Love it! Thank you for this. I ordered this, and I am excited to get it.. I grew up Protestant, but I am leaning more and more towards the Catholic Church. So this was extremely helpful to see.
To echo many comments here, as a Catholic i am very grateful for your review(s) of this bible and the time you invested. I completely agree with your view of not writing off resources from other traditions, which is what led me to your channel a couple of years ago. Wishing you and the channel every success in 2025 and I look forward to watching. God bless.
I appreciate your reviews on Catholic Study Bibles. I've watch some of your other videos that refer to other Bibles and topics as well. I appreciate your contents and wish you the best of luck on your channel. It is nice to have a friendly and fair Protestant review and thoughts. I recently purchased the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible and look forward to receiving it. My mom recently purchased the The Great Adventure Catholic Bible, Second Edition. If you haven't reviewed that Bible I would be interested in your review of that Bible as well. Well wishes for 2025.
@@jamesbarksdale978 I believe that they have material so that you could. It is used in the Bible in Year podcast by Ascension as well. There are references materials that you can use alongside both situations, but I don’t believe that it has to be.
On Rev 12, the Catholic view is that the woman is multi-faceted. She's Mary and she's the Church. I haven't touched Revelation yet in my copy but their notes sound like the Catholic view as I understand it.
Mary was not alive at the time they fled to the mountains. This most likely was referring to Gods bride, the house of Israel who were still alive and came to Christ. They fled on Thursday afternoon, April 10, AD70. So their prayer was answered it did not take place on the sabbath nor winter.
I just got my copy of this Bible today from the USA. What a massive volume of work! Your lectures / reviews on this Dojo are really helpful thanks so much for putting them together. I have using the RSV more and more as for me personally coming from a Catholic background it is familiar territory.
Regarding your comment in 18:30 very prominent early Christians like St. St. Quodvultdeus thought the woman in rev 12 was Mary "The dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth so that when she bore her child he might devour it. ... The woman signifies the Virgin Mary, who, free of all stain, brought forth our Head." This was written in the 5th Century
I wouldn’t consider him early. Early Christians were Jews and understood that the Jews had a special place in Gods heart and would not be forgotten. Later on catholics lost sight of that fact that they were grafted onto the olive tree and started to create their own all about me kind of doctrine - going so far as to hate the Jews. Forcing them off land and killing them in their crusades. Good times! There would be tribulation saints, those who come to faith during the tribulation and are martyred. But the woman is Israel. Israel will be protected during those 3.5 years and wears the 12 point crown of the 12 trines of Israel - out of which God will save a portion from Each tribe. And Hod is protecting them while the end is near and Messiah is coming again and the Jews will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child. When he comes again in all his glory.
@ I just don’t get why he would start talking about Mary all of a sudden. She’s barely mentioned in the gospels and I am not sure if she’s even mentioned in the epistles and letters of the first church fathers. Why do Catholics enlarge the presence of Mary later on so much?
Thank you for your reviews of this Bible. I've been waiting for this to come out for a long time chomping at the bit and it's great to see a third party so to speak. Non-catholic Christian giving an honest review. Thanks for taking a look and thanks for keeping an open mind while approaching it.
We as Catholics don’t just see that figure as Mary, we accept many interpretations of that passage, because of the nature of the way Revelation is written. We normally emphasize that interpretation though because of the common Protestant polemic against the title given to Mary, Queen of Heaven, as they will typically outright reject that view in discussion.
Well that and the Hebrew Tradition of the Gebirah (Queen Mother), in which the Mother of the King is considered Queen… And since Jesus is the King of Kings…
That comes from the pagan traditions that the Roman Catholic Church hold to dearly. As with many other things you should really dig into "the queen of heaven". Hope you don't take this as an insult because it isn't, just spreading truth and hope you look into it.
@@frankemann81 i don’t take it as an insult. I take it as misinformation spread by self interested individuals more concerned about keeping people in their congregations, than being honest Anyone that studies history beyond just nodding acceptance to whatever “Pastor Dave” says, can see the truth for themselves. Just because parallels to an idea or practice in pagan and early historical cultures can be made about something, doesn’t make it a facsimile of the later day beliefs. Many cultures worldwide had a belief in a cataclysmic flood. That does not make the biblical account of Noah pagan in your mind… does it? Jesus loved and honored his Mother. Catholics do the same. He is King of Kings, and she is the Queen Mother Period
@ no, it’s not. Mary isn’t a pagan goddess, she is Mary, mother of God. Totally unrelated by the way, but did you know Hitler drank water? I hope you don’t drink water. Could be a dangerous association 😳
Thank you for this review series. I am Catholic now but still follow several protestant content creators on youtube. Your reviews came up as I was looking for info on the St Ignatious study bible. I watched all 5 parts and found your review very helpful. I know you said this was all for now, but I hope you put out something on the Maccabees study notes. I'm looking forward to those once my copy arrives. I Subscribed to your channel. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
Great review series of this Bible. I am waiting for mine to arrive from the USA to the UK. Should be here next week. Being a Catholic myself this is going to be great to read through. Thanks for putting this series together!
18:36 Its both. There aren't many catholic apologists who do not affirm it as both. Its your exclusivist reading of it that has us dedending what you leave out.
Also, Protestants have recognized Rev 12 as Mary, too. That's not just a Catholic interpretation. I really strongly dislike the current modern evangelical eisegesis that it absolutely CANNOT be Mary. It's messed up
@@vinciblegaming6817if you deny that it's Mary you then deny that the child born who rules the nation w a rod of iron is the Messiah as described in Psalm 2. Ultimately you end up with a fragmented and limited scope. The woman is Mary, the Church, and Israel. It's both/and not either/or. It's sort of the Dan Brown modern day approach to symbolism that is so narrow
@@DiscipleDojo ha. I acknowledge your sense of humor. But no... I really dislike those words because you can accuse someone with interpretations you dislike of eisegesis and claim you are doing exegesis. It's self-serving, shuts down debate and discussion, and unfalsifiable.
I totally understand other interpretations of Rev 12. However, if there’s anyone that DOES want to explore some really interesting unpacking of this from a thoughtful Catholic perspective, Joe Heschmeyer has an excellent video called “Why Catholics make such a big deal about Mary” which makes this case very well I think. It’s worth a watch.
