The Bible is literature. Thought I'd give it a read. What's

that yale course

>>7614742
http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies

This one? Should I treat the two testaments as completely separate?

>>7614749
Yes, New Testament studies is completely different, and the more you study the more you realize its a different world. The associated Ehrman book with the New Testament class is a primer, and an excellent one at that that is widely available to pirate.

As far as reading the bible as literature, of course you should read it all but for enjoyment, Job, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Matthew, and James are masterpieces.

>>7614784
1 Maccabees is also pretty awesome if you like to imagine wild eyed zealots slaughtering greeks.

File: image.jpg (162KB, 406x595px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 406x595px

>>7614784
"If you believed not Moses, how shall you believe my words?"

>>7614804
I'm talking about historical-critical studies, not making a faith statement. IE the Christ-cult of Syria merging with the Jesus People of Jerusalem, Mark's rebellious Jewishness vs. John's Christian Zealotry, reconciling inconsistencies, etc.

>>7614784
>>7614796
Thanks, the Bible will be an interesting read.
I just learned it's more correct to call it a collection of 66 books. And that there are multiple versions. So how should I attack the (protestant) Bible? I was thinking just start at Genesis and go from there but I feel like it might dissuade me if I start with the raw old testament stuff. Is there a recommended order for people who've never picked one up before?

>>7614738
Read it in order. In the Old Testament the Israelites relationship with God changes throughout, the text undergoes an evolution of ideas. Also read chronologically for the thematic consistencies. God tells a lot of people not to do a lot of shit, but what are the consistent values of the Bible? The ones that you'll find a thousand pages after the first few of Genesis? The New Testament refers back to the Old repeatedly and won't seem quite so revelatory unless you see how belief systems are being altered, maintained, and turned on its head. Yes, there are a lot of boring parts. But you'll find a lot of really interesting things in there that if you hadn't read the thing yourself, nobody would have told you.

>>7614749
>This one? Should I treat the two testaments as completely separate?
You have to understand the intricacies of the way they are treated to understand them as a pair rather than individuals. They should, for a novice, be treated as two entirely different studies. Start with the old testament then tackle the new when you're intimately familiar.

>>7614823
The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version Fourth Edition

KJV is interesting for what it is.

>>7614823
Maybe it would benefit you, if you are impatient ro genuinely interested in christianity, to read the highlights of the new testament. Go read some Jesus for entertainment, but when you're ready to treat it as study you should go back to the old testament to understand his world and what he saw it through. Then you can more properly handle the new testament in an academic capacity.

>>7614823
That course you posted on the old testament is very good for novices. I am more interested in NT stuff, and it was very accessible for me, and she works in a lot of archaeology.

>>7614834
https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/historical-jesus/id384233911?mt=10

I got alot out of this course as well, and he provides you with TONS of scholarly works to dig deeper if you so choose.

Please read the bible in two editions.

Read the King James as it is the most important book in the west, but read it alongside a critical, more literal translation. This tactic is absolutely necessary to get the most out of the book. You will not finish the Bible this year. Just start working on it at your own pace, and try your best to both appreciate the literary value of the KJV and the theology, history, etc. that becomes more apparent through a more modern translation.

>>7614824
Sounds good, I've tried to talk to a lot of people about learning the Bible but they're all trying to convert me from the get go. Who knew 4ch would be the best resource for studying the Bible.

>>7614834
>>7614838
Thanks man, this is exactly the kinda stuff I'm gonna get into

>>7614841
What more literal translation do you have in mind? I don't know much about modern translations. I have an NIV Bible that I'll work through since that was the one I was given, I'll refer to KJV verses online in parallel with the NIV.
I've literally got nothing to do all year, my job has me doing absolutely nothing so I decided I'd do some reading instead of the usual shitposting, so I'll (hopefully) be working through it quickly.

>>7614851
>What more literal translation do you have in mind?
see
>>7614829

The best cheapest study bible out there.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0195289552/ref=mt_hardcover?_encoding=UTF8&me=

File: 12158101.jpg (14KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x360px

>Protestants

Can someone give me the best and literal translation of the koran/qu'ran? Saw this thread and figured its related enough

File: 1.jpg (190KB, 1104x1104px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1104x1104px

Congratulations on reading the literal and figurative cornerstone of Western literature, the same book which has guided nearly all of the West's great writers, and great minds alike.


Remember to know exactly what you're reading. This picture should help. The Bible was put together by a council of men


The Law books describe early, early, Hebrews.

I like the history books. Lots of entertaining stories.


Proverbs and Pslams are beautiful.

The prophets are included in the Bible, mostly because many times Jesus is fulfilling prophecies or giving lessons, and the reader can flip back to the prophets and read about them, to confirm Jesus' identity as the Messiah. They are also useful for teaching


Of course, the Gospels are the main focus of the Bible, and Christianity as a whole

Paul's letters are the most useful writings for a Christian, second to Jesus' words. Paul explains and teaches the Christian

Revelation is a tricky one. Many Biblical scholars believe it shouldn't have been included. But its fun to read

>>7614851
I've always enjoyed the KJV. It has a really interesting history

As you may know, the Bible used to be only read in Latin. Most educated men would speak some form of Latin. Latin languages like French and Spanish evolved or this very reason. Henry the 8th of England didn't really like Rome, so he printed his own Bible in English.

Over time it evolved into the King James Bible.

Over time it became the most widely printed book in English, and nearly every speaking home had a copy. There's a very, very high chance that your great grandparents (and there parents, etc etc) first learned to read English because they were taught it from a KJV Bible.

File: ed61bd0b4b4e9c94a457eef1a7430387.jpg (229KB, 736x903px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 736x903px

This is the reading plan I've been following, but I read two bits everyday instead of one. To be honest I'm not sure reading all these books simultaneously is effective. I feel like some of these books need to be read as a whole, while other parts can be read disjointedly. It also doesn't include the Apocrypha.

I am reading the New Oxford Annotated Bible 4th Ed with the Apocrypha. NRSV translation. I highly recommend it. It's taking a while to go through all the footnotes and context bits, but I think it's worth it. I might get a KJV bible after reading this one.

>>7614868
arberry

>>7614873
Thanks for this overview, Revelations looks fun hahaha

>>7614889
Wow, I didn't realise it had this much impact. This is what makes reading/studying the Bible so interesting, it's the same texts that people from hundreds and thousands of years ago also read.

>>7614912
>>7614854
I'll most likely be getting this Bible, thanks again.

>>7614873
>>7614912
Are Maccabees 1 & 2 canon? I read them in a Dutch translation, but when I wanted to look up the KJV on the website it was missing.

>>7615126
Yes they are canon but only in the Roman Catholic, Greek, and Slavonic bibles.

>>7614738
I read like this:
skim twice front then back
skim important text,
skim entire text
and then read

To add to that:

Saying A, E , I , O , U
or 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

And while doing that record myself reading it.
And then read. Maybe best.

>>7615141
Also when reading it. It is best to question myself about the text while reading or perhaps read up about it.

>>7615145
Or perhaps try to read like that.

>>7615126
I'm looking for a Dutch version but can't find out which to pick

SV and NBG 1951 seem a bit outdated, but NBV and HSV use 'jij' instead of 'gij', which just doesn't feel like Bible to me.

Pls help

>>7615137
Thanks, glad I still got to read it.

>>7615162
I had the same problem. Eventually I just started reading the Willibrord version (1978) since it was already laying around the house.
The language is somewhat archaic but not too difficult to follow. The only disappointment so far (for me) are the Psalm translations.

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willibrordvertaling

>>7614738
Torah -> History Books -> Prophets -> Apocrypha -> Gospels -> Epistles

Which is essentially the front-to-back order of a standard Protestant Bible. The Wisdom literature (i.e. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes) can be read at any point.

The New Testament depends on an understanding of the Old Testament. The Epistles depend on an understanding of the Gospels.

The Prophets depends on an understanding of the Torah, and to a lesser extent, the History books.

>>7614823
>I just learned it's more correct to call it a collection of 66 books.
More like eight (or so) collections of similar writings. The Torah (first five books) is one piece. The history texts are another piece. The prophets are another piece...

Also, Bibles without the Apocrypha are pleb-tier.

>I feel like it might dissuade me if I start with the raw old testament stuff.
If you don't want to read the whole thing, don't. But the raw old testament stuff is important to understanding the new testament.

>>7615214
Why is it so important to read the Apocrypha? How much would I be missing out?

Also, I have decided to just go at it from front to back.

>>7615221
You'd miss about a third of the history of the Jews. Ever hear of Hanukkah? Want to understand the religious climate Jesus lived in?

You won't get either of those from the Protestant Old Testament, which ends about 400 BC. But you will get it from 1 & 2 Maccabees.

The Apocrypha has several types of literature. You could skip Tobit and Judith without any problem. Sirach is pretty similar to Proverbs.

Also, here is a chronological order of the (Protestant) Bible:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/dailyreading/pdf/1yr_chronologicalplan.pdf

You'll notice that it's pretty close to a front-to-back reading order.

>>7615198
I have Willibrord '78 at my parents' home as well, and I guess it might be the perfect middle ground (also has hilarious translation of Hebrew names, for example Job's daughters are named Tortel, Poederdoos and Kaneelbloesem instead of their Hebrew names), but I want a Bible for myself and Willibrord is quite hard to find.

