nicea did not even touch upon the issue of the canon. Eusebius (the great church historian) lists the 27 NT books shortly after that.
In sort, your argument is killed by a ruthless gang of facts 😉😉
@@vincewarde What you say is true - BUT the Council's gave us the 'modern' version of the Bible (later divided along Protestant and Catholic theogolical lines) - and this especially true in terms of Constinople and gnosticism and the first wildly circulated 'standard version' from St Jerome in 400 AD. If we are to read the Bible as the whole - and draw connections as Fr Casey does between OT and NT events, then elements that are missing are as important as those included and thus understanding the mindset of 'editors' - both in the sense of the conferences and the organic process of 'audience feedback' as it were, is vital for understanding.
@@malenko316 What you are missing is this: ALL EVIDENCE points to the fact that the Greek and Hebrew texts we have today are the same as the originals. You are free to believe what you want - but it is not supported by the available evidence which is strong.
You should make it clear that this is your own opinion and not a church teaching, personally I believe that every single letter written in the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit
I love learning the Word of G_d.
@@Fr.Oscar_OP-Buscando_la_verdad I can not make G_d common, to do so I believe i would profane His presence. I am not dumb just respectful and honoring His Holiness.
@@Fr.Oscar_OP-Buscando_la_verdad I just wanted to share with you that I love Yeshua! He is my compassionate, loving, savior and I am trying my best to learn his Word and His heart.
I don't understand the anagogical defense of the particularly bloody passages in the Old Testament. Could someone elaborate?
Depends on the passage and the book. Life was much harsher then and communities can’t be all torn apart by belief back then as they can today because they had to literally rely upon one another. So crimes like blasphemy were serious because it caused issues in the community that have real world consequences unlike us who can believe what we want and still get our orders from Amazon. So different times.
@@brianfarley926 I'm specifically thinking about the Book of Joshua, where they wage a war of conquest in the Promised Land that amounts to nothing short of a genocide of the tribes living there. I am not sure if "it were different times" is the appropriate excuse for that, and regardless it's not anagogical.
@@brianfarley926 Well mass murder of unworthy ethnicities is definitely on the "tough" side of "tough love", but that's not the issue here. The issue is that it's unclear how these events in the Book of Joshua are metaphorically connected to the cleansing at the End Times (which is how Father Casey suggests reading them), and what we learn from this when we read about it, cast in such an anagogical form.
If a woman lies in front of an animal and copulation with it, you shall kill both!!! Thus, you will remove evil from your midst!!! There you have it!!! Is God or the woman wrong???
As a person who due to can't comprehend what they trying to say I get very confused. Just can't figure out what it means. Any help to help me?
Like what the Bible is trying to say? pick a Bible for children or teens, they are a lot more simplistic and maybe it will help you
Ask God for wisdom to understand what you read.
Fr. Casey addresses four layers of meaning in the Bible and a method to discover each meaning. Using each way can help people figure out the multiple things the Bible tells us in a single passage or story.
Method 1 is literal/historical, and examines what the human author meant. So for example, if Paul is writing to the Corinthians, we can look up what what happening in Corinth at the time and better understand what issues he was addressing. If they are worshipping other gods, Paul is probably talking about how there is one God. If they are saying that Jesus isn't God, then he is probably talking about how God is the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Method 2 is asking "where is Jesus in this?" The example Fr. Casey gave was the story of Abraham about to sacrifice his son Isaac when God stopped him and provided a ram to sacrifice in Isaac's place. Using this method, we can understand that Isaac and the lamb prefigure (foreshadow) who Jesus is. Jesus is both the Son who is sacrificed by the Father and he is the ram provided by God to save us from death.
Method 3 is the moral sense. This method basically asks how this story tells us to live our lives. If Jesus did not discriminate against people for being different from him (like a Samaritan or a woman), then we shouldn't either.
Method 4 is the spiritual sense. This method asks what a passage tells us about heaven, hell, judgement, - basically about parts of reality we can't see with our physical eyes and/or what happens after we die. So Israel defeating its enemies in battle in the Old Testament can tell us about how God defeats the devil and all his forces.
NABRE (2011) has great footnotes. Oxford or Harper Collins Study Bibles are great. Lots of commentary at the bottom of the page to help prod us along.
@Cinnamon Dan Thank you had stuff stolen including my Bible. Watching Father Casey buying one next month. Now I know which one Thank you again
The right way is to just read the thing. The wrong way is to presuppose the story you want to hear and then try to find that within the words of the bible. You only need to interpret the stories if you don't like what the stories say. Convenient.
2:45 I think "historical critical method" is the wrong term here (should be "historical method"?). That would imply questioning the legitimacy of scripture itself
Dear Father Casey: you’re short! There are actually 3 ways of reading the Bible based on the senses of scripture as taught by the Church. While the “Catechism of the the Catholic Church” cites the Church Fathers in giving the Literal and Spiritual senses, “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church” gives a third, that is, Fuller sense. I suggest and hope you make a video on this in the near future.
The Bible is like movie when pieced rightly by the spirit !
A horror movie that's rated NC-17.
Obviously, you are Protestant!!!
@@ayybeealternative1999 Like reality.
@@Laurelin70 yeah.
@@ayybeealternative1999 no it ends with a marriage
I have a question. If most of the Bible is to be taken as an story not as literal fact, what is the difference between christinaty and other religions?
I found that i was reading the bible by using literal methods🤭. I found that not every one can understand the bible. We real need to consult our priest if we don't understand the bible
How you read the Bible depends also on how you choose to perceive it. To me it is a mixture of history, legend, fiction, literature, all written by great many people who lived at different times in different cultures and places. This is why I greatly value the Catholic edition of it that is richly annotated. Then I get additional input from other books and even TH-cam videos many of which are highly educational, e.g., Useful Charts, Religion for Breakfast, anything by or with Dr James Tabor (I've become a secret Taborite). Breaking in the Habit is also good. I like the guy.
Squeezing God into the Scriptures n not realizing that God is greater than all of human existence in all ages.
That interpretation of the parable of the Good Samaritan seems odd to me. Firstly, a Samaritan, as Father Casey pointed out, is someone by birth at odds with the victim (who was Jewish). Why would Jesus have chosen to portray his relationship with the downtrodden as such? There is nothing about his origin that carries any such contention. Not to mention that talking about oneself in such an overtly noble manner seems un-Christlike, and it simply wasn't the point he was trying to make at that point in time; which, as was also pointed out, was a critique of the contemporary religious structure. Isn't it very odd to at the same time read the priest and the Levite as the Jewish spiritual authorities they were, and positively good (yet insufficiently helpful) prophets from Scripture?
That's not the meaning of the "anagogical sense": it wasn't Jesus who talked about himself, it's US reading that text who can APPLY it to the existential meaning of the world and of God's will and attitude toward human beings or the creation, or God's plan on Universe's fate.
@@Laurelin70 But Saint Augustine did interpret the text as the good Samaritan standing in for Jesus. If Jesus did not mean for the story to be taken that way, what is the sense of us doing so?
Truth. But I learned all of this at a Protestant College. Most Protestants believe the same as Casey. I also have known fundamentalist Catholics…taking everything in Scripture literally.
Reading as historical context, i go down the rabbit hole for hours on end, and find what i didn't know and what i forgot and fill in the gaps of what i remember from Protestant Sunday School, topics taught without enough context; things we were to remember and regurgitate without asking any questions.
At 6:30 ST. Augustine's teaching on the good Samaritan, concerning the oil and wine, the Inn....are APPLICATIONS of the text, NOT interpretations.
Certainly not all applications are scripturally accurate. An individual portion of scripture has only ONE interpretation, but may have several applications. Big difference,
because using applications as valid "interpretation" opens the door to much misuse of scripture; and we see that in much of progressive Christianity today,
For example, nothing could be plainer than JN. 6 when Jesus refers to His body and blood as something to be "consumed". Catholics take this literally while the context is illustrative.
Jesus had just fed the 5,000 and was using the event to point out that HE is the only true source of life.
It is the RCC that interprets without "reason" here, and in other passages.
Exodus 20:4 KJV
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Zasięg
I am glad the church fathers have left the Bible's interpretation otherwise we would have a million of denominations.
Happy Lent.
2:56 What you have outlined is properly speaking called the "philological" method. The "historical critical" is later. It involves idiotic statements like "the pentateuch had several different authors" (apart from last chapter~s of Deuteronomy being written by Joshua and apart from Genesis being based on earlier accounts to which Moses had access, apart from the six day account which was granted himself on Mt Sinai).
3:10 Yes, Antipope Ratzinger when speaking of "historical critical" is indeed speaking of "such reconstructions" - i e like Jahwist and Elohist and Priestly Codex and like Isaiah with Deutero-Isaiah - and it is bad of him to ascribe to them even "relative certainty" - they more properly have no certainty at all, or even they do have a certainty of being wrong when conflicting with tradition.
From your part, it is very unwary to conflate this with taking figures of speech like figures of speech. Or things of that nature.
Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa! What Anglican or Lutheran church encourages it’s congregation to when reading the Bible interpret it’s passages while suspending reason? Could I get a quote on that? 🤣🤣🤣
I don’t speak for Protestants but I don’t think their catechisms advocate not applying reason but perhaps you can show me 😆
1:20 _"the fallible human author"_ / _"the infallible divine author"_
When I explain to Protestants how Papal infallibility works, I tell them "as we agree, Luke and Mark and the other guys" (all the way from Moses to John) "were habitually fallible, could be in error, as humans, and even so God preserved them from error when writing those books - so, why not the Pope in interpreting them?"
It seems, to you I have to turn this around.
As we agree, Peter, Linus, Cletus, Clement up to Pius XI and probably Pius XII, and again (on my part) possibly in a secret Siri papacy and then the late Pope Michael, or (on your part) "John XXIII through Francis" are personally fallible men. Nevertheless, God grants them identifiable infallibility, for instance in signing Nicaea I or II or in _partly_ confirming Constantinople II about Honorius or in writing and signing Ineffabilis Deus, so - why not grant the Biblical authors even more, also on limited occasions, namely inerrancy as to _every_ fact in the original manuscript.
Speaking of inerrancy and infallibility, Ineffabilis Deus seems to have _as infallible,_ quite a lot with Genesis 3 _as inerrant._ The most basic definition of Mary's complete sinlessness is Genesis 3:15 along with Luke 1:28 and 1:42. Given, obviously, that the Blessed Virgin is the third person called in some form "blessed among women" (though the two former with some restriction as to locality), and the two previous ones had killed, that is utterly destroyed and "crushed" the heads of Sisera and Holophernes. Credits to Patrick Madrid for pointing out this Jael / Judith connexion, I have used it more than once.
7:05 Why would St. Luke _not_ have understood what St. Augustine did?
Fr. Casey, speaking of ways of reading the Bible, have you ever heard of "WatchmenWakeUp"? Id be very curious as to what you would have to say about this group of people who very actively denounce celebrations like Christmas and Easter. They claim that these are why bad things come upon us like "government tyranny" and "Lgbtq".
1:38 _"at face value without the use of reason"_
I'm sorry, but Ken Ham was not on the index librorum prohibitorum, and his view of Genesis most certainly was not condemned in Trent Session IV.
Besides, "without the use of reason" is not a good paraphrase of "at face value" ... it is even reminiscent of a straw man.
It could also be seen as an expression of detecting a certain naiveté.
But taking things you otherwise trust at face value (Bible, senses, traditions about authorships, original genres or other events) is the default. Not doing so is the exception which needs a motivation.
Does he teach Jews?
The Bible should be red under the guidance of the church who inspired by the Holy Spirit made it in 382AD. The Holy Spirit breathed on both; she explains the Scriptures infallibly, and inequivocally!!!
No Catholic theologian would say that the Bible was made in 382AD, because the canon was affirmed then. We have bound New Testaments containing the same 27 books in our NT from the 200s. Church Fathers are quoting the books from the 2nd century onwards. Eusebius, writing in the 330s lists the same 27 books - with 22 listed as being universally accepted and the remaining 5 being widely accepted, and no other books listed even being possibly inspired.
While we can discuss the role of the Church in affirming the Canon, there is zero question that the NT books existed and were authoritative before 382AD.
@vincewarde let me explain to you little brain: the Holy Catholic Church compiled the 46 books of the old testament, added 27 books into one volume and with her only authority from God she declared that compendium to be the Word of God!!! the Catholic Church does authenticate the Bible!!, her daughter!!!
No where in the Bible says that she is the word of God!!! The Bible is a Catholic book!!!
@@dvdortiz9031 I'm disappointed that you have resorted to ad hominem attack, rather than addressing the points I made. In any case, I will neither hold this against you or my other Catholic brothers and sisters.
1) The affirmation of the 27 NT books by the Catholic Church does not mean that they were not Scripture prior to this. They were inspired from their beginning and I highly doubt that any Catholic theologian would argue otherwise. They might argue that only the 4th century Catholic Church could authenticate the NT inspired texts - but that is a different matter than saying that Christians didn't have "the Bible" prior to this time.
2) There was very little controversy over which books were inspired because som many were accepted when the Canon was affirmed. See all of the evidence above, which you have chosen to ignore up to this point.
3) Add to this the fact that the Church Fathers quoted these books as authoritative.....
4) "No where in the Bible says that she is the word of God!!!" Really?
2 Pet 3:15-16 (ESV) And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
Peter refers to Paul's writings - and by association Luke and Acts - as "SCRIPTURE"
What does Peter mean by this? He has already told us in chapter one:
2 Pet 1:20-21 (ESV) Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
So Peter removes any doubt about the inspiration of Paul's writings when he calls them "Scripture"
1Tim 5:18 (ESV) For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”
Here Paul quotes both Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7 AS SCRIPTURE
Luke 10:7 (ESV) And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.
I think this clearly establishes that the New Testament does indeed claim to be Scripture.
Does any of this mean that you should abandon the Catholic Church? OF COURSE NOT!!!!!!
Your faith as a Christian and even as a Catholic should be affirmed by the fact that the NT books affirmed by the Church had been used as Scripture for hundreds of years. You can even argue that only the Catholic Church had the authority to affirm these books - although I would argue that they were simply acting on an abundance of evidence. What you cannot argue is that the universal Catholic Church was clueless about which books were Scripture until 382AD when the Church affirmed the Canon. The facts are simply against you.
@vincewarde the quotes you picked were written before the Bible was compiled!!! You declare that yourself!! The word "Bible" does not exist in the Bible.
'Scriptures' refer to the old testament, only...
I did not use any ad hominem attack. your latest statement confirms your lack of understanding. Sorry!!!
@@dvdortiz9031 I will respond point by point:
"the quotes you picked were written before the Bible was compiled!!! You declare that yourself!!"
Here you fail to understand that the Bible is not one book, but a collection of inspired works. Your reasoning seems to be that these books were not inspired until the Church affirmed that they were. No theologian, Catholic or Protestant would agree with this.
It is provable that the 27 books of the NT were considered by all or most of the Church to be inspired long before the Church affirmed their inspired status. Saint Eusebius affirmed 22 books as universally accepted as inspired, with the remaining 5 books nearly so DECADES before 382AD. The Church Fathers quoted these books as authoritative as well - over a period of hundreds of years.
"The word "Bible" does not exist in the Bible."
And your point is? Who cares is the term (which means "book" in Greek) is used? What is important is the inspiration of the books now in our Bible. The term "Bible" results from their inspired status, not the reverse.
"'Scriptures' refer to the old testament, only... "
Sorry, but as indicated in the quotes from 2 Peter, Peter, whom you recognize as the first Pope, states that Paul's writings are "Scripture" . Here is the quote again:
2 Pet 3:15-16 (ESV) And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other SCRIPTURES.
If you, as a Catholic, are unwilling to take the word of the first Pope - and I am - what does this say about us?
"I did not use any ad hominem attack. your latest statement confirms your lack of understanding. Sorry!!!"
Really, than what did you mean by this statement: "let me explain to you little brain"? As Christians, we should be more respectful to each other. Debate is fine, but insults are not.