Interpreting Sacred Scripture


I respect the CCC, but I am not Roman Catholic and have a different interpretation on some issues. For instance the CCC defines the fire of Luke 12:49 as the fire of the Holy Spirit given to man. I disagree. Jesus said that He was going to bring fire to the earth, not to men. Therefore, I believe that this “fire” is the same as the fire of Isaiah 66:15-16, and it is the fire of a global nuclear war.


My old Jerusalem Bible gives a quite lengthy footnote to this verse in Luke, listing several possible interpretations of the “fire.” Nuclear warfare, however, is not one of them.

Also, the verse in Isaiah and the verse in Luke are not cross-referenced to one another. Evidently the Dominicans who produced this edition detected no connection between the two. My personal view, FWIW, is that they probably got it right.


Thanks for attention to this issue. I use that Bible, and will look up your reference. The idea that YHWH’s judgement of mankind is effected through a global nuclear war is not a popular one and, of course, is only recently available.
When I asked my Episcopal priest if the fire of 12:49 was the same as the fire of 66:15-16, he said that in Anglican theology it was.


With all due respect, seeing as most Protestant denominations have so many interpretations of Scripture, can’t agree on “essentials” (whatever those are), & are not united, I’ll stick to the historical teaching of the Church.


Let’s take each book and it’s contents individually. Sacred Scripture is made of many books over many centuries, in different cultures.
Where would you like to start.


This is a good example of personal interpretation. To understand this passage, and Jeremiah, we must look at what was going on at the time, with the Jewish people.


Yahweh says He will not destroy by flood. Please read the verse thoroughly.


That’s the second version of two. In the first (8:21) the flood is not mentioned. YHWH makes an unconditional promise that He will not destroy humanity ever again.


Quote the verse and the passages beside it please

Genesis 9:11 says specifically that God will not destroy by flood again.

9:11 And I shall maintain my covenant with you: that never again shall all living things be destroyed by the waters of a flood, nor shall there ever again be a flood to devastate the earth.’


Most don’t see ancient prophecy as relevant to modern times. As you may have noticed, I don’t agree with that idea. Isaiah 3:17-24 is a perfect description of the conditions for Jewish women in the slave labor camps of the 1940s.


How do you explain Genesis 9:11
And as for Jeremiah, we could discuss what the Jewish people were experiencing at that time, however it would derail the thread.
Make a new thread if you like. There are people knowledgeable in Ancient Jewish history here on CAF


It may not be relevant to your argument, but in Isaiah 66:16 the Lord says he is going to bring his judgment by fire and the sword “to all flesh,” not “to the earth.”


I only wanted to provide an example as a way of giving my opinion as to a possible answer to this question, which is that the prophecy of ancient scripture may be more factual than we realize and may even be relevant to modern times.
My apologies if I derailed the thread.


Scripture must be weighed in both the literal sense, and the allegorical sense.


This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit