My father had a new testament only version of the Bible.

File: aaaa.jpg (115KB, 408x408px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 408x408px

>*randomly opens Old Testament*
>"Ephrain, son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, son of bla bla bla"
>*closes Old Testament*

File: 0db433f14038e77e3faa6f488c80a4af.jpg (33KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 564x423px

>>2687422
Not having separate single quire papyrus codices and parchment scrolls for each work.

>>2687422
Yes. Plebs that have no taste are extremely common.

>>2687422
Only for antisemites

File: 1442289464267.jpg (64KB, 510x482px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 510x482px

What's the correct way to read the Bible?

KJV?

>>2687502
NASB

>>2687440
Guess you never read the opening of Luke's Gospel

>>2687502
Vulgate, anything else is for plebs.

>>2687422
Yes, that's common, my father has only the new testament in his bible too

i had one also. Funny enough soon after being forced to read the old testament in sunday school i became atheist

>>2687897
Really? For me the atheism pill was from the NT, not the OT.

My dad has two. He has a King James Bible that he reads at home and a pocket sized New Testament that he kept in his pocket when he was in combat in the Marine Corps.

>>2687901
how so?

>>2687897
The book of Mormon did it in for me.

Thanks mom and dad, you looney fucks

>>2687931
The OT is horrible, violent, blatantly authoritarian, and very obviously self-serving/self-pandering. I don't really believe in a deity, but I believe that if there is a deity out there who created the universe and at least takes some part in running it, it's the sort of OT god; our universe is not particularly well run.

The NT, on the other hand, is far, far more internally inconsistent, and just less consistent with reality in general. Why does a supposedly eternal being reverse course like that after a thousand or so years? Why are so many quotes of the older testament actually just wrong? Why can't Matthew count? And why, if we're to believe that this deity really is ultrakind, and Good with a capital G as opposed to just powerful and jealous, why is the world so shit? We're being punished for our sins? Bullshit! For starters, most of the theological underpinnings of what sin are and how it works are blatantly inconsistent with the supposedly also perfectly true divine revelations in the OT. But even if you accept the premise that we are in fact being punished for a grave sin of being what our creator created us as, why do you have things like animals and other, non-ensouled life, who did not and cannot sin, heir to all the pains and travails and punishments that this "Good" and "Just" God dishes out, apparently more or less at random?


Tl;dr. The OT makes me sick to my stomach. The NT is just flat out impossible to believe.

>>2687422
Yeah, they're common for mass distribution. For example, they're often given away on college campuses.

>>2687488
But the title of the codex in your pic says ΑΠΟΚΡΥΦΟΝ

>>2687972
i guess im not really in the best postion to answer any of your questions as i havent read the bible in over a decade now
but god isnt necessarily good in the new testament. If you are devoted to him your soul is respected in the afterlife, thats pretty much it. I cant remember any quotes that make him sound good.

>>2687995
That wasn't actually the core of my objection, and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.

Rather, what I meant to say is that my rejection of the NT was based on grounds of implausibility. It just doesn't hold together even if you accept its own premises. The OT has its warts in that direction to, but it does seem to hold up better, which is remarkable given that it's about 4 times as long by volume and written over a considerably longer period. My objections with the OT are ethical, that the god portrayed in it is evil or uncaring, and contradictions with the outside world contained within it. My objections to the NT are primarily based on contradictions with other parts of the NT and parts of the OT. It's the "weaker" section of the two, and because I was reading this primarily in my teenage years, I noted its faults more readily.

>>2687422
I have a cuple of those too, i dont know why, i think i got one from school, not the US.

>>2687498
OY VEY!

File: nuevo-testamento-gedeones.jpg (23KB, 290x320px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 290x320px

Very common. They usually given for free in pocket size.

>>2687422

Yes it is, though, I wouldn't see why anyone would need it, the Old Testament is important to understand how it was used in the New Testament.

>>2687502

ESV is the best commercial one to get, it's literal and easy to understand, it helps provide better theological translation, adds in the Dead Sea Scrolls that make certain passages make sense, it's an all round solid choice.

KJV is technically alright if not outdated in language, but it has many of the text has missing words and variants not found in the original manuscripts of Alexandria and Sinaiticus. It's literal yet it's vocabulary is less precise. It's funny since KJV-onlyists love to meme about how demonic the NIV is, yet their book contains more problems with variants than the NIV.

File: Is-God-a-Moral-Monster.jpg (315KB, 1035x1600px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1035x1600px

>>2687972
>The OT is horrible, violent, blatantly authoritarian, and very obviously self-serving/self-pandering.
>Le argument from outrage meme
>I don't understand OT cultural context

wew lad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C3q3Zr_R8E

File: early-christian-manuscripts-33-638.jpg (114KB, 638x359px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 638x359px

>>2687986
You can still see the holes in the fold made for the binding in the early papyri.

>>2687422
Well, I have an unannotated copy of the Bible that only has the NT, so I suppose it's pretty common.