What do you think?
Rate this book
101 Questions & Answers on the Bible
A noted biblical scholar's concise responses to a wide range of the questions most frequently posed to him about the Bible. †
147 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1990
5 people are currently reading
93 people want to read
About the author
Raymond E. Brown
138 books102 followersRoman Catholic priest, member of Society of Saint-Sulpice and a prominent biblical scholar, esteemed by not only his colleagues of the same confession. One of the first Roman Catholic scholars to apply historical-critical analysis to the Bible.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
September 17, 2017
3.5 stars
My brain feels a little fried. It was SO hard finishing the last 8 or so pages, I felt like I just had no attention span left. Not that the book is bad in anyway - there were actually more 'responses' that I found interesting than I had expected there would be. But while the writing isn't archaic, or Victorian, or even of a high vocabulary level, it's just... not technical, per say, but like reading essays or scholarly articles in tone. A little 'dry' maybe, but a definite adjustment in comparison to the books you get from the store that are designed towards a wider audience.
It's about... basically what it says on the cover. It's the author's responses to the most popular questions that come up on his lectures on the bible. It covers everything from Genesis vs. Darwin (one of the parts I didn't mind - it reminded me of the movie "Inherit the Wind", which is one of my favourites we were shown in school), through the early history of the church, angels, demons, miracles, etc.
More open minded that you might expect, and it's interesting to see the discussions on the differences between Catholicism (the author's faith) and Protestantism, which comes up a few times. It even discusses the 'rising influence of fundamentalism, and it's roots' (the book is a bit dated) - interesting to see how that initially developed, compared to what it is today.
Not a fun read, but it was worthwhile. I'm looking forward to reading some 'fluff' though!
My brain feels a little fried. It was SO hard finishing the last 8 or so pages, I felt like I just had no attention span left. Not that the book is bad in anyway - there were actually more 'responses' that I found interesting than I had expected there would be. But while the writing isn't archaic, or Victorian, or even of a high vocabulary level, it's just... not technical, per say, but like reading essays or scholarly articles in tone. A little 'dry' maybe, but a definite adjustment in comparison to the books you get from the store that are designed towards a wider audience.
It's about... basically what it says on the cover. It's the author's responses to the most popular questions that come up on his lectures on the bible. It covers everything from Genesis vs. Darwin (one of the parts I didn't mind - it reminded me of the movie "Inherit the Wind", which is one of my favourites we were shown in school), through the early history of the church, angels, demons, miracles, etc.
More open minded that you might expect, and it's interesting to see the discussions on the differences between Catholicism (the author's faith) and Protestantism, which comes up a few times. It even discusses the 'rising influence of fundamentalism, and it's roots' (the book is a bit dated) - interesting to see how that initially developed, compared to what it is today.
Not a fun read, but it was worthwhile. I'm looking forward to reading some 'fluff' though!
October 13, 2021
Claro y conciso libro que responde a una serie de preguntas relevantes sobre la Biblia y la Iglesia. Escrito por un experto biblista y sacerdote que responde con admirable escrupulosidad a las cuestiones planteadas. Para aquellos que quieran una base sobre la que comenzar o proseguir la lectura de las Escrituras es muy recomendable su lectura.
La obra se completa con una batería de argumentos católicos frente a algunas acusaciones fundamentalistas provenientes de aquellos que interpretan la Biblia literalmente y sin contexto científico.
La obra se completa con una batería de argumentos católicos frente a algunas acusaciones fundamentalistas provenientes de aquellos que interpretan la Biblia literalmente y sin contexto científico.
December 16, 2018
This is one of my husband's favorite books; Brown is certainly one of his favorite authors and biblical scholars. I read it at his recommendation, not sure how interested I was in what seemed like a simple topic. A non-Catholic, I first learned some basic, important things about Catholic theology, which I found interesting and sensible. I also learned answers and clarifications about Christianity in general, for instance, which gospel writer emphasized what and/or didn't mention at all. Brown is a straightforward writer who doesn't hedge at the questions, 101 of them as the title mentions. He is also upfront about being a believing Catholic, while allowing that not everyone is. I found this little book to be faith-promoting and informative on many levels, and would recommend it.
October 2, 2014
I give this book 4.5 stars. This is an outstanding resource for pastors and/or educated laypeople, in which Raymond Brown, one of the greatest biblical (and especially New Testament) scholars of our time, gives his take on a wide variety of questions and issues around the Bible. Brown's remarks are intelligent, pastoral, clearly stated, and quite helpful to a deeper and more mature understanding of the biblical witness.