@@mikejames303 That's nowhere taught in God's Word.. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Nothing more. She's a sinner who needed a Savior, just like anyone else.
Thank you for your treatment on this publication! I’m sad to say that this may be the end of my viewership, but will take to praying for your success in bringing souls to the Word of God, Christ’s peace be with you!
I think the one thing you're missing from the Catholic perspective is that we view Mary as the archetype of the Church, so of course that passage about the woman can be viewed as representing a person as well as representing the Church. Similarly, Abraham represents faith and the faithful (children of Abraham). So also, the Church is the children of Mary, and Jesus is our brother (as is written elsewhere in Scripture).
What scripture. ?? Catholics give too much adoration(idolatry of Mary) One of the reasons I left the church. There are many more. Such as a myth of Purgatory. Doesn’t exist. There’s heaven and hell. That’s it. No stopover for people who haven’t quite been good enough to go to heaven until living people pay alms until they have bought these souls to heaven. The church is rife with works as being needed to get to heaven. None of these things are in the Bible. At least not the one true word of God. We are saved through faith alone by Grace alone . Works can not save us lest man boast. Jesus said no one is good not one. He said the only one who is good is my father. So works or being a good person are irrelevant to salvation.
@thrithgolden2748 She's the archetype, meaning she represents the Church, which is different from being the Church. John's gospel presents her as the new Eve, and Jesus as the new Adam. So there is a bridal symbolism, as well as being mother. That idea comes from John the Evangelist, not me.
I always appreciate your reviews and explanations! Thank you so very much for your dedication, generosity, and your commitment to Truth and to our Lord Jesus!!!
17:53 Revelation 12 as Mary: St. Quodvultdeus (d. 453): He explicitly identifies the woman in Revelation 12 as Mary. He writes, "The woman signifies the Virgin Mary, who brought forth our Head, and the dragon signifies the devil, who lay in wait for the Lord at His birth". St. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310/320 - 403): He also sees a Marian interpretation in Revelation 12. He states, "And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. This can be understood as the devil’s attempt to destroy Christ at His birth, and the woman is Mary". St. Methodius of Olympus (d. 311): While not as explicit, he alludes to the woman in Revelation 12 in a way that can be interpreted as referring to Mary. He speaks of the woman clothed with the sun as a symbol of the Church, but also acknowledges the Marian symbolism. These interpretations highlight the early Church’s recognition of the Marian symbolism in Revelation 12, alongside other possible meanings.
@@YAHWEH-YESHUA-MINISTRIESthey mean that just because you generally disagree with someone, doesn’t mean that they don’t have bits of knowledge and wisdom that you can benefit from. Simple really, more people should have that attitude because it is rare that someone has absolutely nothing you can learn from.
Patmos was described differently to me - as a land of exile rather than penal colony. After John survives the burning oil, he’s sentenced to exile. Difference with a distinction. Good review. Enjoyed your series or reviews on this one. AMDG.
I am awaiting delivery of my copy! As a protestant that gets this to try to understand RCC understanding of Scriptures, I have one question. Do I need a copy of the Catechism to get a basic understanding of the references or do the cc have enough for rough?
It’s cheaper to go online and reference the CCC, but if a hard copy is a must there are used bookstores with reasonable copies. Be forewarned that there have been three editions since the early 1990s. Also, the CCC has come under sharp critique. Consult the Baltimore Catechism 4 or Catechism of the Council of Trent.
@@joebollig2689 Thank You! I am mostly wondering if this Bible just throws references out that mean nothing without actually looking at the CCC. I will know soon enough and will keep your comment in mind as a reference for what to do if the references leave me scratching my head.
In my opinion, you would not necessarily need the CCC alongside this study Bible. However, the CCC shall provide you a detailed view of the 4 pillars of the Church and would encourage you to subscribe to Fr Mike Schmitz podcast “Catechism in a Year”
Hey, J-MS, I've appreciated your reviews of the Ignatius SB and other sources reflecting on the 'ancient faith' and ancient cultural side of things of late. I'm sending you a copy of the Yah Scriptures, and would appreciate your perspective on things such as it, the Cepher, and other 'holy name' Bibles generally "restoring" 'lost' scriptures to the 66-book Protestant collection or recognition of sacred texts. BTW, I also go by SquabBob, Tɨm, and ReformedGrit.
I have the older New Testament version of this and wondered if all the NT notes are the same and they just added the Essays and Old Testament to this new volume. It's not too much money but I always hate to double buy items. thanks ..this was a great series. take care
For a conversation with an Orthodox scholar, I see Fr Stephen De Young interacting with Protestants all the time. Regarding the textual notes, I've seen them in other places in the RSVCE. It's been a while, but I think the asterisk is more of an interpretive note, while the double cross is a clarifying note. But, I could be mistaken. JM, I'm grateful for the role you have taken on to be that middleman between the scholarly and the lay worlds. You bridge the gap so well. Thanks!
Asterisk * and obelus/dagger † ("cross") marks are classical typography footnotes indicators. They can be used when there are only a few footnotes on the same page. * is first footnote. † is second, ‡ third ("double dagger or diesis). There would also exist a triple dagger, and a reversed cross (with the cross at the bottom instead of the top), but those are usualy not included in most available fonts... Nowadays, we are more used to numbers, or letters, but it is still available as an optional format in wordprocessors such as MS Words. In this context, I think that they are parts of the original RSVCE footnotes, that are mandatory to use its text. I would think that letters are translation notes, and symbols are interpretative comments.
@ oh cool! You answered! I realize you have a whole stack of Bibles and books to review but would you consider adding The Word on Fire Bible to your list? The entirety of the Bible is being released in volumes. Bishop Robert Barron started Word on Fire years ago. I’d be interested to hear your take.
I'm thinking the footnote thing might have to do with a copyright or approved use issue involving the original owners of the RSV (the World Council of Churches). These notes appear in every RSV Bible I've seen (or it's derivatives, like the RSV2CE). In other words, they're contractually obligated to leave them in.
Those seemingly unimportant notes you mentioned are actually part of the text of the RSVCE2. I have a Ignatius non-study bible version with those notes. They are minimal, but there is no need to rip them out of the text for those who want them, so they are getting the entire Ignatius Bible plus the study notes. I remember years ago the Ryrie Study Bible did the exact opposite. It had all of Ryrie's notes but had ripped out all the essential notes that came with any other edition of the NASB.
@@DiscipleDojo It is mandatory for a Catholic bible to have at least some interpretative footnotes (or at least it used to be, I know some recent miniature travel editions that are without any footnotes...). The logic is that we never read the Bible outside of Tradition.
@paulgrassart8935 There's nothing in canon law or in Liturgiam Authenticam that I can find that makes any such stipulation. The interpretive notes in the 1966 RSV-CE are included in most editions of the RSV-CE and RSV2CE, sometimes in an appendix at the back. But there's no requirement, to my knowledge, that an edition must include them. NABRE is different as the notes are included at the insistence of the copyright holders. Catholic editions of other translations, such as the NRSV-CE or ESV-CE, do not include interpretive notes.
Wish you and all your loved ones a lot of health wealth and love from above in 2025. We are still waiting for our paperback print. Figured this edition alongside our Catholic Action Bible will serve our family well along the path home to our Father in Heaven. Tenete Traditiones God bless
The United States Council of Catholic Bishops have a verse by verse explanation of the scriptures. The Catholic Bishops in their explanation of Revelation Ch. 12 do not mention Mary; the woman symbolizes people of the Old and New Testaments. (Gen. 37:9-10)
The Apostle John is the Presbyter John. Papias first lusts him alone as one he heard in person, then, after his death, he is listed among the Presbyters (what he here calls all the Apostles) as he asks any who met them what else John said, or what the others had said
@@Truth.n.Love.is.God.BCatholic. I don't have videos arguing for or against Catholicism. I'm not Catholic because I reject the concept of a magesterium and the Papal primacy. If I were to leave Protestantism I would go Orthodox, not Catholic.
@DiscipleDojo Orthodox is just a group of different national churches that spilt from Catholicism, and each of those churches emphasise that nationaity. It doesn't make sense for someone not of that ethnicity to join one instead of the actual Catholic Church. Don't be embarrassed about going back to the actual Catholic Church. No matter what church you join there is always going to be someone in charge whose interpretation has the authority of being correct.
@ thank you for the responding? Do you have any insight videos that outline the reasons for your denomination you’ve chosen or adhere to? I’m especially curious about any traditions or sacraments that are affiliated with your denomination. E.g. sola fide (&/or scriptura), or neither, etc…
Isn't that already happening since Luther, when it comes to starting an independent denominational church these days with unqualified self made pastors?
I’ve read all of Romans, 1st & 2nd Corinthians and they have the asterisks and the cross and double crosses all throughout the books. You must have missed them.
@@horak77 I didn't see them used as subject notes in Romans, but if I missed them, so be it. It's hard keeping track of things I'm not looking for initially.
If you want to see a Catholic commentary on the book of Revelation taken to another level take a look at Coming Soon: Unlocking the Book of Revelation and Applying its Lessons to today by Dr. Michael Barber who was a former student of Scott Hahn. I know you have a lot on your plate and it's not your faith tradition that book is like drinking from a firehose regarding the information depth and concentration.
@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think! And the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
@@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think? Even the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
@@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think? Even the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
revelation was the second volume of john, just as acts was the second volume of luke. if you apply the methodologies of criminology, you can construct a criminological profile of the the new testament. john was written after the fire of rome and the start of the persecution in july of 64. the book of revelation was most likely written starting from the outbreak of the first jewish war in 66. john is the only one without the olivet discourse because these two events happening in succession with the death of peter and paul is a pretty clear motivation. revelation was completed not later than the end of 67 because it would lose its meaning. nero was the beast as verified by his gemmatria, 666. and nero died june 68. moreover, and more importantly, the new testament never mentions the greatest catastrophe of judaism, the destruction of the temple in 70. there is clear evidence in the literature before and after the destruction of the temple. this is seen clearly in the writings of josephus, the epistle of barnabas, and the shepherd of hermas, vis a vis the new testament. this conclusion is opposed simply because people do not believe that jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple of jerusalem, just as the jews do not accept jesus can be their messiah.
I'm not Catholic. I think your reviews are awesome. My only concern is study Bibles trying to pull the reader into their faith or church. I'm interested in a Bible history and study only. I wish I could find a group locally to meet with that is multiple denominational
The Bible isn't self-interpreting. Every single Study Bible you find will be interpreting Scripture through the lens of a particular tradition, or just one person's personal interpretations (something like the Tony Evans commentary). The only question is who has the right to interpret the Scriptures.
@bradyhayes7911 I understand and my statement was more of a wish list. I just I'm trying to make sure that any books that I read or not too heavily into trying to convert someone or knowing the rosary or knowing about the Mormons secret temples and the different Church groups private events.
Yes I guess you’re always going to run into this problem especially with a text like revelation that has a good deal of symbolism. Or maybe this Catholic study Bible also refers to perpetual virgins and Jesus being an only child? Just trying to reinforce that Catholic doctrine
LOL! You're asking for a lot! I think every study Bible has a perspective that caters to its readership. Hope you can find that eclectic Bible study group.
There’s no such thing as a “small c” catholic. Read the Teachings of the Early Church Fathers. Study St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch. In 107 AD, he clearly defined what Catholic is. I’m sure he knows better than anyone.
you are not catholic with smal 'c' if you don't belong to an apostolic Church - pretending otherwise risks to be an obstacle to a serious confrontation with the Catholic/Orthodox position...
It was a red flag to me that, as a non-denominational Christian, every group I saw claimed to be the REAL Catholics. The Lutherans' official name was the 'Evangelical Catholic Church'. The most traditional Anglicans/Episcopalians called themselves Anglo-Catholics. Presbyterians called themselves Reformed Catholics. The official name for Eastern Orthodox is the 'Orthodox Catholic Church'. Even my non-denominational pastor called himself a little 'c' catholic. Every single Christian group I found claimed to be the TRUE catholic church, and yet there was a 2000 year group actually known as The Catholic Church. And they're by far the biggest Christian group, and by far the most globally diverse. It seemed to me that if every Christian intuitively knew their church should be Catholic, God wouldn't hide the 'true' Catholic Church away in some obscure denomination. The Catholic Church IS the catholic church, and it's stood for 2000 years as the largest group within Christianity.
