What is your interpretation of the bible?

Calypso Jones wrote:From my experience and i mean no disrespect to Catholics but face it.....Catholics are not likely to read the bible.  THAT has been my experience>>IN CATHOLIC schools, with catholic friends, in catholic groups.    They rely on the priest to tell them what is in the bible and frankly....they shouldn't do that.    THere Enters the potential for a catholic priest to INTERPRET a passage any way he wants.  and i am directly reminded of the catholic church in NYC THIS WEEK that put in the church...God is Trans.  God is most definitely not Trans and that is a false interpretation and claim.

Utter hogwash about Catholics not likely to read the Bible and I've seen many disparaging remarks about Catholics here so it is absolutely meant as disrespect.

One kook Priest is not representative of Catholics as a whole. How many kook Ministers, Pastors etc from various denominations come out with ridiculous statements?

Red Lily wrote:

Calypso Jones wrote:From my experience and i mean no disrespect to Catholics but face it.....Catholics are not likely to read the bible.  THAT has been my experience>>IN CATHOLIC schools, with catholic friends, in catholic groups.    They rely on the priest to tell them what is in the bible and frankly....they shouldn't do that.    THere Enters the potential for a catholic priest to INTERPRET a passage any way he wants.  and i am directly reminded of the catholic church in NYC THIS WEEK that put in the church...God is Trans.  God is most definitely not Trans and that is a false interpretation and claim.

Utter hogwash about Catholics not likely to read the Bible and I've seen many disparaging remarks about Catholics here so it is absolutely meant as disrespect.

One kook Priest is not representative of Catholics as a whole.  How many kook Ministers, Pastors etc from various denominations come out with ridiculous statements?

I said MY EXPERIENCE and my experience is the reality of it and what i have seen/heard/been there.  And as far as disrespect goes, i do not disrespect Catholics..even my catholic family members admit they do not read the bible the priest does it for them.  

I had a long time friend, catholic sit down at lunch one day...he was in his 50's 60's and tells me the miraculous story of Jonah.  It was like he thought i had never heard it before and obivously HE HAD NOT.   Protestant children are raised on these stories.

My son in law's whole family are catholics...they don't go to church except to have their children baptized and my daughter in law, MY granddaughters go to the catholic classes for children to take their first communion...the one where the little girls dress up like brides.

My son in law's sister in law and i do bible study together when they visit...just the two of us. She didn't know that the catholic bible and the protestant bible are different. Of course i am kind to her!!! I want her to read the bible herself.

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2016/02/when-was-each-book-of-the-bible-written/

Job: Considered earliest, but date unknown
Genesis: 1445-1405 BC
Exodus: 1445-1405 BC
Leviticus: 1445-1405 BC
Numbers: 1445-1405 BC
Deuteronomy: 1445-1405 BC
Psalms: 1410-450 BC
Joshua: 1405-1385 BC
Judges: 1043 BC
Ruth: 1030-1010 BC
Song of Songs: 971-965 BC
Proverbs: 971-686 BC
Ecclesiastes: 940-931 BC
1 Samuel: 931-722 BC
2 Samuel: 931-722 BC
Obadiah: 850-840 BC
Joel: 835-796 BC
Jonah: 775 BC
Amos: 750 BC
Hosea: 750-710 BC
Micah: 735-710 BC
Isaiah: 700-681 BC
Nahum: 650 BC
Zephaniah: 635-625 BC
Habakkuk: 615-605 BC
Ezekiel: 590-570 BC
Lamentations: 586 BC
Jeremiah: 586-570 BC day
1 Kings: 561-538 BC
2 Kings: 561-538 BC
Judith*: Uncertain (538 BC-AD 70)
Daniel: 536-530 BC
Haggai: 520 BC
Baruch*: 500-100 BC
Zechariah: 480-470 BC
Ezra: 457-444 BC
1 Chronicles: 450-430 BC
2 Chronicles: 450-430 BC
Esther: 450-331 BC
Malachi: 433-424 BC
Nehemiah: 424-400 BC
Susanna*: 400 BC-AD 70
Psalm 151*: 400 BC-AD 100
Letter of Jeremiah*: 307-317 BC
Tobit*: 225-175 BC
Ben Sira (Sirach)*: 200-175 BC
Bel and the Dragon*: 200-100 BC
Greek Esther*: 200-1 BC
Prayer of Azariah*: 200-1 BC
1 Maccabees*: 150-100 BC
2 Maccabees*: 150-100 BC
1 Esdras*: 100 BC-AD 100
Prayer of Manasseh*: 100-1 BC
3 Maccabees**: 100-1 BC
4 Maccabees**: 100-1 BC
Wisdom*: 50-20 BC
2 Esdras**: AD 100-200
*A deuterocanonical/apocryphal book
**A pseudepigrapha book

New Testament
James: AD 44-49
Galatians: AD 49-50
Mark: AD 50-60
Matthew: AD 50-60
1 Thessalonians: AD 51
2 Thessalonians: AD 51-52
1 Corinthians: AD 55
2 Corinthians: AD 55-56
Romans: AD 56
Luke: AD 60-61
Ephesians: AD 60-62
Philippians: AD 60-62
Philemon: AD 60-62
Colossians: AD 60-62
Acts: AD 62
1 Timothy: AD 62-64
Titus: AD 62-64
1 Peter: AD 64-65
2 Timothy: AD 66-67
2 Peter: AD 67-68
Hebrews: AD 67-69
Jude: AD 68-70
John: AD 80-90
1 John: AD 90-95
2 John: AD 90-95
3 John: AD 90-95
Revelation: AD 94-96

Notice that these lists contain the extra books in the Catholic bible not found in the Protestant bible.

My mennonite neighbor uses the same bible i do.

Calypso Jones wrote:

2cent wrote:I am in the midst of reading the Bible, cover to cover.  NEVER did I start with the notion that I'd have complete understanding of it, upon my first read.  Nor would I think I could on the 2nd or 3rd reading.

It takes much study and discussion to come to an understanding, and, even then, I wouldn't assume I had a full understanding of God's word.  

The Bible is NOT easy to understand in all chapters and verses.  I've re-read some verses multiple times, and am yet to come to a complete understanding.  

Else, why would churches hold Bible study?  Isn't that to choose a verse or chapter, and work through a study to interpret its meaning?  

I never thought I could do it on my own.  I'm hoping I can find a study group to help me.

Are you reading KJV or New KJV and that is difficult because it is in a language that is lovely but not current with how we speak today.  That's where a study bible comes in handy and maybe a NLT version or American STandard.  PLUS you have the notes that explain what a particular phrase or custom at the time means in today's world.   In the days that these books were written people knew what was going on and they understood the turn of certain phrases common to the time.   We are far removed from that.   But that is not an interpretation meaning a verse that is open to being turned into something it was not originally intended.  It is simply explaining what was the understanding of that term in the day it was used.    For instance.... in biblical days, most homes had flat rooves and the inhabitants of those homes slept on the roof especially in summer and they were very aware of the movement of stars.  They also had small enclosures on those roof tops for guests and often these guests were just travellers.  Of course we would not do that today because it is dangerous to do so.

Just how stupid do you think I am?

2cent wrote:

Calypso Jones wrote:

2cent wrote:I am in the midst of reading the Bible, cover to cover.  NEVER did I start with the notion that I'd have complete understanding of it, upon my first read.  Nor would I think I could on the 2nd or 3rd reading.

It takes much study and discussion to come to an understanding, and, even then, I wouldn't assume I had a full understanding of God's word.  

The Bible is NOT easy to understand in all chapters and verses.  I've re-read some verses multiple times, and am yet to come to a complete understanding.  

Else, why would churches hold Bible study?  Isn't that to choose a verse or chapter, and work through a study to interpret its meaning?  

I never thought I could do it on my own.  I'm hoping I can find a study group to help me.

Are you reading KJV or New KJV and that is difficult because it is in a language that is lovely but not current with how we speak today.  That's where a study bible comes in handy and maybe a NLT version or American STandard.  PLUS you have the notes that explain what a particular phrase or custom at the time means in today's world.   In the days that these books were written people knew what was going on and they understood the turn of certain phrases common to the time.   We are far removed from that.   But that is not an interpretation meaning a verse that is open to being turned into something it was not originally intended.  It is simply explaining what was the understanding of that term in the day it was used.    For instance.... in biblical days, most homes had flat rooves and the inhabitants of those homes slept on the roof especially in summer and they were very aware of the movement of stars.  They also had small enclosures on those roof tops for guests and often these guests were just travellers.  Of course we would not do that today because it is dangerous to do so.

Just how stupid do you think I am?

I don't think you're stupid at all.

Can i not ask a question and then just thread drift a bit without y'all taking offense?? I was giving an example of what i meant, not a very good one but the best i could come up with at the time.

When i was an altar boy,  I used to eat a lot of those "stick to the roof of your mouth biscuits" or hosts before mass. I always loved the taste or lack of, of those things!

Then I'd wash them down with a little altar wine.

The bible says Jesus made wine for the masses. But the bible didn't exactly say it was for altar boys or that we should eat hosts.

Da Devil made me do dat!

you bad.

Calypso Jones wrote:you bad.

I was mischievous.  
You should have heard me play that rare, huge pipe organ up in the choir loft!

One time I cleaned the brick walkway with holy water.  I just wanted to see if it had more powers than Clorox.
Clorox won the battle of good vs evil.