Pontiff calls for daily reading of the Word of God

Deutsch

The pontiff called on his believing subjects to study the Word of God daily if possible. This advice is obviously fueled by the knowledge that only very few people will heed this recommendation. Otherwise, according to tradition, binding instructions for use would have been appropriate.

Pope calls for reading the Bible

A seemingly unusual call from the Pope to his flock. On the last special “Word of God Sunday,” he called on Catholics to return to the “sources of faith.” Believers should always carry the Bible with them because it is the book of life (Source). The gospel is simple and short. One should not do without this “gentle power” that touches the heart. “The word of the Lord releases the power of the Holy Spirit,” said the pontiff.

Now there is nothing fundamentally wrong with this call from the Pope. In fact, daily study of the Word should be a part of everyone’s daily routine. This is not an annoying fulfillment of a duty, but rather as the half hour, or better yet the whole hour, that you had already been “working towards” all day.

Reading the Bible is not the same as reading the Bible

The Catholic Church traditionally has its own ideas about understanding and especially interpreting the Bible. For many centuries, on the one hand, it was not possible for the common people to read the withheld Bible and, on the other hand, the possession of this Bible by a non-cleric was strictly forbidden. At that time the Church still had the opposite view, as the Pope announced last Sunday. The Gospel is “simple and short,” said Francis. It has always been in the nature of this church to explain the gospel in such a complicated, mystical and impenetrable way that ordinary mortals are incapable of even understanding the written word.

It has to be scientific

The scientific treatise by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Inquisition) explains what the Roman Church understands today by the “interpretation of the Bible”. (Source). This church (still) wants to recognize a “problem” in the interpretation of the Bible and is addressing this with some approaches to the various methods of accessing the Bible. The discussion includes a historical-critical method, the methodology of literary analysis, approaches based on tradition, the path through human science, contextual approaches, feminist approach, fundamentalist approach and a whole package of philosophical hermeneutics. Here the chief scholastics of this church were able to really let off steam.

But the pope said the gospel is “short and simple.” The pontiff may be right in this, but which path should his faithful flock now take in order to really look at the Word of God from the “correct perspective” according to his institution?

Simply approach the Bible in a “naive” way

The favored and only correct way would be to understand the Bible as it is written. Really “straight forward” and also with a childlike curiosity.
Confirmation of this can be found in 2. Timothy 3:16:
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
and in Matthew 18:3:
“And [Jesus Christ ]said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.“

Because the literal interpretation of the Bible as it is written places faith on the foundation of the gospel, this interpretation of the Bible is also called “fundamentalism.” A term that has now become a fighting term, with fundamentalism only referring exclusively to the word written in the Bible (Info).

Fundamentalist Bible interpretation – Taboo!

Fundamentalism therefore automatically excludes the influence of any man-made tradition. And this represents nothing other than a pure provocation for the Roman Catholic Church. It is also not surprising that the “scientific treatise” of the Inquisition (now the “Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith”) describes the “fundamentalist approach to Holy Scripture” as an unacceptable approach.

Inquisitors have a problem with this

This is what the letter on “pleasing Bible interpretation” says on this point:
“Fundamentalist interpretation starts from the principle that the Bible, being the word of God, inspired and free from error, should be read and interpreted literally in all its details. But by “literal interpretation” it understands a naively literalist interpretation, one, that is to say, which excludes every effort at understanding the Bible that takes account of its historical origins and development. It is opposed, therefore, to the use of the historical- critical method, as indeed to the use of any other scientific method for the interpretation of Scripture. “

An insinuation is added in just a few lines. Accordingly, the fundamentalist cannot understand the “Bible in its historical growth and development”. Anyone who has made an effort to read the Bible instead of blindly trusting some of the talk from the pulpit will know that this claim by the Catholic guardians of the faith is outrageous. But it is entirely true that the fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible is opposed to scientific methods of interpretation. The result of this science can be clearly seen in most of the very liberal “theologians”.

The word spoken by God is rejected

A Roman Catholic Bible also contains the statements 2 Timothy 3:16 and Matthew 18:3. But these are knowingly ignored by this church. The “theologian” Thomas Hieke demonstrated such a result of modern theology in a conversation with Deutschlandfunk. “It also makes no sense to say: I take the Bible literally, because that would also be an interpretation and an inappropriate one at that.” (Source) Hieke argues correctly that the Bible passages should never be taken out of context, because this happens on a regular basis these days in order to supposedly support one’s own stated nonsense, but when the Bible says right at the beginning, “In the beginning created God heaven and earth”, then this is literally true.

Tradition over Scripture

The Roman Catholic Church places its catechism above the Bible and claims to be able to interpret the Word of God only in the light of its own traditions.

However, the representatives of this institution should be careful not to go too far out in their rage against fundamentalism, otherwise what happened in Prague might happen. Martin Luther already made it clear in Worms that he would revoke his writings if an error could be proven based on the writings.

As is well known, this refutation did not materialize. Not because of a lack of desire, because this would have been the easiest way, but because of the impossibility. The protesting church’s proclamation of “sola scriptura” (just the scripture) was inconsistent, because otherwise the Protestant church would have had to keep the Saturday Sabbath (Info), but the Church of Rome is nonetheless an unparalleled collection of rainbow-colored diversity of pagan traditions.

Diversity of church traditions

The church calendar is full to the brim. The following festivities and traditions sometimes also affect the once Protestant churches, which had never completely separated themselves from the paganism-based traditions of the mother church Rome.

Advent wreath – Pagan
Christmas tree – Pagan
Christmas 25.12. – Pagan
Epiphany – Pagan
Easter – Pagan
Eucharist – mockery of Christ – Paganism
Catholic Mary – Isis from paganism
Arrogance and blasphemy based on paganism

Read the Bible, yes! But the right one!

Even the choice of the Bible must be approached with caution today. The majority of modern Bibles use a basic text for the New Testament that is permeated with Gnostic ideas. The two “scientists” Nestle and Aland did the preparatory work. This conjured up a basis for Bible translations that not only springs from the spirit of Hellenism, but also fell victim to the red pencils of modern so-called theological science. More information about choosing the right Bible – here.

For such science, which has set itself the goal, among other things, of trimming Jesus Christ for compatibility with ecumenism and of adapting the eternally valid Gospel to the “modern reality of life” of people, the comparison with Jannes and Jambes is appropriate. These were the magicians at the Egyptian court and their false miracles.

Bible verses from King James Version