The only criticism I would raise, and the reason why I didn't give the book 5 stars, is that it is geared largely to a Roman Catholic audience. Brown notes this fact in the preface, explaining that the questions and answers have grown out of his numerous lectures (and subsequent question & answer sessions), many of which have been delivered specifically to gatherings of Catholics. So, if you are a Roman Catholic reader, you'll probably find more that is helpful in this book than a Protestant reader like me. Although Brown is a very powerful commentator on the relation of biblical material to Catholic faith and practice, and although he does make many very good points (several of which I'd never thought of before, and which have been very helpful to my understanding of Catholic faith), I'm not altogether convinced by all of his arguments/perspectives.
But, again, the best and most important thing about this book isn't it's take on Roman Catholicism; it's the opportunity to read a great scholar's riffs on biblical questions that interest pretty much all Christian disciples. I strongly recommend it!
The only criticism I would raise, and the reason why I didn't give the book 5 stars, is that it is geared largely to a Roman Catholic audience. Brown notes this fact in the preface, explaining that the questions and answers have grown out of his numerous lectures (and subsequent question & answer sessions), many of which have been delivered specifically to gatherings of Catholics. So, if you are a Roman Catholic reader, you'll probably find more that is helpful in this book than a Protestant reader like me. Although Brown is a very powerful commentator on the relation of biblical material to Catholic faith and practice, and although he does make many very good points (several of which I'd never thought of before, and which have been very helpful to my understanding of Catholic faith), I'm not altogether convinced by all of his arguments/perspectives.
But, again, the best and most important thing about this book isn't it's take on Roman Catholicism; it's the opportunity to read a great scholar's riffs on biblical questions that interest pretty much all Christian disciples. I strongly recommend it!
October 1, 2024
THE PREMIER CATHOLIC BIBLICAL SCHOLAR RESPONDS TO THE QUESTIONS HE GETS MOST OFTEN
Fr. Raymond Brown (1928-1998) was perhaps the greatest biblical scholar of the 20th century. He wrote in the Introduction to this 1990 book, “In the late 1950s I completed doctoral studies preparatory to teaching the Bible… In 1960 I gave my first summer school on the Bible and in the intervening years, beyond my regular teaching, I suppose I have spoken a thousand times to groups of all sorts who were interested in hearing about the Scriptures... I have been struck over the years by how often, no matter what I lecture on, the questions that are posed in the period assigned for such questioning come back again and again to the same subjects… And so I have decided to try to pull together some of my experiences in these question periods, the questions that I remember as the most asked, and to put in print responses to them.” (Pg. 1)
He explains, “In terms of what we might call the literal sense of Scripture, i.e., what a verse meant when it was first written, it is doubtful that the Roman Catholic Church has ever defined the meaning of any passage. The church has defined that some of its doctrines are related to scriptural passages, but not necessarily that those doctrines were in the minds of the people who wrote the passages. Thus, a conflict between private interpretation and church doctrine based on Scripture is really not relevant to the type of commentary help that I have been describing.” (Pg. 25)
He observes, “If the Book of Jonah is a parable and not history, then God’s inspiration makes it an inspired parable. The truth that it conveys about God’s desire to convert all nations to the recognition of His name and to a moral way of life that will bring them happiness is a truth that we can accept as God’s inspired word for us. Inspiration does not mean that we have to believe that a historical figure named Jonah was swallowed by a large fish. We would have to deal with the factuality of that only if the Book of Jonah were inspired history. Similarly, if the first chapters of Genesis are not classified in the branch of the library called science, but in the branch of the library called religious lore and legends, we would still accept the creation of the world by God as the inspired truth conveyed by these chapters. We would not, however, have to accept the Genesis description as a scientific account of the origins of the world.” (Pg. 31)
He notes, “In the early 1900s the Roman Pontifical Commission issued official answers to a number of questions that had been provoked by the development of critical biblical scholarship, particularly among Protestants. It insisted that substantially the Gospel that appears first in the New Testament represented the work... of Matthew,... and that the Fourth Gospel was the work of John... in the mid-50s, however… the same Roman Pontifical Commission explained that now Catholics had full freedom with regard to such decrees except when they touched on faith and morals (and really none of them did that in any substantial way). This means that while earlier Catholic teaching about the identity of the evangelists was bound by an official church response, that is no longer the case. Catholics are now as free as anyone else to express their views about the identity of the evangelists.” (Pg. 59)
