How do Catholics interpret the Bible?
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 09. 2024
- www.catholic.com
Jimmy Akin answers a caller who asks how she can explain what Catholics believe about Biblical interpretation to her Protestant friends.
Jimmy Akin was born in Texas and grew up nominally Protestant. At age 20 he experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant pastor or seminary professor, Jimmy started an intensive study of the Bible, but the more he immersed himself in Scripture, the more he found it to support the Catholic faith. He entered the Church in 1992. His conversion story, “A Triumph and a Tragedy,” is published in the book Surprised By Truth.
Akin is Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a member on the Catholic Answers Speakers Bureau, a weekly guest on the global radio program, Catholic Answers LIVE, a contributing editor for Catholic Answers Magazine, and the author of numerous publications, including the books Mass Confusion, The Salvation Controversy, The Fathers Know Best, and Mass Revision.
His personal blog is www.jimmyakin.com.
Catholicism is awesome
Tyler Lahr I think it is funny protestant religions hijack the book from the legitimate church of Christ - then have the audacity to denounce Catholicism.
Tim Spangler Then, as a Catholic, what was I actually reading that had the words "Holy Bible" on the cover? It's got authors in it like Matthew Mark Luke John, Paul, Moses, David, Solomon, etc.
What Kilika seemed to be saying is there are passages which, to Catholics, blatantly support Catholic teachings and Protestants try to rationalize their way out of it. When Protestants say that all moral and spiritual teachings are in the Bible and nothing else is needed, yet we have to over reach the meaning of a text to get the Protestant interpretation. We do a "double take" and pause on Protestant interpretation.
Do not add???
I could not find Sola Scriptura. A key tenant of the Protestant faith and it's not in Scripture. If it was truly part of divine revelation and as important as Protestants make it out, it would be mentioned.
Yes, God does have the final say. Howwever, the reason Catholics have a problem with your interpretation is due to several passages out of the Bible. If God intended sola scriptura, then why can’t we find it in the Bible. In fact look to Scripture:
"The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. [Matt 23: 2-3]
With the standards set by sola scriptura, what passage out of the Old Testament was Christ citing when he mentioned Moses’ seat. However, whatever this was, Christ saw it as important enough to call it a reason to follow what the Pharases teach. He did this knowing that he would be spending practically his whole ministry in conflict with them. Yet, he says this?
...if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. [1Tim 3: 15]
The Church is the bulwark of truth? If sola scriptura were true, then why didn’t St. Paul identify “scripture” as the bulwark?
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. [2Thes 2: 15]
St. Paul even states this as a clarification. We are to “hold fast” to two “channels of Tradition” one written (Scripture) and the other oral (what Catholics call “Tradition”). Why did Paul cite two channels if Sola Scriptura is God’s intent?
All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [2Tim 3: 16]
Notice that Paul states “all scripture” if sola scriptura is God’s plan, shouldn’t this read “only Scripture.” Another issue with this, is how do we know what books are inspired? Selecting the books/ “table of Contents” is the Church practicing its teaching authority. God wrote the 10 Commandments in stone, not the New Testament index.
Acts 15ff also describes sending delegates to the Council of Jeruslem (of which Paul was one). So, Acts even teaches (by example) that Councils have binding authority. The very fact that this Council is documented in Scripture also implies that Christ never addressed the issue in His ministry. So, there was something the Christ left unaddressed for the Church to decide.