@@bradyhayes7911 Thank you. The real and only Catholic Church is the Church Jesus Christ personally founded over 2000 years ago. It’s headquartered in Rome. There is no other Catholic (or catholic) Church.
Bible scholars when they are trying to get to the truth about a verse or translation always try to go back as far as they can to the source to check the facts. We can now follow the Christian God belief linage back continuously and see how it evolved over the years all the way back to 1500BC. What we discover is forget all this stuff about Jesus and Moses, Yahweh/Johovah/The Lord/Allah originally started out as a multi God belief. God called Yahweh by the Jews originally had a father called El, the most powerful god and head of the council of gods. Yahweh also had a sister goddess called Anat, who killed Mot the god of death. Yahweh's brother Baal is mentioned in Jewish scripture some 90 times and although is now relegated to being a false god to accommodate the latter Jewish single god narrative, was the god of thunder. So do fact check this you will find both Yahweh and El get a mention in the Christian bible, so this is very much your faith we are looking at here! Just remember God's father was the head of the council of gods, before resolved by the single god changes to being two names of the same god... even if that means god was married to his mother for a while as they were adjusting their god claims. If you don't have a bible, do a fact check on line it is fascinating to think how generations for the last 2000 years have been feed a line of nonsense... God's brother was the god of thunder no less!
@DiscipleDojo I ask everyone to fact check everything to do with religion, so could you point out which parts are incorrect for me so I can correct my post. Assuming you have fact check me yourself. Have a great day
Why is it seem everyone has all these different bibles out. What happened to the original catholic Bible. Why is everyone turning to these new bibles and neglecting the originals
@@TheKidneyAndTheStone I like your response to @DiscipleDojo. He thinks he’s a scholar. He’s not. Read Dr. Scott Hahn’s books and other books from good, Catholic apologists. Perhaps Trent Horn can advise, too. BTW…read the book, “Where did the Bible come from? Our debt to the Catholic Church”. The first Bible that rolled off the printing press was a Catholic bible. Protestants weren’t around at that time.
The first " interpreter" of the Word of God was Satan. The second "interpreter" of the Word of God was the catholic church. The true Apostles of Jesus and His church even today believes simply because Jesus said it. Beware the leaven of the interpreters of God's Word. Revelation chapter 17 is the Word of God concerning the catholic church.
No one else has even come close to a review this deep for the St Ignatius Study Bible. Great job. I appreciate your efforts and the review.
Love it! Thank you for this. I ordered this, and I am excited to get it.. I grew up Protestant, but I am leaning more and more towards the Catholic Church. So this was extremely helpful to see.
To echo many comments here, as a Catholic i am very grateful for your review(s) of this bible and the time you invested. I completely agree with your view of not writing off resources from other traditions, which is what led me to your channel a couple of years ago. Wishing you and the channel every success in 2025 and I look forward to watching. God bless.
As a Catholic, thank you for your thoughtful and reasonable review series. Looking forward to checking out some of your other stuff.
I appreciate your reviews on Catholic Study Bibles. I've watch some of your other videos that refer to other Bibles and topics as well. I appreciate your contents and wish you the best of luck on your channel. It is nice to have a friendly and fair Protestant review and thoughts. I recently purchased the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible and look forward to receiving it. My mom recently purchased the The Great Adventure Catholic Bible, Second Edition. If you haven't reviewed that Bible I would be interested in your review of that Bible as well. Well wishes for 2025.
The Great Adventure Catholic Bible has been popular among Catholics.
Isn't it designed to be used with a more extensive group study program?
@@jamesbarksdale978 I believe that they have material so that you could. It is used in the Bible in Year podcast by Ascension as well. There are references materials that you can use alongside both situations, but I don’t believe that it has to be.
My brother in Christ, thank you for the work, been on the fence about purchasing it, and now it's at the top of the list
Great review. Thank you very much for taking the time and for being fair and open-minded about it.
On Rev 12, the Catholic view is that the woman is multi-faceted. She's Mary and she's the Church. I haven't touched Revelation yet in my copy but their notes sound like the Catholic view as I understand it.
Both and...
Mary was not alive at the time they fled to the mountains. This most likely was referring to Gods bride, the house of Israel who were still alive and came to Christ. They fled on Thursday afternoon, April 10, AD70. So their prayer was answered it did not take place on the sabbath nor winter.
I just got my copy of this Bible today from the USA. What a massive volume of work! Your lectures / reviews on this Dojo are really helpful thanks so much for putting them together. I have using the RSV more and more as for me personally coming from a Catholic background it is familiar territory.
Excellent series. I am Catholic. I enjoy your work very much. God Bless.
I pray for you
This has been an excellent indepth review series, thank you.
Loved the review. That Seven Churches tour looks amazing!!
Regarding your comment in 18:30 very prominent early Christians like St. St. Quodvultdeus thought the woman in rev 12 was Mary
"The dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth so that when she bore her child he might devour it. ... The woman signifies the Virgin Mary, who, free of all stain, brought forth our Head."
This was written in the 5th Century
I wouldn’t consider him early. Early Christians were Jews and understood that the Jews had a special place in Gods heart and would not be forgotten. Later on catholics lost sight of that fact that they were grafted onto the olive tree and started to create their own all about me kind of doctrine - going so far as to hate the Jews. Forcing them off land and killing them in their crusades. Good times!
There would be tribulation saints, those who come to faith during the tribulation and are martyred. But the woman is Israel. Israel will be protected during those 3.5 years and wears the 12 point crown of the 12 trines of Israel - out of which God will save a portion from
Each tribe.
And Hod is protecting them while the end is near and Messiah is coming again and the Jews will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child. When he comes again in all his glory.
Thank you, I was about to point this out to him in the comments. Mother of God, pray for us !
St Quodvultdeus was a close friend of Saint Augustine and fled from Tunisia to Italy after his city was captured by Vandals who were Arians.
It's multidimensional..
Like most of Christ's teachings.