After revealing that he DOES believe in a devil, he adds, “As for people who believe in the existence of a supreme intelligent principle of good, namely God, I am not at all clear as to why [people] would feel impelled to deny the existence of a supreme (under God) intelligent principle of evil. Does the recent history of the world incline one to doubt the existence of such an evil force at work? Indeed, the more pessimistic, the more recent history of the world might make it easier to believe in the devil than to believe in God.” (Pg. 70-71)
He says about the birth stories in Matthew and Luke, “there are reasons for thinking that the birth stories… are not historical in some, or even many details…. There is no official church statement in force the birth narratives are literally historical.” (Pg. 76) Later, he adds, “The enduring virginity of Mary is something that goes beyond any documentary attestation and we have and represents praise of Mary that stems from our faith. We Roman Catholics consider it a doctrine of the church, but that does not necessarily mean that Mary told anyone that she always remained a virgin. We accept this doctrine of ‘Ever Virgin’ not on the basis of a biblical text, but from Christian reflection on the sanctity of Mary and the way in which that sanctity was expressed in her life.” (Pg. 93)
More controversially, he states, “Jesus shared many of the religious presuppositions of his time---presuppositions reflecting detectable limitations of knowledge with which the modern reader would not have to concur. For instance, Jesus seems to take literally that Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a fish (Mt 12:40), while we would understand the Book of Jonah as parabolic... to deny the full humanity of Jesus is just as serious as to deny the full divinity, and one may argue that it is truly human to be limited and time-conditioned in our knowledge. Thus we may have in Jesus the strange combination of absolute surety about what God wants of us if God’s kingdom is to come, and a limited human way of phrasing the message.” (Pg. 105)
Brown’s books are always challenging and illuminating (at least, for those with a relatively “progressive” perspective on theology), and the breadth of this one will make it “must reading” for anyone (particularly Catholics) wanting to read one of the “giants” of modern biblical scholarship.
Fr. Raymond Brown (1928-1998) was perhaps the greatest biblical scholar of the 20th century. He wrote in the Introduction to this 1990 book, “In the late 1950s I completed doctoral studies preparatory to teaching the Bible… In 1960 I gave my first summer school on the Bible and in the intervening years, beyond my regular teaching, I suppose I have spoken a thousand times to groups of all sorts who were interested in hearing about the Scriptures... I have been struck over the years by how often, no matter what I lecture on, the questions that are posed in the period assigned for such questioning come back again and again to the same subjects… And so I have decided to try to pull together some of my experiences in these question periods, the questions that I remember as the most asked, and to put in print responses to them.” (Pg. 1)
He explains, “In terms of what we might call the literal sense of Scripture, i.e., what a verse meant when it was first written, it is doubtful that the Roman Catholic Church has ever defined the meaning of any passage. The church has defined that some of its doctrines are related to scriptural passages, but not necessarily that those doctrines were in the minds of the people who wrote the passages. Thus, a conflict between private interpretation and church doctrine based on Scripture is really not relevant to the type of commentary help that I have been describing.” (Pg. 25)
He observes, “If the Book of Jonah is a parable and not history, then God’s inspiration makes it an inspired parable. The truth that it conveys about God’s desire to convert all nations to the recognition of His name and to a moral way of life that will bring them happiness is a truth that we can accept as God’s inspired word for us. Inspiration does not mean that we have to believe that a historical figure named Jonah was swallowed by a large fish. We would have to deal with the factuality of that only if the Book of Jonah were inspired history. Similarly, if the first chapters of Genesis are not classified in the branch of the library called science, but in the branch of the library called religious lore and legends, we would still accept the creation of the world by God as the inspired truth conveyed by these chapters. We would not, however, have to accept the Genesis description as a scientific account of the origins of the world.” (Pg. 31)
He notes, “In the early 1900s the Roman Pontifical Commission issued official answers to a number of questions that had been provoked by the development of critical biblical scholarship, particularly among Protestants. It insisted that substantially the Gospel that appears first in the New Testament represented the work... of Matthew,... and that the Fourth Gospel was the work of John... in the mid-50s, however… the same Roman Pontifical Commission explained that now Catholics had full freedom with regard to such decrees except when they touched on faith and morals (and really none of them did that in any substantial way). This means that while earlier Catholic teaching about the identity of the evangelists was bound by an official church response, that is no longer the case. Catholics are now as free as anyone else to express their views about the identity of the evangelists.” (Pg. 59)
