catholic bible commentary

What does it say for this verse:

Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Thank you! First honest answer gets 10 points, even if I don't agree with it. Promise.

Catholic bible???
Yeah repetition like hail Mary's and our Fathers.

2009-11-25 16:47:07 by Gesonta

Check out this cool app and learn guitar - howc.st Learn the difference between the Catholic Bible and Protestant Bible in this Bible study video ...

I need a bible commentary with a Christian, not catholic, not muslim, not mormon, not Joehova witness, not trinitary point of view.
i.e. apostolic, pentecostal, or true disciples.
May God be with you. Thanks

The BEST I have ever seen, this one teaches the meaning of every verse of every Book of the Bible: http://www.soniclight.com/constable/note s.htm

It is Bible-believing Christian. God bless you :)

2008-11-20 21:27:18 by Rommey T

Price: $29.95

the Jerome Bible Commentary ?"

I also sincerely hope that "Father K" also has the time to answer this question. I may have to post it again tomorrow morning. If so, that is fine.

Do you use this version of the bible, more than any other.
*The Jerome Bible Commentary is a Catholic Bible.

Was just curious on any thoughts, respectfully from only "Catholic Christians"
and no other Christians out there.

Greatly appreciate everyone respecting this wish that only Catholic Christians answer this.
Respecting this request is an act of Unconditional Agape Love.

Thank You for all your intelligent, and most encouraging answers.

Have a fantastic week, and coming weekend.

I have read the Jerome Commentary. It seems fine. I do know that the "New Jerome Commentary" is the official Catholic commentary, but I question some things in it, in regards to it's 'modernized viewpoint".

However, I own one that is called "The Great Commentary" by Cornelius a Lapide.

http://www.archive.org/details/commentar y00lapiuoft

It has everything, in fact one I found interesting was St. Robert Bellermine's commentary on Psalms. It was really quite beautiful, insightful and...a bit legalistic, just like St. Bellermine!

A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture is another I have, it's really excellent goes a bit deeper in more of a cultural aspect the publisher is Thomas Nelson & Sons (TAN)

My brother in law who is a professor of Theology at a Jesuit institution uses Haydock's. I have only looked briefly at it, and was engrossed...but alas, I was visiting his home, didn't need to be snooping around his library. Here is an online link:
http://haydock1859.tripod.com/

My personal opinion is to stay with things that have an Imprintapur before 1968. Why? Because if you notice some supposedly "Catholic" works are not really Catholic, recall the book by a homosexual priest in the 1980's who said it was okay to be a homosexual??? it had an Imprimatur from Philadelphia, yuck! So, the same applies here when it comes to commentaries. When in doubt, err on side of caution, and go where it was KNOWN to be truly Catholic, hence my date year.

Blessings to you in this beautiful Lenten Season!

2007-03-28 16:38:14 by Thessdian

Price: $9.95

Is there no mention of a minimum age of marriage in the BIble? Why do authoritative Catholic commentaries mention that Joseph was an old man when a teenaged Mary was bethrothed to him? Did Jesus say anything about Judaism's acceptance of child marriages (later documented in written form in the Talmud/Gemara)? Why/why not?

No but ..................

WHAT MADE CHRISTIANS PEDOPHILE??

In a 2008 study done in USA conducted by YouGov for Channel 4 20% of 14−17-year-olds surveyed revealed that they had their first sexual experience at 13 or under.
According to anthropologist Margaret Mead and psychologist Albert Bandura, the turmoil found in adolescence in Western society has a cultural rather than a physical cause; they reported that societies where young women engaged in free sexual activity had no such adolescent turmoil.

Read this web link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolescent% 20sexuality

WHY CHRISTIAN PRIESTS USE NUNS FOR SEX??

see this web link. http://www.sarabite.info/nuns.html

WHAT TURNED CHRISTIANS INTO RAPISTS????

In 2007, there were 248,300 victims of sexual assault. Every 2 minutes, someone in the U.S. is sexually assaulted.

See this link: http://www.rainn.org/statistics?gclid=CJ f3mI2GxpwCFQEupAodLhCCKw

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, there were 102,560 reported rapes or attempted rapes in 1990.[1] According to a study by the National Victims Center, there were 683,000 completed forcible rapes in 1990. See this link: http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/somme rs.html

WHY DIVORCE RATE IS SO HIGH AMONG CHRISTIANS???

50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.”
According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:
The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%

Read this web link :
http://www.divorcerate.org/

WHY CHRISTIANS DRINK WINE WHEN IT IS FOREBIDDEN AS PER BIBLE????

Luke (1:15)

For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.

WHY CHRISTIANS EAT PORK WHEN IT IS FOREBIDDEN AS PER BIBLE????

(LEV 11:7) The pig, because he has a split hoof, and is cloven-footed, but doesn't chew the cud, he is unclean to you.

(LEV 11:8) Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch; they are unclean to you



IS BLOOD DISINFACTANT??