@ I just don’t get why he would start talking about Mary all of a sudden. She’s barely mentioned in the gospels and I am not sure if she’s even mentioned in the epistles and letters of the first church fathers. Why do Catholics enlarge the presence of Mary later on so much?
Thank you for your reviews of this Bible. I've been waiting for this to come out for a long time chomping at the bit and it's great to see a third party so to speak. Non-catholic Christian giving an honest review. Thanks for taking a look and thanks for keeping an open mind while approaching it.
We as Catholics don’t just see that figure as Mary, we accept many interpretations of that passage, because of the nature of the way Revelation is written.
We normally emphasize that interpretation though because of the common Protestant polemic against the title given to Mary, Queen of Heaven, as they will typically outright reject that view in discussion.
Well that and the Hebrew Tradition of the Gebirah (Queen Mother), in which the Mother of the King is considered Queen… And since Jesus is the King of Kings…
That comes from the pagan traditions that the Roman Catholic Church hold to dearly. As with many other things you should really dig into "the queen of heaven". Hope you don't take this as an insult because it isn't, just spreading truth and hope you look into it.
@@frankemann81 i don’t take it as an insult. I take it as misinformation spread by self interested individuals more concerned about keeping people in their congregations, than being honest
Anyone that studies history beyond just nodding acceptance to whatever “Pastor Dave” says, can see the truth for themselves.
Just because parallels to an idea or practice in pagan and early historical cultures can be made about something, doesn’t make it a facsimile of the later day beliefs.
Many cultures worldwide had a belief in a cataclysmic flood. That does not make the biblical account of Noah pagan in your mind… does it?
Jesus loved and honored his Mother. Catholics do the same. He is King of Kings, and she is the Queen Mother
Period
@ no, it’s not. Mary isn’t a pagan goddess, she is Mary, mother of God. Totally unrelated by the way, but did you know Hitler drank water? I hope you don’t drink water. Could be a dangerous association 😳
Ignorance can kill your soul! @@frankemann81
Thank you for this review series. I am Catholic now but still follow several protestant content creators on youtube. Your reviews came up as I was looking for info on the St Ignatious study bible. I watched all 5 parts and found your review very helpful. I know you said this was all for now, but I hope you put out something on the Maccabees study notes. I'm looking forward to those once my copy arrives. I Subscribed to your channel. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
Great review series of this Bible. I am waiting for mine to arrive from the USA to the UK. Should be here next week. Being a Catholic myself this is going to be great to read through. Thanks for putting this series together!
As a Catholic your time and effort is appreciated.
Excellent content; very balanced & honest.
Thank you for your reviews. I appreciate and respect the quality of work you put in each video. Liked and Subscribed!
Thanks, you reviews of this Bible have been very interesting.
18:36 Its both. There aren't many catholic apologists who do not affirm it as both. Its your exclusivist reading of it that has us dedending what you leave out.
Also, Protestants have recognized Rev 12 as Mary, too. That's not just a Catholic interpretation. I really strongly dislike the current modern evangelical eisegesis that it absolutely CANNOT be Mary. It's messed up
@@vinciblegaming6817 you misspelled "exegesis". ;)
@@vinciblegaming6817if you deny that it's Mary you then deny that the child born who rules the nation w a rod of iron is the Messiah as described in Psalm 2. Ultimately you end up with a fragmented and limited scope. The woman is Mary, the Church, and Israel. It's both/and not either/or. It's sort of the Dan Brown modern day approach to symbolism that is so narrow
@@DiscipleDojo ha. I acknowledge your sense of humor.
But no... I really dislike those words because you can accuse someone with interpretations you dislike of eisegesis and claim you are doing exegesis. It's self-serving, shuts down debate and discussion, and unfalsifiable.
@@DiscipleDojo definitely eisegesis
I totally understand other interpretations of Rev 12. However, if there’s anyone that DOES want to explore some really interesting unpacking of this from a thoughtful Catholic perspective, Joe Heschmeyer has an excellent video called “Why Catholics make such a big deal about Mary” which makes this case very well I think. It’s worth a watch.
Greatly appreciate your review. God Bless!
Mary and the Church are intimately associated. See the gospel of Luke and John for further details.
Mary is the Mother of the Church since she is the Mother of all who are a disciple of Christ (John 19:26-27) as well being the first Christian.
@@mikejames303you guys just can’t help yourselves haha.
@@MeederTom if you don't like this reality, argue with Jesus, he is the author of this institution
@@MeederTom I know haha, we can't stop spreading the truth.
@@mikejames303 That's nowhere taught in God's Word.. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Nothing more. She's a sinner who needed a Savior, just like anyone else.
Excellent review on the catholic bibble it's a very nice read😊
Excellent review. Thank you!
Thank you for your treatment on this publication! I’m sad to say that this may be the end of my viewership, but will take to praying for your success in bringing souls to the Word of God, Christ’s peace be with you!
Hoping your sadness will someday subside 🙏
Thank you for your very fair and honest review.
Thanks again. I like their notes here too.
Thank you for the great review! God bless!
I think the one thing you're missing from the Catholic perspective is that we view Mary as the archetype of the Church, so of course that passage about the woman can be viewed as representing a person as well as representing the Church. Similarly, Abraham represents faith and the faithful (children of Abraham). So also, the Church is the children of Mary, and Jesus is our brother (as is written elsewhere in Scripture).
What scripture. ?? Catholics give too much adoration(idolatry of Mary) One of the reasons I left the church. There are many more. Such as a myth of Purgatory. Doesn’t exist. There’s heaven and hell. That’s it. No stopover for people who haven’t quite been good enough to go to heaven until living people pay alms until they have bought these souls to heaven. The church is rife with works as being needed to get to heaven. None of these things are in the Bible. At least not the one true word of God. We are saved through faith alone by Grace alone . Works can not save us lest man boast. Jesus said no one is good not one. He said the only one who is good is my father. So works or being a good person are irrelevant to salvation.
So mary is the church and bride of Christ, yet she is Christ's mother?
@thrithgolden2748 She's the archetype, meaning she represents the Church, which is different from being the Church. John's gospel presents her as the new Eve, and Jesus as the new Adam. So there is a bridal symbolism, as well as being mother. That idea comes from John the Evangelist, not me.
Thanks for the reviews!
I always appreciate your reviews and explanations! Thank you so very much for your dedication, generosity, and your commitment to Truth and to our Lord Jesus!!!
Many thanks for the review!
I always thought the RSVCE asterisk notes were very random and mostly unhelpful.
Great review series, thanks so much!
17:53 Revelation 12 as Mary:
St. Quodvultdeus (d. 453): He explicitly identifies the woman in Revelation 12 as Mary. He writes, "The woman signifies the Virgin Mary, who brought forth our Head, and the dragon signifies the devil, who lay in wait for the Lord at His birth".
St. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310/320 - 403): He also sees a Marian interpretation in Revelation 12. He states, "And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. This can be understood as the devil’s attempt to destroy Christ at His birth, and the woman is Mary".
St. Methodius of Olympus (d. 311): While not as explicit, he alludes to the woman in Revelation 12 in a way that can be interpreted as referring to Mary. He speaks of the woman clothed with the sun as a symbol of the Church, but also acknowledges the Marian symbolism.
These interpretations highlight the early Church’s recognition of the Marian symbolism in Revelation 12, alongside other possible meanings.
All the Catholic catechism refers to scripture in the affirmation of the church
I have to go check those superhero seminary videos. I have a bunch of these fellows on my shelves as well... I should find a way to put them at work 🤔
"Disagreement doesn't you don't benefit from people's wisdom and knowledge" I can't overstate how much appreciate this approach
What??
@@YAHWEH-YESHUA-MINISTRIESthey mean that just because you generally disagree with someone, doesn’t mean that they don’t have bits of knowledge and wisdom that you can benefit from. Simple really, more people should have that attitude because it is rare that someone has absolutely nothing you can learn from.
Patmos was described differently to me - as a land of exile rather than penal colony. After John survives the burning oil, he’s sentenced to exile. Difference with a distinction. Good review. Enjoyed your series or reviews on this one. AMDG.
I note you have marked in yellow points you specifically refer to.Such is your attention to doing a fair and clear job😊😊
Excellent explanation on it
I am awaiting delivery of my copy! As a protestant that gets this to try to understand RCC understanding of Scriptures, I have one question. Do I need a copy of the Catechism to get a basic understanding of the references or do the cc have enough for rough?
Oh. There's this app called Ascension. It has a completely free and accessible offline platform to view the Catechism as well as the Bible, RSV-2CE.
Yes I would as a Catholic. Helps you understand the church teachings. I do not have this Bible but I think has CC ref as well.
It’s cheaper to go online and reference the CCC, but if a hard copy is a must there are used bookstores with reasonable copies. Be forewarned that there have been three editions since the early 1990s. Also, the CCC has come under sharp critique. Consult the Baltimore Catechism 4 or Catechism of the Council of Trent.
@@joebollig2689 Thank You! I am mostly wondering if this Bible just throws references out that mean nothing without actually looking at the CCC. I will know soon enough and will keep your comment in mind as a reference for what to do if the references leave me scratching my head.
In my opinion, you would not necessarily need the CCC alongside this study Bible. However, the CCC shall provide you a detailed view of the 4 pillars of the Church and would encourage you to subscribe to Fr Mike Schmitz podcast “Catechism in a Year”
Thanks!!
Hey, J-MS, I've appreciated your reviews of the Ignatius SB and other sources reflecting on the 'ancient faith' and ancient cultural side of things of late. I'm sending you a copy of the Yah Scriptures, and would appreciate your perspective on things such as it, the Cepher, and other 'holy name' Bibles generally "restoring" 'lost' scriptures to the 66-book Protestant collection or recognition of sacred texts. BTW, I also go by SquabBob, Tɨm, and ReformedGrit.
I have the older New Testament version of this and wondered if all the NT notes are the same and they just added the Essays and Old Testament to this new volume. It's not too much money but I always hate to double buy items. thanks ..this was a great series. take care
Good question.
@DiscipleDojo it's called a douay rheims
For a conversation with an Orthodox scholar, I see Fr Stephen De Young interacting with Protestants all the time.
Regarding the textual notes, I've seen them in other places in the RSVCE. It's been a while, but I think the asterisk is more of an interpretive note, while the double cross is a clarifying note. But, I could be mistaken.
JM, I'm grateful for the role you have taken on to be that middleman between the scholarly and the lay worlds. You bridge the gap so well. Thanks!
Asterisk * and obelus/dagger † ("cross") marks are classical typography footnotes indicators. They can be used when there are only a few footnotes on the same page.
* is first footnote. † is second, ‡ third ("double dagger or diesis). There would also exist a triple dagger, and a reversed cross (with the cross at the bottom instead of the top), but those are usualy not included in most available fonts...
Nowadays, we are more used to numbers, or letters, but it is still available as an optional format in wordprocessors such as MS Words.
In this context, I think that they are parts of the original RSVCE footnotes, that are mandatory to use its text. I would think that letters are translation notes, and symbols are interpretative comments.
You should check out the divine mercy bible.
This is awesome!!! Thanks for the review!!
Thanks for the reviews on this one! By any chance, have you looked into the Word On Fire Bible volumes?
@@johnbanasiak3720 I have not
@ oh cool! You answered! I realize you have a whole stack of Bibles and books to review but would you consider adding The Word on Fire Bible to your list? The entirety of the Bible is being released in volumes. Bishop Robert Barron started Word on Fire years ago. I’d be interested to hear your take.
thank you
Have you considered doing any of the Word on Fire Bible volumes?
Tim Wildsmith has covered these, but maybe not in the same depth that JM would.
I'm thinking the footnote thing might have to do with a copyright or approved use issue involving the original owners of the RSV (the World Council of Churches). These notes appear in every RSV Bible I've seen (or it's derivatives, like the RSV2CE). In other words, they're contractually obligated to leave them in.
1 man’s opinion vs 2000 years of Church history 😂😂😂
Those seemingly unimportant notes you mentioned are actually part of the text of the RSVCE2. I have a Ignatius non-study bible version with those notes. They are minimal, but there is no need to rip them out of the text for those who want them, so they are getting the entire Ignatius Bible plus the study notes. I remember years ago the Ryrie Study Bible did the exact opposite. It had all of Ryrie's notes but had ripped out all the essential notes that came with any other edition of the NASB.
@@raymondwichowski2689 what make them odd is that they are interpretive rather than translation-focused.
@@DiscipleDojo It is mandatory for a Catholic bible to have at least some interpretative footnotes (or at least it used to be, I know some recent miniature travel editions that are without any footnotes...). The logic is that we never read the Bible outside of Tradition.
@paulgrassart8935 There's nothing in canon law or in Liturgiam Authenticam that I can find that makes any such stipulation. The interpretive notes in the 1966 RSV-CE are included in most editions of the RSV-CE and RSV2CE, sometimes in an appendix at the back. But there's no requirement, to my knowledge, that an edition must include them. NABRE is different as the notes are included at the insistence of the copyright holders. Catholic editions of other translations, such as the NRSV-CE or ESV-CE, do not include interpretive notes.
Wish you and all your loved ones a lot of health wealth and love from above in 2025.
We are still waiting for our paperback print.
Figured this edition alongside our Catholic Action Bible will serve our family well along the path home to our Father in Heaven.
Tenete Traditiones
God bless
I’ve really enjoyed this series. I’m a convert to Catholicism, and I would be interested in having some conversations with you on my channel.
The United States Council of Catholic Bishops have a verse by verse explanation of the scriptures. The Catholic Bishops in their explanation of Revelation Ch. 12 do not mention Mary; the woman symbolizes people of the Old and New Testaments. (Gen. 37:9-10)
Max J. Lee does the study not one the CSB Baker Illustrated Stidy Bible available on Kindle.
lol, never say never! 😉 I was never going to become Catholic either.
Sad that you did
@ I Used to think the same way, so I get it. Peace and blessings to you.
I recently received my St Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. Do you have your study thoughts on it all in one place, please? Thank You.
Is your course on revelation as a Protestant view? My jiujitsu brother ..
@@sixAdam22 I am a Protestant, but the course looks at different interpretations.
The Apostle John is the Presbyter John. Papias first lusts him alone as one he heard in person, then, after his death, he is listed among the Presbyters (what he here calls all the Apostles) as he asks any who met them what else John said, or what the others had said
27:13 why aren’t you Catholic and what videos do you have that would show your conversations for and against or with Catholics?
@@Truth.n.Love.is.God.BCatholic. I don't have videos arguing for or against Catholicism. I'm not Catholic because I reject the concept of a magesterium and the Papal primacy. If I were to leave Protestantism I would go Orthodox, not Catholic.
@DiscipleDojo Orthodox is just a group of different national churches that spilt from Catholicism, and each of those churches emphasise that nationaity. It doesn't make sense for someone not of that ethnicity to join one instead of the actual Catholic Church. Don't be embarrassed about going back to the actual Catholic Church. No matter what church you join there is always going to be someone in charge whose interpretation has the authority of being correct.
@ thank you for the responding? Do you have any insight videos that outline the reasons for your denomination you’ve chosen or adhere to? I’m especially curious about any traditions or sacraments that are affiliated with your denomination. E.g. sola fide (&/or scriptura), or neither, etc…
@@Truth.n.Love.is.God.BCatholic. me too. I'm curious.
As a Catholic I think you’re wrong… for the algos 💪😅
We should all read the bible and start our own church.
Isn't that already happening since Luther, when it comes to starting an independent denominational church these days with unqualified self made pastors?
😏 Didn't Hazel Motes try this already?
You need to start adding funkopops to your collection
@@nick-oi1xf they are on the shelf down to my left. Hard to see on camera.
We in Philadelphia stage
@@Paul-k3v4d they aren't stages. They were actual churches.
I’ve read all of Romans, 1st & 2nd Corinthians and they have the asterisks and the cross and double crosses all throughout the books.
You must have missed them.
@@horak77 I didn't see them used as subject notes in Romans, but if I missed them, so be it. It's hard keeping track of things I'm not looking for initially.
Catholics always say, "both and".
@@StringofPearls55 not all Catholic study Bibles do so. Thus, my mentioning it and commending this one.
If you want to see a Catholic commentary on the book of Revelation taken to another level take a look at Coming Soon: Unlocking the Book of Revelation and Applying its Lessons to today by Dr. Michael Barber who was a former student of Scott Hahn. I know you have a lot on your plate and it's not your faith tradition that book is like drinking from a firehose regarding the information depth and concentration.
Haven't seen the video yet, but Mary is the Woman!!!! Queen of Heaven and Earth ❤
@@tillo1981 not according to the Hebrew Bible. 😉
@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think! And the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
@@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think? Even the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
@@DiscipleDojo good thing we're Christians then don't you think? Even the Jewish people are very well aware of the Gebirah and her relevance and importance.
revelation was the second volume of john, just as acts was the second volume of luke. if you apply the methodologies of criminology, you can construct a criminological profile of the the new testament. john was written after the fire of rome and the start of the persecution in july of 64. the book of revelation was most likely written starting from the outbreak of the first jewish war in 66. john is the only one without the olivet discourse because these two events happening in succession with the death of peter and paul is a pretty clear motivation. revelation was completed not later than the end of 67 because it would lose its meaning. nero was the beast as verified by his gemmatria, 666. and nero died june 68.
moreover, and more importantly, the new testament never mentions the greatest catastrophe of judaism, the destruction of the temple in 70.
there is clear evidence in the literature before and after the destruction of the temple. this is seen clearly in the writings of josephus, the epistle of barnabas, and the shepherd of hermas, vis a vis the new testament. this conclusion is opposed simply because people do not believe that jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple of jerusalem, just as the jews do not accept jesus can be their messiah.
I'm not Catholic. I think your reviews are awesome. My only concern is study Bibles trying to pull the reader into their faith or church. I'm interested in a Bible history and study only. I wish I could find a group locally to meet with that is multiple denominational
The Bible isn't self-interpreting. Every single Study Bible you find will be interpreting Scripture through the lens of a particular tradition, or just one person's personal interpretations (something like the Tony Evans commentary). The only question is who has the right to interpret the Scriptures.
@bradyhayes7911 I understand and my statement was more of a wish list. I just I'm trying to make sure that any books that I read or not too heavily into trying to convert someone or knowing the rosary or knowing about the Mormons secret temples and the different Church groups private events.
Yes I guess you’re always going to run into this problem especially with a text like revelation that has a good deal of symbolism.
Or maybe this Catholic study Bible also refers to perpetual virgins and Jesus being an only child? Just trying to reinforce that Catholic doctrine
Get a ESV study bible
LOL! You're asking for a lot! I think every study Bible has a perspective that caters to its readership. Hope you can find that eclectic Bible study group.
Let the LivingWater channel see this video because they always freaks out about the rapture.
Excellent review. Not a Catholic (unless we mean small "c"!).
There’s no such thing as a “small c” catholic. Read the Teachings of the Early Church Fathers. Study St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch. In 107 AD, he clearly defined what Catholic is. I’m sure he knows better than anyone.
you are not catholic with smal 'c' if you don't belong to an apostolic Church - pretending otherwise risks to be an obstacle to a serious confrontation with the Catholic/Orthodox position...
It was a red flag to me that, as a non-denominational Christian, every group I saw claimed to be the REAL Catholics. The Lutherans' official name was the 'Evangelical Catholic Church'. The most traditional Anglicans/Episcopalians called themselves Anglo-Catholics. Presbyterians called themselves Reformed Catholics. The official name for Eastern Orthodox is the 'Orthodox Catholic Church'. Even my non-denominational pastor called himself a little 'c' catholic. Every single Christian group I found claimed to be the TRUE catholic church, and yet there was a 2000 year group actually known as The Catholic Church. And they're by far the biggest Christian group, and by far the most globally diverse. It seemed to me that if every Christian intuitively knew their church should be Catholic, God wouldn't hide the 'true' Catholic Church away in some obscure denomination. The Catholic Church IS the catholic church, and it's stood for 2000 years as the largest group within Christianity.
Not trying to be mean, but that definition is undoubtedly a revisionist white-washing of the historical meaning of the word
@@bradyhayes7911 Thank you. The real and only Catholic Church is the Church Jesus Christ personally founded over 2000 years ago. It’s headquartered in Rome. There is no other Catholic (or catholic) Church.
Yeah go look at non Catholic resources, it’s important to know heresy to refute it
@@DaedalusProject that's a silly comment and you should feel silly for leaving it.
I think you are wrong
Hope this helps 😅
Bible scholars when they are trying to get to the truth about a verse or translation always try to go back as far as they can to the source to check the facts.
We can now follow the Christian God belief linage back continuously and see how it evolved over the years all the way back to 1500BC.
What we discover is forget all this stuff about Jesus and Moses, Yahweh/Johovah/The Lord/Allah originally started out as a multi God belief. God called Yahweh by the Jews originally had a father called El, the most powerful god and head of the council of gods. Yahweh also had a sister goddess called Anat, who killed Mot the god of death. Yahweh's brother Baal is mentioned in Jewish scripture some 90 times and although is now relegated to being a false god to accommodate the latter Jewish single god narrative, was the god of thunder.
So do fact check this you will find both Yahweh and El get a mention in the Christian bible, so this is very much your faith we are looking at here!
Just remember God's father was the head of the council of gods, before resolved by the single god changes to being two names of the same god... even if that means god was married to his mother for a while as they were adjusting their god claims.
If you don't have a bible, do a fact check on line it is fascinating to think how generations for the last 2000 years have been feed a line of nonsense... God's brother was the god of thunder no less!
@@apollo8352 that is incorrect, as we discuss here on the channel in our Baal series. :-)
@DiscipleDojo I ask everyone to fact check everything to do with religion, so could you point out which parts are incorrect for me so I can correct my post. Assuming you have fact check me yourself.
Have a great day
It’s the apostle John. Written around 81-96 AD when Roman emperor was Domitian.
@@Gary-e5d nothing in it says he was the Apostle John. That's later tradition. Could've been the Apostle...but nothing demands that it is.
Why is it seem everyone has all these different bibles out. What happened to the original catholic Bible. Why is everyone turning to these new bibles and neglecting the originals
@@TheKidneyAndTheStone there is no such thing as "the original catholic Bible."
@DiscipleDojo who appointed you as a disciple
Which were the originals?
@@TheKidneyAndTheStone Really?
@@TheKidneyAndTheStone I like your response to @DiscipleDojo. He thinks he’s a scholar. He’s not. Read Dr. Scott Hahn’s books and other books from good, Catholic apologists. Perhaps Trent Horn can advise, too. BTW…read the book, “Where did the Bible come from? Our debt to the Catholic Church”. The first Bible that rolled off the printing press was a Catholic bible. Protestants weren’t around at that time.
The first " interpreter" of the Word of God was Satan. The second "interpreter" of the Word of God was the catholic church. The true Apostles of Jesus and His church even today believes simply because Jesus said it. Beware the leaven of the interpreters of God's Word. Revelation chapter 17 is the Word of God concerning the catholic church.
@@francissweeney7318 you just "interpreted" Rev 17, you realize? 😅
No I just passed on the prophesy. No personal interpretation.
I just can not believe in some of Catholic's ways. I know all truths for all us mankind of flesh will be Judgement Day. The Forever Judgement.
Apocalypse not revelation.
@@Ettoredipugnar not in English.
@ it’s a revelation given to St. John on the island of Patmos, a revelation of an apocalyptic vision
Apocalypse means Revelation in greek 😄
godojo your wimpy doodle
@@aubreyleonae4108 I don't know what you just said, but thanks. 😅
@@DiscipleDojo 👍 You're alright 🙂
who cares about a protestant opinion? of course he will defend his sect views lol
@@johntorres3223 obviously you do if you took the time to watch and comment. 😉
Orthodox Church has mostly rejected Revelation.
That's interesting. It's in the EO Bibles, although not in the Divine Liturgy.
Tell me more.
@@jamesbarksdale978
Google
Is the Book of Revelation Canonical in the Orthodox Church?
By Fr. Stephen De Young
Is the Book of Revelation Canonical in the Orthodox Church?
Fr. Stephen De Young
Dismissing and disagreeing for the algorithm. 🫡
.
.
.
.
.
(Kidding. I’ve had mine for a while. It’s awesome! 😉)