After revealing that he DOES believe in a devil, he adds, “As for people who believe in the existence of a supreme intelligent principle of good, namely God, I am not at all clear as to why [people] would feel impelled to deny the existence of a supreme (under God) intelligent principle of evil. Does the recent history of the world incline one to doubt the existence of such an evil force at work? Indeed, the more pessimistic, the more recent history of the world might make it easier to believe in the devil than to believe in God.” (Pg. 70-71)
He says about the birth stories in Matthew and Luke, “there are reasons for thinking that the birth stories… are not historical in some, or even many details…. There is no official church statement in force the birth narratives are literally historical.” (Pg. 76) Later, he adds, “The enduring virginity of Mary is something that goes beyond any documentary attestation and we have and represents praise of Mary that stems from our faith. We Roman Catholics consider it a doctrine of the church, but that does not necessarily mean that Mary told anyone that she always remained a virgin. We accept this doctrine of ‘Ever Virgin’ not on the basis of a biblical text, but from Christian reflection on the sanctity of Mary and the way in which that sanctity was expressed in her life.” (Pg. 93)
More controversially, he states, “Jesus shared many of the religious presuppositions of his time---presuppositions reflecting detectable limitations of knowledge with which the modern reader would not have to concur. For instance, Jesus seems to take literally that Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a fish (Mt 12:40), while we would understand the Book of Jonah as parabolic... to deny the full humanity of Jesus is just as serious as to deny the full divinity, and one may argue that it is truly human to be limited and time-conditioned in our knowledge. Thus we may have in Jesus the strange combination of absolute surety about what God wants of us if God’s kingdom is to come, and a limited human way of phrasing the message.” (Pg. 105)
Brown’s books are always challenging and illuminating (at least, for those with a relatively “progressive” perspective on theology), and the breadth of this one will make it “must reading” for anyone (particularly Catholics) wanting to read one of the “giants” of modern biblical scholarship.
April 15, 2015
Excellent primer on how catholic scholarship understands the bible. Also has great advice for engaging with fundamentalists and biblicists. It has a helpful appendix for answering objections to commonly misrepresented catholic doctrines
August 15, 2021
I really enjoyed this. It is very pleasant to read an honest accounting of Catholic Biblical thought and scholarship. I was impressed with the honesty that Fr. Brown brought to the discussion of what we know, and what we don't know, about Jesus and his times. I was especially surprised by the frank discussion of the differences between the Bible and tradition/magisterium in Catholicism. Too many Catholic thinkers and writers believe that Jesus left this world with his instructions for exactly how to create, manage, and grow his church....and look! It just how happens to be just like what we have now! It is a self-serving fantasy, to put it as kindly as I can.
One of the more interesting aspects of the author's analysis is what he called the three stages of development of the traditions about Jesus that led to the Gospels. Stage one is Jesus himself and his ministry. Stage two is those who were witnesses first hand to what happened, while stage three is the actual writing of the Gospels. The Gospel writers--no one really knows their names--were basing their stories on what had been told to them (or perhaps written down) by those who knew Jesus and witnessed the events covered in the Bible. The contradictions are numerous, and what we know is far outweighed by what we don't know. Virgin births? Bishops? The eucharist? It's all mighty hazy. I appreciated Fr. Brown's honesty about all of this, and while he himself wrote that, as a Catholic, he looked to the traditions and teachings of the Church, he left a lot of room for interpretation and other ways of following, and worshiping, Jesus. That's pretty remarkable stuff from a Catholic priest, but...this guy was a professor at Union Theological School, so one expects a certain theological generosity.
One part I liked in particular is about how tradition, interpretation, and practices can change to speak to people across all of time, and in all places. Fr. Brown used the Parable of the Talents as a metaphor for taking something valuable and either allowing it to grow and change, or burying it in the ground to preserve it just as it was given to you. In the story, the man who hides his talent does not have a happy ending! I like this idea very much.
At the end of the day, I am a bit of a free-range Christian. I do not belong to a church. I find things I like about each of them, and things I dislike about each of them. Were I to pick, I think I'd go Episcopalian: they are a blend of Anglo-Catholic and Reformed that has a lot of room for confused, wavering ecumenical harlots like me. Catholicism is the faith of my family, but it is not mine anymore.