catholics wake up. your traditions are not found in the Holy bible. show in the holy bible where purgatory is mentioned scalpulary and the rosary. confession and the biggest sin of all honoring and venerating on statues and carved images which the bible in the ten commandmemts prohibits such practices. go ahead and get a copy of the new catechism 2016 edition and there you will discover that your pope so called holy father removed and revised 2 commandments to his advantage. you know that God will punish anyone who even removes 1.of the ten commandments therefore before you catholics start criticizing other Christian religions read the bible. and study the early church father's and you will discover that catholics were not around in 100ad or around 300ad yeah I know.ypur answer will be with Jesus telling Peter that he will give him his church. well your wrong the two words that you must understand from the original scriptures were written in hebrew and Greek Aramaic and not latin. there you will find Jesus calling Peter (petros) little rock and Jesus referring himself as (petra) the big rock the foundation which he will build his church. understand that Jesus mentioned church which is his bride his people and not a temple which catholics think it meant. again if you catholics think that Peter was the first pope then why in the Catholic belief Linus was the second pope and Peter 2 at the end of his letter he is introducing mark as the one where they should listen to. hmm mm is that surprising that Peter never mentioned Linus and the bible never mentioned Linus not once. and if there was so called popes back then in the time of the original apostles then why did Jesus choose John to write down the most important book of the new testament which is the book of revelations and not the bishop at that time which in your catholic faith would have been the person to receive the holy revelations and not john. think about it. maybe because there was no such thing as a pope. and if there was a person assigned to lead Rome then Paul would be that man for our Lord Jesus Christ gave Paul to Rome the gentiles and Peter to the jews. catholic belief has been so corrupt through out history and has become a diobolic church with pegan traditions and idolatrous men who have took role to lead the Catholic members to a doctrine that they don't follow. so before to put down prodostines they did not steal the Catholic bible the bible has always belong to God's chosen people but if it weren't for peope like Martin Luther and early reformation you catholic would not have the ability to read to holy bible these people went much suffering for you and many who want to be saved by Sola scriptura and not this non holy person who you catholics are in mercy to interpret the holy bible. for as God gave us the bible so we can understand it with the help of the Holy Spirit. I'll leave with this comment Jesus said that not even hell will prevail against his church and church means his peope and a religion so we all know that's true. then why has the catholic religion before the reformation prohibited catholics to read the bible your so call leaders aka popes. but God sent peope like Martin Luther to make way for his peope to know God. so you say if it weren't for catholics everyone else would not have the bible well I say if it weren't for Martin Luther and the reformation you catholics would have never know what the Bible said. wait you still don't know what it says. keep thinking that catholics just like purgatory and every fairytale that your so called holy father the pope decides that for you catholics. I have a Holy Father and that is God my creator and nor a mortal being like yours. here's a debate on CZcams that you catholics could educate yourself with your so call religion. Dr James white vs.Dr Sungenis on the subject Sola scriptura and also debated fr Pacwa on infallible. may the Lord Jesus Christ and The Holy Spirit and Our Holy Eternal Father open your eyes to the truth of the Holy Bible.
Love you guys!!!!
Keep on going !!!!
As a protestant, I think this answer is a thoughtful one. And the protestant who the caller was talking to is not representative of all protestants. The Holy Spirit always counsels believers. But to understand scripture, Catholics and Protestants should consult with as many sources as possible and use their reason. That's why God calls us to worship him with our minds.
I've consulted with many Catholic thinkers' ideas in the past.
u are being too literal. Jesus spoke in parallels. "
"He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them." a nonbeilver would say "what? understand with their hearts?" see the protestant downfall. u must read the bible in harmony to understand. btw the bible says to EXAMINE the scriptures not the word "use ur minds" etc. Jesus speaks in parallels.
"Excuse me, did you say the 'B' people?" Lolol.
ὁ κατέχων Wow, I thought she said "Bee People." Homer Simpson on the shuttle. :)
bee movie
Great show. God bless.
Invasion of Killer Bees.
And don't forget 2 Peter 1:20-21! "Above all else, however, remember that none of us can explain by ourselves a prophecy in the Scriptures. For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God." (GNT). We require some kind of prophetic authority. Of course, Protestants would argue that the Holy Spirit comes upon the true believers and gives them authority. The problem with this line of thought is that many Protestants come to many different conclusions about Scripture, not just on trivial matters, but on serious issues, such as abortion, gay marriage, and others. It seems unlikely that the Holy Spirit would guide so many people to hold obviously contradictory conclusions about serious matters. With the division of Protestantism in mind, the solution appears to be that the passage means we need a prophet to tell us how to interpret Scripture. Technically it does not prove that the true prophetic message is found through Catholic papal infallibility, though I cannot imagine who else it would be, especially considering that Peter, the first pope, was the rock on which the Church was built.
2Peter
17
ESV:For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,”
18
ESV:we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.
19
ESV:And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts,
20
ESV:knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.
21
ESV: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.
Peter is speaking of prophecy not coming from man, but coming from the Holy Spirit. He is NOT speaking of the ability to understand scriptures. We can understand scriptures because it interprets itself. Protestants who are bible followers, can differ in some doctrines, but not the Gospel itself, which is the death and resurection of Christ, and that salvation comes through faith alone in Christ. God bless.
I should start by noting that the implications of 2 Peter 1:20 differ due to the wording. Yours appears to support your viewpoint, while my translation supports mine. For a perhaps more objective measure, this is what the KJV says:
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
Looking at BibleHub, most translations are similar to this one, but a few are closer to your translation. The KJV makes it more evident that the wording is supposed to mean that we cannot privately interpret Scripture, as opposed to it meaning that we cannot create our own Scriptures ourselves, as you argue (I believe the point you are making).
But regarding your points, it is obvious that Scripture does not interpret itself because Protestants clearly often do differ in the Gospel itself. Sure, one could argue that many small doctrines that are not as important could vary, but even big major things vary among Protestants. Things such as methods of baptism (infant/adult, sprinkling/immersion), abortion (100% pro-life, okay in rape/incent), and the death penalty (which Protestant groups such as the Evangelical Lutherans, Methodists, the American Baptist Church, and Presbyterians all oppose, while other churches, such as the Missouri Synod Lutherans, the Southern Baptist Church, and the Assemblies of God all support).
And now, you could argue that the ones that differ are not "Bible followers," but then that creates the problem of whose interpretations the Holy Spirit is actually guiding. Clearly God would not lie to us in our interpretations if the Holy Spirit is with us, so the group of Christians who the Holy Spirit is guiding should have infallibility when it comes to doctrine. But there are many passages that can be logically read in multiple ways, and Protestants argue about that a lot. How do know who has the true Prophetic message?
The solution is that we have an authority that is infallible when it comes to doctrinal issues. We have someone who is being definitively led to know what the passages in the Scripture mean. As Matthew 16:18-19 says, "And so I tell you, Peter: you are a rock, and on this rock foundation I will build my church, and not even death will ever be able to overcome it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; what you prohibit on earth will be prohibited in heaven, and what you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven" (GNT). God gave Peter (and therefore his successors, as evidenced by the line "and not even death will ever be able to overcome it") authority in his Church: authority to both interpret Scripture (through the guidance of the Holy Spirit) and to create certain rules for its adherents to follow.
God bless.
SamiandIarerad The subject is the same, prophecy. It does not speak of the interpretation of Scripture, but that prophecy comes from the Holy Spirit and not man imagination.
Again the bible interprets itself, but the disagreements among protestants is not because the bible is not clear, we understand some doctrines differently, but our salvation remains because our trust and faith is in Christ. As for Matt 16, many early church leaders did not see Peter being the rock, but his and all apostles faith and of course some thinks that the rock is Christ, since scriptures speaks of Him as such.
We read that all apostles where given the powers to loose and bound, but there is no mention of any successors having that same powers. Actually the word church is not even the right translation of (ekklesia) ekklesia is derived is (qahal) lhq which simply meant 'assembly, or called out ones, and is not an institution or a bilding. All believers of Christ makes the the body of Christ, and the church is not a body of clergymen but a community united in Christ.
Romans 12:4-5 ESV
For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ESV
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
France Filiault But Jesus said, the only way to bear witness with the Lord is to have unity. Isn´t it true that what He wanted for His followers is to live in peace and harmony with each other, not contradicting each other and throwing false accusations with each other? Protestant means = to protest. Catholic means = Universal. We are One United Universal Christian Church. And we are obedient...for our religion is our obedience to the Lord!
Josh Itos Gravidez You are right on the first part, but wrong the second. Yes we are asked to be united in the same mind, but that does not mean to agree with everything we are told, certainly not killing people because they disappointed with you, like the catholic church has slaughters mean in the name of "unity". Protestants simply protested the pope and other traditions that where introduced as doctrine into the church, that where completely not practiced by the apostles and the early church. There are many catholic church that does not agree with the RCC.
Your obedience to the Lord should be to read, study and practice what is written in the bible, not following your religion. The Jews where a religious people, with many man made traditions aw well, but that only angered God, and so was Jesus angered when the pharisees got in His way because of those added tradition. The bible shows us many disputes among the christians and the leaders, there wasn't any dogmas or attempts on making the church believe in one set of doctrines. Read for yourself Romans 14 and the book of 1 Corinthians which has as I remember 2 separate disagreements among christians in the first few chapters.
God bless
im a little lost how do we catholics interpret the bible?
+Matthew Marrero Simple, we let the Church interpret the Bible for us.
Tim Spangler Yup. Because we know we (individually) will just interpret it to our own destruction. Let the Church do it. They have the resources, history, and the guarantee of Jesus that the Holy Spirit will always guide the Church.