(Leviticus14:1) And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,
(Leviticus14:2) This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: he shall be brought to the priest.
(Leviticus14:3) and the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look; and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper,
(Leviticus14:4) then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:
(Leviticus14:5) And the priest shall command to kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water.
(Leviticus14:6) As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water:
(Leviticus14:7) And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let go the living bird into the open field.

JESUS HAD NOT COME FOR PEACE??

Luke 12:51-53 “Do you think that I have come to give peace in the earth? I tell you, no, but rather division. For from now on, there will be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. They will be divided, father against son, and son against father; mother against daughter, and daughter against her mother; mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law, and daughter-in-law against her mother-in- law.”

Matthew 10:34 “Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword"

WHY BIBLE INSULT THE WOMEN??

1 Corinthians (14:34-35)

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law [34].

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church [35].

GALLILEO PROVED THAT BIBLE IS FALSE??

In the 15th and 17th century Copernicus and Galileo proved that earth revolves around the sun. This fact is actually the reverse of the biblical fact which says that sun revolve around the earth. For this reason Galileo under went for trial in 1633. However church finally (after 400 years) admitted that Galileo was right and they were on false belief.
FALSE BELIEF!!!!!!

WESTERN CHRISTIAN BIBLICAL REFERENCES:
Psalm 93:1 -------- The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.
1 Chronicles 16:30 ------ The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.
Psalm 96:10 -------- The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.
Psalm 104:5 --- The Lord set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.
Ecclesiastes1:5 ------- And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place.

And the MOST INTERESTING thing is that church took about 400 years to express regret for this unfortunate wrong belief and finally POPE JOHN PAUL II On 31 October 1992, expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary, as the result of a study conducted by the Pontifical Council for Culture.

For more details please visit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Gal ilei


IF JESUS WAS GOD, WHOM JESUS USED TO CALL GOD??

Matthew (27:46)

About the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, limaa sabachthani?” That is, “MY GOD, MY GOD, why have you forsaken me?”

WHY CHRISTIANS MAKE AND KEEP IDOLS OF JESUS WHEN IT IS FOREBIDDEN AS PER BIBLE????

OT/(EXO 20:4) "You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

2009-10-16 05:57:55 by Sadat

OTHER than the Apocryphal books that the Catholic Bible still contains, according to his writings and commentary, Martin Luther wanted at least FOUR other books of the Bible removed because he believed they were not canon.

The public outcry over removing these books, however, was so great that Martin Luther relented and left them in, thus they are a part of every translation from the King James forward.

Can you name any of these books and answer why Martin Luther wanted them removed from the Bible?

Hint - All four are New Testament books.

Luther wanted to remove the Epistle of James, Esther, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation.

Calvin and Zwingli also both had problems with the Book of Revelation, the former calling it "unintelligible" and forbidding the pastors in Geneva to interpret it, the latter calling it "unbiblical".


Many non-Catholic Christians like to accuse Catholics of "adding" Books to the Bible at the 16th c. Council of Trent. This is absolutely, 100% false. This Council, among other things, simply affirmed the ancient accepted books in the face of Protestant tinkering. How could Luther have relegated the deuterocanonical books to an appendix if they hadn't already been accepted in the first place? The Gutenberg Bible was printed in 1454 -- and it included the deuterocanonical Books. How could the Church have "added" them at the Council of Trent that began 91 years later? Most Protestant Bibles included the deuterocanonical Books until about 1815, when the British and Foreign Bible Society discontinued the practice! And note that Jews in other parts of the world who weren't around to hear the Council of Jamnia's decision in A.D. 100 include to this day those "extra" 7 books in their canon.

The Orthodox Russian and other branches of the Eastern Orthodox Church have a New Testament identical with the Catholic. In Syria the Nestorians possess a Canon almost identical with the final one of the ancient East Syrians; they exclude the four smaller Catholic Epistles and Apocalypse. The Monophysites receive all the book. The Armenians have one apocryphal letter to the Corinthians and two from the same. The Coptic-Arabic Church include with the canonical Scriptures the Apostolic Constitutions and the Clementine Epistles. The Ethiopic New Testament also contains the so-called "Apostolic Constitutions".

As for Protestantism, the Anglicans and Calvinists always kept the entire New Testament But for over a century the followers of Luther excluded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse, and even went further than their master by rejecting the three remaining deuterocanonicals, II Peter, II and III John. The trend of the seventeenth century Lutheran theologians was to class all these writings as of doubtful, or at least inferior, authority. But gradually the German Protestants familiarized themselves with the idea that the difference between the contested books of the New Testament and the rest was one of degree of certainty as to origin rather than of instrinsic character. The full recognition of these books by the Calvinists and Anglicans made it much more difficult for the Lutherans to exclude the New Testament deuteros than those of the Old. One of their writers of the seventeenth century allowed only a theoretic difference between the two classes, and in 1700 Bossuet could say that all Catholics and Protestants agreed on the New Testament canon. The only trace of opposition now remaining in German Protestant Bibles is in the order, Hebrews, coming with James, Jude, and Apocalypse at the end; the first not being included with the Pauline writings, while James and Jude are not ranked with the Catholic Epistles.

2008-01-17 04:45:24 by Last Ent Wife (RCIA)