Thanks for your help though!

I was told to only bother reading

>Genesis, Exodus, Job, Ezekiel, Judges, all of the Gospels, Psalms, Song of Solomon and Revelations

Was I mislead?

>>7614873
>Congratulations on reading the literal and figurative cornerstone of Western literature, the same book which has guided nearly all of the West's great writers, and great minds alike.
Stopped there fuck your god you obvious vucnt esOUBecsnpouVFRWsNJ;f GUCK JESUS AND MOTHER JESUS WAS RAPED BY MARY WITH A TWIG AS BABY

>>7615641
Don't cut yourself on that edge, and make sure to tip your fedora.

File: mfwCatholicism.png (320KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 500x375px

>>7614861
>Catholics

>>7615627
Massively, I dont think anyone here is talking about reading for faith (and I dont know anyone of Christian faith who would tell you not to read Elijah and Daniel).

Not to mention avoiding Job ignores the question of natural evil, and ignoring Paul just doesnt make sense for any Christian reader.

>>7615711
>>7615784
>I dont think anyone here is talking about reading for faith
ppl don't do this
we read to get away from it or, more nobly, we read to become better aquanted with it

>>7615790
Im only saying that no one would tell you to cherry pick the bible for that if they didnt have a very specific faith based agenda.

>>7614738
Why bother? Really. The modern day equivalent, of quality, excluding relevance, would be Atlas Shrugged. The few parts of the few chapters I read convinced me that John Green is more worthwhile!

>>7615784
Thanks man, I wasn't told to read those from a faith perspective but just to understand the Western canon

>>7614738
>>7614738
just remember to read the bible from right-to-left after you finished reading it the wrong way the first time OP

>>7615800
>this is a troll post

>>7615627
If you're looking for the Western canon, you better add

>Acts
>A couple of Paul's Epistles (i.e. Romans, 1 Corinthians)
>The famous parts of 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings

What's the best audiobook recording of the Bible?

>>7615627
I recommend ecclesiastes and proverbs too. And Maccabees is p. entertaining in its own right.

From the new testament, I would say add Acts and Hebrews

>>7615721

ITT: passages that trigger martin Luther

>For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also (James 2:26)

>But muh faith alone!!

He's the reason why all these born again Christians think it doesn't matter if they sin or not. As long as they subscribe to the Protestant YouTube channel they get a free pass.

What about the New World translation of the holy scriptures? The JW bible. I've heard it's the most accurate bible translation

Wouldn't that be better than the King James version

>>7617566
>I've heard it's the most accurate bible translation
It's not. "Accurate" is a complicated and subjective term, but few scholars would prefer the New World Translation over translations widely used in academia, such as the NRSV.

The King James Version is about 400 years out of date. However, it's language has had a huge impact on English, and so it you're reading the Bible for it's literary value, you're probably better off with a King James Version..

>>7616403
Sounds fun, will do, thanks anon

>>7614738

>Attend Mass
>Read the assigned readings
>Talk to your pastor

that is my best advice

>>7618325
Would it offend the Pastor asking questions about the Bible as if it were any other piece of literature though?
Also any talk about faith and I'm outta there.

>>7618378

I attend a mass in Northern New York when I'm visiting family. I've met the priest personally, and have talked to him a few times, of course in the setting of a church function or a banquet.

The thing you have to realize, is these guys are, for the most part, intellectuals. Maybe not in the same way you might think, but many of them are well verse in history, latin, greek, philosophy, and theology.

Despite their accolades, and what people of faith believe, their regular people who know a lot about their subject. They went to school for it. A lot of them are pretty easy going, intelligent, and welcoming.

They're there to answer your questions. I'd say give it a try, just please try to be respectful, and I'm sure they will be respectful as well.

>>7618411

I don't live in the US of A so it'll be a bit more difficult to find someone but I might give it a go. Catholic Churches will be difficult to find, there is majority protestant here. (although from what I've heard from America, they're different to your protestants)

>>7616904
>>7617294

Thanks guys, I'll add them.

>>7614738
Another question, what stationary does everyone use when marking/writing in your Bibles?

Read the Gospel of Thomas and Barnabas to see how the Christian church has the distorted view of Jesus. He was not God. He never claimed to be those things came after.

>>7618588
Are they apocrypha?
Is this about the Trinity?

>>7618607
Yes the apocrypha is where you will find a more accurate view of Jesus. With the NT you only get one side of it - the Christian side.

>>7618613
Were they deemed apocrypha because the sources were dodgy/illegitimate or because they went against current beliefs?

>>7614873
Which is the closest to philosophy?

>>7618900
Kohelet

>>7614738
>2016
>not reading the Quran instead for literary merit

>>7619070
Sure why not, what's a good translation?

>>7614738
I wish people read the bible like they believed the stories were true. Why is it when we were faithful and enlightened by this great book, we could be so great and yet when we lost our faith, we ourselves declined.

What ironic lament that a book of faith is merely literature to the overly clever, overtly cynical people of this era.

>>7619087
By every measure, humanity has progressed since the time of the bible, and right now we have a situation where secular societies are far more advanced in all arenas than religious ones.

>>7619092
Except irreligious societies soon die. Historically, cultures which lose their religion, they die themselves.

Human beings are exactly as religious as they were before, it is merely that the religiosity is directed to other things. Belief in aliens, or new age garbage.

>>7614784
>not mentioning John as a masterpiece

>>7618621
No they were deemed so by a council.

Thomas may have been based on pre-Markan material.

File: 1428521710997.png (32KB, 416x215px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 416x215px

>reading the bible
lmao god isnt even real and anyone with an iq over 110 will know this

why the fuck is the bible still sold haha? who the fuck is it for?

>>7619674
Even if you don't believe God is real, you can't possibly deny its cultural relevancy. References and allusions to biblical tales can be found in literature spanning back centuries. I don't believe in Greek gods either, but I still think it's important to read Iliad and Odyssey.

>>7619690
if we destroyed every last trace of bible on the world we would literally start improving.

>>7619690
Very true but by reading it ppl won't start believing dude, your alltewrior motives are lame.

File: c9a.png (225KB, 373x327px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 373x327px

>>7619705
I want reddit to leave

>>7619705
If we all lived by the sermon on the mount, regardless of our beliefs in a higher power, we would immediately start improving

>>7619674
>my specific definition of "God" does not exist in the physical sense, therefore a large collection of teachings that has inspired millions of people to live their lives in a way that would seem correct to them for two thousand years, is not worth reading.

>>7619752
>le has been mayor influence meme
and hitler inspired 50 million germans and austrians, and still millions after his death, sam ething, fuck off christfag

>>7619756
>implying that Mein Kampf shouldn't be read for historical perspective

>>7619764
Taking my post as a refutation of Mein Kampf's worth is kinda missing the point.
i don't believe it offers much either though.

>>7619074
Abdullah Yusuf Ali for your first read-through, and Abdul Majid Daryabadi if you want to compare other religious texts.

>>7619756
Everyone I don't like can be compared to Hitler: The emotional child's guide to political/religious discourse

>>7619775
>>7619773
>admit youre a dumbass racist christfag
>try to backpeddle to prove youre not

>>7619764
Knowing and understanding what it is, and reading passages is far more worthwhile than wading through it.

Source: I bought it as an edgy 17 year old

>>7619775
jesus is the nrew hitler brah, my post (this one) contains as much credence as youts

>>7619764
No..
>>7619773
^ is right, there are hundreds of other historical texts that hold much more perspective from both and all sides before you should read Mein Kampf, if at all.

>>7619773
I guess I missed the point, then. What were you trying to say? I'm saying that both MK and the Bible are historically and culturally relevant and thus are worth the read, even for irreligious folks.

>>7619780
>Racist

>>7619707
I don't believe in God, edgelord.
>Muh "alltewrior motives"

>>7619756
Are you aware that you even more dumb than enlightenment idiots who refused to study medieval history and texts because they thought it was irrelevant and bad?

How do you hope to understand anything if you don't want to engage in it because it's >TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN

>>7619819
not the other anon
but, go back to /pol/ desu non-familiosa

>>7619835
Are you aware that your mom's dick is still in your ass from 30 years ago and you mom's ass is filled with the Pastor's which in turn is filled with Judas's sperm from over two thousand years ago?
Get your slave shit outta here nigger.

File: giphy.gif (494KB, 250x168px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 250x168px

>>7619835

File: 5060765+_874fb3a5167ddadfd038aa55a4724f6a.png (27KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 625x626px

>>7619674

Read my translation.

>>7619892
*pushes you against a locker*

>>7619932
haha try it faggot choir boyt i'm 2.03 and can dunk biatch
i could fuck up your whole congregation
but i use words because im smarter than any churchgoer

>tfw started reading the Bible almost borderline theist, expecting it convert me
>tfw not doing anything at all

How do people find faith in this?
>yeah there was this bloke who said he was the son of God
>what did he do?
>well he healed people and kept saying that you should believe in him and god or else

I can understand the belief in a God, but I don't really get the belief in Jesus.

>>7620624
>or else
gets me everytime

>>7619175
this...as well as much of Paul's epistles

>>7615721
>protestant
wew hahahaha

File: jj.jpg (24KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x500px

How do I write dialogue for black characters?

>>7621034
Use A confedarancy of Dunces as a template.