Tim Spangler That's what you think.. ;)
How do you all brothers and sisters in Christ proclaimed to yourselves" You have faith in Jesus Christ and believed in Jesus Christ and yet stubbornly opposed Jesus Christ words...Think. ?.Think.... And Think again and again Our Lord Jesus, Says so many things...just listen to his word and meditate on it ( please read the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and I pray you will be all enlightened ) To follow Christ,takes humility, submit yourself to the Authority, you'll be fine, if you don't uderstand, ask. Not everyone read the bible has the authority and interpret the same way,I evangelizing people from this rock that He himself established MATHEW 16 if given a chance especially to those who are asking for it and for those who listens.Catholics are not very argumentative when it comes to scriptures,We considered ourselves sinners,but trying to walk into holiness just like the saints did and follow Jesus Christ to the cross...My advice, pls.don't protest and argue,Our Lord Jesus Christ says so many things. ..Listen to him...Mother Mary is already in Heaven ask for her intercessions... Our Father in Heaven is looking at us very happy for we all acknowledge all what He has done for our salvation,from the birth of a Woman our Mother Mary her YES to the Father and sufferings of his only begotten SON and Ressurrections,We can all be claiming it if we follow Jesus word take up our cross daily and follow him closely the best way possible. PRAY UNCEASINGLY JESUS SAID!!!
that sounds protestant.. not Catholic...
THE PROTESTANT RESPONSE TO THIS VIDEO:
The more precise question we should all pose is: "How does the Roman Catholic Church interpret the Bible?"
The short answer is quite simple: This institution has misinterpreted and intentionally obfuscated the simple and plain language of The Holy Bible--in order to justify its false doctrines (Primacy of Peter; Apostolic Succession; Seven Sacraments; Virgin Birth; Assumption of the Virgin; Mariology; Prayers to Mary as Co-Mediatrix; prayers to dead "saints"; Purgatory; Indulgences; genuflection to statues; the Rosary [repetitious prayer, condemned by Christ] and other useless "sacramentals." In fact, the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church created the vile institution of the Inquisition, which burned the true saints of God (the genuine followers of Jesus)--just as Nero had done to the Early Christians--for their pious act of translating The Bible to make its Truth available to all people. Even the Renaissance humanist-scholar, Thomas More, participated in the burning of English Protestant clerics.
The Early Church up to the time of the Council of Nicaea held the pure and simple Faith of Christ. With the advent of Emperor Constantine "the Great" the ancient pagan Roman state began to patronize the church, but also introduced Roman Imperial pagan ideas, superstitious practices and solar cultic rituals into the Roman Catholic Church as the Empire now also lavished wealth, gold rings, and palaces on the bishop of Rome. Around A.D. 313, Constantine, still a pagan, erected the Church of San Giovanni in Laterano (the Lateran--the seat of the Bishop of Rome, or Cathedral of Rome) and donated the Roman Imperial Era house of the Laterani family (L. Domus Laterani) to the Bishop of Rome. It is said that Constantine--truly an astute politician but a rather dubious Christian--was finally baptized on his deathbed.
Constantine never abandoned his adoration of the Unconquerable Sun (L. Sol Invictus): accounts of the Council of Nicaea (which Constantine convened to settle the many theological disputes raging in the early 4th century) tell us that Constantine entered the audience hall (L. aula) dressed in the purple robes of the high priest (L. Pontifex Maximus) and wearing a solar diadem-crown of Sol Invictus (formerly Apollo Helios) which featued solar rays radiating around the emperor's head.
In the Early Church, there were five administrative metropolitan bishoprics (referred to as The Pentarchy) in the Late Roman Empire: Jerusalem; Alexandria; Antioch; Constantinople; and Rome--all equal in importance with none claiming any superior authority or spiritual-temporal hegemony. This egalitarian relationship among the principal bishoprics radically changed when Constantine became emperor of Rome and started to support and patronize the Church. Now another church council placed Rome (former capital of the Imperium Romanum) at the head of all the bishoprics in Christendom.
By the time Pope Gregory I had asserted the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, the Church had become paganized--with clerical offices now being held by the aristocracy. Bribery and "politics" entered the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. A church hierarchy and College of Cardinals (Curia) was ultimately established--recalling the ancient Roman Senate (which had its seat for most of Rome's history in the Curia in the Roman Forum). The Roman Catholic Church today still has its Curia which oversees the operations of the Catholic Church, elects popes, advises popes, establishes congregations with various functions, and oversees tribunals--among other functions.
During the Early Middle Ages, the popes assumed the pagan title of Pontifex Maximus (which Julius Caesar once held as supreme head of the Roman state-religion). In Latin, "Pontifex" means bridge-builder; this terms was first meant literally as a builder of bridges, and later metaphorically--meaning the pope establishes a bridge between God and man. Another title used by the popes to exalt themselves is "Vicarius Filii Dei" (Vicar of the Son of God). The Latin title "Vicarius" means standing in place of or taking the place of--whence the English adjective "vicarious." Mr. Aiken claims this was not a title ever claimed by The Papacy. Mr. Aiken is WRONG: This title appears prominently on the bejeweled bulbous triple Crown of the Pope (L. triregnum).
As to the false Catholic Doctrines of Petrine Supremacy and Apostolic Succession:
During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin correctly affirmed that apostolic succession had been lost in the Roman Catholic Church by its progressively harmful doctrinal and moral corruption--and that the true church was found only where the Gospel was rightly preached "sola Scriptura." Luther also correctly identified the office of the pope as Anti-Christ.
During the Renaissance and Barqoue periods, the Catholic Church used talented artists--architects, painters, and sculptors of genius (Bramante; Raphael; Michelangelo; Bernini) to create the facade of spirituality and sanctity, while the institution itself continued to plunge into ever greater depths of corruption. Pope Alexander VI Borgia, a Renaissance pope (born in Spain) regularly practiced simony (absolving sins in exchange for payment of money) as well as fornication with his own daughter, Lucrezia Borgia, in the papal bed!
These various titles the popes have used for centuries constitute a blasphemous attempt of The Papacy to exalt itself above Christ (just as Satan attempted to exalt himself above God--as The Bible clearly tells us). Another blasphemy of Roman Catholicism is Mariology--especially the honorific epithets of "Queen of Heaven" (L. Regina Coeli) and the false and anti-Biblical assertion that Mary is Co-Redemptrix with her Son, Jesus--according to which spurious doctrine (which the popes proclaimed in their encyclicals) Roman Catholics pray directly to Mary, in the hopes that Mary will soften the heart of Christ, thereby averting divine Wrath, and appeasing God so that any Catholics prayer would have to always be answered in the affirmative.
The above points are all quite relevant to the question "How does the Roman Catholic Church interpret the Bible?" The history of the Catholic Church is well documented by objective historians of European civilization.
How can a church which has utterly perverted the plain and simple meaning of The Bible--of course to further its own ambitions and to enrich its treasury (e.g. indulgences; Masses for the dead; simony) possible ever be able to interpret God's Word properly or truthfully?
The Roman Catholic Church has manipulated The Bible so systematically--through sophistry and semantic distortions--that this cannot be co-incidence or oversight. When this infamous institution has condoned--for centuries--Catholics genuflecting before statues of Mary and "saints" its hierarchy was always aware that it was encouraging the violation of God's Commandment against bending the knee (that's what genuflect literally means in Latin) before graven (i.e. sculpted) religious images.
For popes to proclaim Mary (the simple and humble Hebrew girl of the New Testament) as Queen of Heaven (a pagan title given to many goddesses of the ancient Mediterranean world) and to pontificate the absurd dogma that Mary is Co-Redemptrix with Christ, belittles Christ, insults the Divinity of God, and manifests how wrongly this institution has INTENTIONALLY misinterpreted the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church breaks God's Law and violates His commandments continually--behind the noble facade of a superficial form of Christianity--false sanctity--observing a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof.
The Gospel of Luke tells us that when Mary sang her famous hymn of praise to God (The Magnificat or Canticle of Mary) she clearly acknowledged the need of a Savior; hence Mary was not conceived without sin but was born with original sin (L. peccatum originale).
"Magnificat anima mea Dominum, et exsultavit spiritus meus in Deo salutari meo!"
My soul doth magnify the Lord : and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour!"
As to the Roman Catholic Church's false and blasphemous assertion that Mary is Co-Mediatrix with Christ in the redemption of mankind, The Bible tells us the real Truth--in plain language that anyone can understand:
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." [1 Timothy 2:5].
I could go on and on--but I think that, at this juncture, my readers get the main point I have illustrated--that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate church--the false church and persecuting power which St. John of Patmos vividly describes in God's Book of Revelation, as "Babylon the Great--the Mother of Prostitutes and Abominations of the Earth" [Greek New Testament: Book of Revelation: Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη, ἡ μήτηρ τῶν πορνῶν καὶ τῶν βδελυγμάτων τῆς γῆς].
But that is a topic for another video commentary.
1 John 2:27New International Version (NIV)27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him. Yes, the ones with the Holy Spirit will be guided into all truths, the Truth. If the Pope do not have this Holy Spirit he will be interpreting from the Catholic man made position. The Pope is the defacto position on the bible, that's what the Catholic claimed. What the Pope says goes, no argument about that. This is the Catholic position don't let anyone deceive you. The Holy Spirit is a dilemma for the Roman Catholic Church.