Sup /lit/ I am undoubtedly missing a lot of allusions in Western

>>9482523
You don't need to read the whole bible just the New Testament

>>9482523
read the KJV New Testament
or better yet the whole thing you indolent whelp

>>9482523
First go through Moses books. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomii, slightly longer pack, but nearly as vital as New testament for western literature. Gospels are short as fuck, and you may even bluff your way by reading only one of them, still go with all of them. I'd also also add Apocalypsis and Acts. The former is widely used today. Go through this, and you'll have the all the basics covered fairly quickly. The masses of text that scare most people away are the historical books and prophets. If you go for the expanded package you'll need to go through major prophets, and at least major psalms if not all of them, and round it off with what's left from New Testament.

>>9482561
>>9482585
>>9482724
Appreciate the advice

>>9482523
Just read the whole fucking thing. If your goal is to be able to recognize allusions and motifs in other works you can afford to read the entire Bible. It isn't that long compared to the rest of Western literature you'll able to better understand afterwards

>>9482786
Yeah, I'm gonna end up just buckling down and reading the whole thing. Was scheming for a shortcut, but turns out I'd be better off just nutting up and reading the brick

>>9482786
But it's boring af

>>9482786
If you end up losing interest halfway through then you won't pick up everything.

>>9482822
Just always keep in mind the Bible is a collection of books classified in different genres so don't feel bad about reading it "out of order", in fact going straight through is probably the worst way to do it. Go with a reading plan like the other anon says

yesterday i thought about reading the bible might pick it up of free from some christians

>read the KJV
Yes, but not as your first pass, it's a bastardization of the texts and although much of Western literary canon is predicated on it, it doesn't offer much in the way of contextual understanding. NIV is a wimpy assembly in terms of religious value, but it makes digesting the work itself pretty simple and is arguably one of the least dodgy, revisionary versions.
>read books in XYZ order
No. Read the Bible front-to-back as 'intended', with a few minutes Wikipedia reading for context on each individual book to give you the simple chronological and cultural framework of each of the composite texts. Also a little Wikipedia time learning the differences between the source texts (Aramaic, Old Hebrew, Septuagint, Gospels, etc) will help.
There is certainly value to guided reading of the Bible, but the work is arranged the way it is for reasons that transcend simple chronology and have been taught as such for hundreds of years.
>where do I go from there?
The Apocrypha and supplementary Catholic canon texts are probably the most important for the Western canon and exploring the larger cultural significance of the Biblical texts in their home countries and abroad.
After that, probably studying the Gnostic and Kabbalah traditions will lend you insight into the more esoteric post-Judaic belief systems.

File: t3sBthY.jpg (481KB, 2372x2400px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 2372x2400px

>>9482847
Start with the Book of Job, then read the Bible whole

or

Start with the Divine Comedy and then read Bible

or

Start with Moby Dick and then read the Bible

PS Only time someone can call Bible boring is when they haven't read it, enjoy the show friend

Get a "reader's bible" they're much easier to read and are laid out like a novel.

>>9483434
Does it lose poetic structure of KJ version?

>>9483411
i thought the whole idea behind reading the bible was to understand things like Moby Dick

Check out this one: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071NQ8Y8R or this one: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NU9A0YO

They are very good in their structure, and read like novels. You'll get through Genesis in about 15 minutes.

Yeah, best bet is just to read it.

IMO:
1) Get a version that's readable in plain-ish English. In other words, try to get a modern version that doesn't try to be overly archaic -- you don't need to go so far to Simplified English versions if you don't want to.

2) Get a version that uses paragraphs, at least for the Old Testament. Most KJV printings lack this, and I think it's utterly vital to making the Bible readable.

3) Get a version with section headings. While not absolutely vital, when combined with paragraph format, they make it very easy to tell which parts are long lists of details that you don't need to pay attention to (for instance: 1 Kings 6:23 and on is marked as the "The Furnishings of [Solomon's] Temple", and casually glancing at the text makes it clear that it only deals with small details that, certainly in a first reading, I don't give a crap about).

In terms of literary allusions and other such things, references to Christianity pretty heavily lean on the Old Testament, since it was there for much longer and since the OT is filled with *many* more narratives than the NT.

>>9482561
For Jesus' ministry, sure, but you're missing out on a fuckton if you skip the Old Testament.

>>9482724
>Recommending Leviticus to a newbie
You don't want to send OP to sleep.

There's plenty of bible reading plans to get you started. My ESV has one that gives a good overview of passages important to Christianity. You can get an ESV outreach Bible super cheap online.

ANYWAY for an actual introduction, read the BBC's pages on Christianity, that'll give you the basics

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/

Google the Open Yale University courses on the Bible and get a study Bible.