One of the more interesting aspects of the author's analysis is what he called the three stages of development of the traditions about Jesus that led to the Gospels. Stage one is Jesus himself and his ministry. Stage two is those who were witnesses first hand to what happened, while stage three is the actual writing of the Gospels. The Gospel writers--no one really knows their names--were basing their stories on what had been told to them (or perhaps written down) by those who knew Jesus and witnessed the events covered in the Bible. The contradictions are numerous, and what we know is far outweighed by what we don't know. Virgin births? Bishops? The eucharist? It's all mighty hazy. I appreciated Fr. Brown's honesty about all of this, and while he himself wrote that, as a Catholic, he looked to the traditions and teachings of the Church, he left a lot of room for interpretation and other ways of following, and worshiping, Jesus. That's pretty remarkable stuff from a Catholic priest, but...this guy was a professor at Union Theological School, so one expects a certain theological generosity.
One part I liked in particular is about how tradition, interpretation, and practices can change to speak to people across all of time, and in all places. Fr. Brown used the Parable of the Talents as a metaphor for taking something valuable and either allowing it to grow and change, or burying it in the ground to preserve it just as it was given to you. In the story, the man who hides his talent does not have a happy ending! I like this idea very much.
At the end of the day, I am a bit of a free-range Christian. I do not belong to a church. I find things I like about each of them, and things I dislike about each of them. Were I to pick, I think I'd go Episcopalian: they are a blend of Anglo-Catholic and Reformed that has a lot of room for confused, wavering ecumenical harlots like me. Catholicism is the faith of my family, but it is not mine anymore.
May 20, 2019
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. As other commentators have mentioned, it read a bit dry, though very informative. It provided some questions I had not thought of and answers I didn't realize, such as development and writing of the biblical books. Fr. Brown leaned heavily into historicism, maybe a touch too much to me, but I am not learned enough in this area to push back. He seemed to recognize this himself towards the end of the book, recognizing the tension between the human Jesus and the divine Jesus, since He possess both and it is beyond our earthly ability to understand this Mystery of the Incarnation. Also, the edition I read is ~25 years old, and so it may be somewhat outdated in terms of recent developments in biblical scholarship; still, it provides a solid foundational understanding for answering questions asked of the Bible.
June 26, 2020
Libricino stupendo, che risponde a domande annose su alcune caratteristiche del NT (e alcune cose su Genesi e il Pentateuco). Davvero stupendo per un approccio semplice, scientifico, che aiuta il cristiano (ed il non cristiano) a scremare il necessario dal costruito, scritto da uno dei più grandi biblisti del XX secolo.
March 5, 2020
Great for a book of its size, though not exhaustive in dealing with issues
December 31, 2020
Very in depth.
May 26, 2021
Surprised by how good this little book was. Raymond Brown did not disappoint here. If only I had found this book 10+ years ago, it would have saved a lot of time.
March 23, 2016
This is a good book; sections of it would be excellent for a beginning, undergraduate religion course. Some of Brown's scholarship would now be in dispute, for example the "three stage" development of the Gospels (55-58). Nevertheless, Brown does a great job of introducing people to critical Bible scholarship from a faith based perspective. Would have been five stars but I found some of his critical conclusions a bit tendentious.
June 3, 2012
I'm a big fan of Raymond E. Brown, so not surprisingly I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Much shorter than some of his other tomes I've read, and easy to read a little at a time. Great perspective on the Bible, history, religion, and the Catholic Church and the Pope. Highly recommended to anyone interested in the Bible, especially Catholics.
January 14, 2014
I find it hard to rate this, because I am not in any way qualified to judge the accuracy of his arguments, but I found he did an excellent job of stating the viewpoint of an intelligent Catholic bible scholar without overstating the evidence.
August 28, 2016
This was a good book written in the early 1990's to answer questions regarding the Bible as it applies to Catholic teaching. The answers given are simple, for the most part. I can recommend this book for those who are interested in a Catholic reasoning behind sometimes difficult questions.
August 3, 2016
The most accessible, practical, and concise book on the Catholic understanding of the Bible that I've read. Not only that, but it also addresses some important issues in Christology and ecclesiology.
August 12, 2012
Concise, easy to read 101 most commonly asked questions on the Bible arranged by topic by one of the premier Catholic scripture scholars in the US.
October 4, 2016
Great format with conversational but still intellectually challenging answers with a commitment to both Catholic perspective and an ecumenical spirit.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews