Has anybody here read the Bible for purely literary purposes?
How did you go about it?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Has anybody here read the Bible for purely literary purposes? How did you go about it?
Me.
I was not raised religiously, but I readed it with an open mind.
Genesis and Exodus are kino. Next 3 books are kind of boring but necessary. Then its kino again until chronicles 1 and 2 which you can totally skip because they are summaries of previous books.
Then uts good until psalms, where the hardest part to get through starts. The poetry parts are way too long (specifically psalms) and just after the poetry parts you have the prophets part, which is basically guys spoiling whats going to happen in the new testament, but you wont get any of it because its said with symbolism, so until you read the new testament you wont really understand said prophecies. Daniel is also a prophet but he is a very interesting read. The rest of the old testament I dont remember anything except of the book of Jonah which is good.
Then all the new testament is good except for some Paul letters. Revelations is like the infinity war of the Bible.
Reading the bible helped me to understand the western civilization morals, it also has a lot of philosophy which, even if you are not a religious person, you can think about and use it in your daily life. Also the story is kino.
Did it convert you?
It did not fully convert me, but I try to follow christian morals because they resonated with me, nd I think they are completely logical, except for respeting the sabbath and holydays. All of the christian morals are based on two things: Love God, and Love every single other humans, even the ones who hate you. This seems reasonable for me, because if I was born in their place and had the same experiences than them, I would be the same than them, and if I were them then I would like to be treated with love.
I'm guessing by convertion you mean going to church and doing the rituals, I did not if thats what you mean.
If you mean convertion by having faith that Jesus died for our sins, then I know that, in the case of Jesus being really God and judging me, he would forgive me.
On the other hand, I'm know doubting that the universe was created by a God (I was raised without religion, so I always saw everything from a skeptic point of view). The universe being created by a God now seems more reasonable.
Another thing I want to say is that reading it in a symbolic way is more enjoyable than reading it literally, you need to analyze and think which parts are literal (historical) and which are symbolic (allegories/symbols), dont take everything 100% litetal.
Last thing, Jesus is one of the best characters in written media, I would even say its the best. Not saying literature to not be disrespectful.
(I'm the raised w no religion anon)
I know this because I've heard hundreds of hours of interpretations, specifically cliffe. But, that said, I can't truly 100% believe. Even if I try to act and to say I do, and even if I try to lie to myself, very inside me there will always be doubt and skepticism.
>Another thing I want to say is that reading it in a symbolic way is more enjoyable than reading it literally, you need to analyze and think which parts are literal (historical) and which are symbolic (allegories/symbols), dont take everything 100% litetal.
The problem is that it's both. These are events that actually occurred and they also have deep meaning. Dividing between purely literal vs purely symbolic is unconstructive because you're attempting to create an arbitrary division that is not present within the narrative solely for the sake of appealing to modern faulty conceptualizations. In any case approaching the Bible in a purely literary manner is silly because you will wholly miss the purpose of the book by not approaching it as something that is divinely inspired.
This is why I like the early church weirdness and eastern religion, you can't (because you're told you can't) say "good job for figuring it out" and accept that Jesus exists on a higher sphere to be connected with, whether or not the best story ever told is true in any meaningful sense.
>It did not fully convert me, but I try to follow christian morals because they resonated with me, nd I think they are completely logical, except for respeting the sabbath and holydays. All of the christian morals are based on two things: Love God, and Love every single other humans, even the ones who hate you.
>Last thing, Jesus is one of the best characters in written media, I would even say its the best. Not saying literature to not be disrespectful.
You cannot view Christ as a 'good moral teacher' if you reject His claim to be God, because if He isn't God (and He claimed to be such) then He is a lunatic and a madman and you cannot take any of His teachings with any ounce of validity. Either Jesus is Lord Almighty and you must approach His teachings as divine word or you must disregard them entirely because no sane person could ever claim to be God Himself while not being such: this is the ultimate conundrum that deists have to contend with.
No, I disagree. Jesus had a very good philosophy, he understood perfectly the human mind. And to make the world a better place, even if he wasnt God, even if he didnt resurrect, he started a new religion with his disciples and then died aa the ultimate message.
You are taking your argument from the book where Paul says that its unreasonable to have faith in Jesus if he didnt resurrected. But we are not talking abiut believing him out of faith, I'm talking about believing him out of thinking deep insidw my mind about his and my morals and trying to be as honest as possible.
>No, I disagree. Jesus had a very good philosophy, he understood perfectly the human mind. And to make the world a better place, even if he wasnt God, even if he didnt resurrect, he started a new religion with his disciples and then died aa the ultimate message.
Jesus claimed to be God and from His teachings "making the world a better place" means following God and being in relationship with God. There is no action you can do on your own that is good enough to guarantee salvation. Christ did not do 'good things' for the sake of some arbitrary sense of compassion but to transform the dead into the living. If you reject God then you have no particularly good reason to follow the things He said to do.
>I'm talking about believing him out of thinking deep insidw my mind about his and my morals and trying to be as honest as possible.
Where does your sense of "morality" come from? And again you are under the misunderstanding that Christianity is about being 'moral' or being a 'good person' when it is not; it is about being in relationship with God. All sense of morality stems from God's desires, and the only reason to follow that is for the sake of being obedient towards the Lord.
>means following God and being in relationship with God.
Not really. If that was the case, then everything the christians believe in could be explained in the old testament. He explained and clarified a lot of things which werent in the OT, specifically the most important is loving others as you love yourself, even the ones who hate you. Besides, he clearly catches humans into following this altruist thinking. Humans, as animals, have 2 instincts: Keep the species alive and survive. By telling you that if you are altruist you'd live forever, hes forcing you to follow both of your most basic instincts: You will live forever and your family will too. Thus, dealing with the fear of death, one of the most dangerous thing a society can think about, thats where the nihilism starts.
You believe that there is no sense in the morals of christianity besides "if you dont follow them you'll burn in hell"? Because they are very well tought up. Christianity is based on empathy. Christianity says that we are all made in the image and likeness of God, thus we are all equal. And even though I dont truly believe that, I believe that if I was born in the body of another human, and raised exactly like that human, then I would be exactly as that human. So, if I ask myself "Would I like this that I'm doing to be done to me?" and the answer is no, then Im an hypocrite dishonest, because the only difference between the other person and me is the body where we were born.
To end, I want to say that, if you follow morals only because a God tells you to, and not because you think with your own reason that they are correct, then you are not choosing to live a rightful life, you are forcing yourself to get that afterlife that you wish for so much.
t. moron
I "cannot view christ as a good moral teacher if I do not believe him to be god" only because YOU say so. You know what, I just decided that Tater Tots are the most healthy food in existence, I believe it with my whole heart, and you cannot tell me otherwise. FRICK YOU.
What ones would you say I should read and what ones could I skip?
Read Joshua and the Samuels and Corinthians, everything else is shit and/or superfluous
Sounds good thanks guys
You should skim (not skip) numbers and maybe deutoronomy. In those books the israeli laws gets explained, but some will caught your eye. Also deutoronomy ending is important.
Then chronicles 1 and 2 are completely skippables, they are hystorical summaries of what youve already read.
Psalms is skippable, its way too long and doesnt adds much.
The next hard books will be Isaiah, Ezekiel and Jeremiah. These books are prophecies of the new testament, they are long and you wont understand them. I'd recommend to read Isaiah and the start of Ezekiel (first 4 or 5 chapters, this is important). Then, when reading the new testament, you should read every single reference at the end of the verses so you make sure to not skip aby prophecy.
After Daniel, except for Jonah, every single book pf the old testament os forgettable. They talk mostly about idolatry, you can skim over them since they are very short.
Then you should read all of the new testament, the only "dense" part to get through is some Paul letters but you'll make it.
Remember to read every single reference at the end of the verses. That way youll see how everything connects way more easily. Also, try to do it only when they are books that you have already read.
>Apocrypha
It's called the Deuterocanon, Cletus.
>Revelations is like the infinity war of the Bible.
marvel movies and their consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Robert Alter translation with copious footnotes about the literary devices used in conjunction with the prose, syntax, alliterations and outright puns, the poetic meters and such.
thanks for the rec. i've been looking for more of a study bible that doesn't insert bias into it and just sticks with the text.
is there a new testament one like this you'd recommend?
In short, no. There is nothing like Alter who is working within a tradition of commentary that is how the israelites have read torah since at least the spooky books /misc/ is afraid of. He quotes Rashi often, who was a brilliant commentator.
David Bentley Hart makes the NT alien in the way it is to read translating it straight from greek yourself. He makes it read like something written by people who didn't speak greek very well and the language aligns with neoplatonism and all those weird gnostic texts. Also Alter as far as the little bit of Hebrew that made it through the septuagint into english.
not literature
I study Classical and Religious Studies at University and I was never brought up with religion at all (brought up quite anti-religious actually), didn’t know anything about it.
I bought the Bible just to learn more about Christianity and wanting to fill that gap in knowledge and I’m now becoming a Roman Catholic, starting RCIA in September.
One thing I will say about the Bible from someone who grew up non-religious, it seems boring until you read it.
Ngl the Old Testament can be a bit of a chore early on with the lengthy list of descendants and the ancient law (interesting to certain people) but the New Testament is a whole new kettle of fish.
That's awesome. What translation do you use? I have the Knox version.
I originally used the NLT but I’m gonna get a Catholic Bible, I’ve been recommended the Jerusalem one (?)
Read the Gospels!! Cannot stress it enough. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all about Jesus and the whole point of the Christian faith.
If you’re wanting to read mainly about the stories of The Bible I would recommend the Action Bible, it’s pretty good
i did that and ended up becoming a believer.
literary impossible.
It's garbage that overstays its welcome.
dilate
The only one dilating here is you. I make sure to curse israelitesus, M*hummad, and Moses every day. Every single last Christcuck, Mudslime, and J*w would be better off dead, including your entire literary corpuses, historical artifacts, and more. Then a bot should be unleashed on the Internet deleting every trace or mention of the Abrahamic traditions.
Anyways, Time will render all of this irrelevant. israelitesus was a vile garbage J*w.
I did but then I converted.
Me, but I only got 6 chapters in before I was converted by the Sermon on the Mount.
I tried but I gave up when I realized I had to learn Hebrew too to actually make sense of it (and it's unironically not worth it, just a bunch of primitive archetypal tales the Greeks did better), not just ancient Greek.
>I don't want to read a book because then I might find God and be saved through his son dying for my sins
Why do people do this? Is it because they want to keep living in ignorant sin? Does OP know, deep inside of himself where only his soul resides, that there is truth that will change him? OP, the word of the cross is lost on the perishing, you have nothing to be scared of.
cope, reading the bible made me atheist.
listening to professional skeptics who claim to have read the bible made you an atheist, you mean.
nope, reading the bible and the apologetics made me realize the entire religion is madeup nonsense and cathecism is only teaching you cope mechanisms.
there are two undeniable events that occurred that even the biggest atheist academics have to accept. a man named jesus was baptized and was crucified. secular historians attest to these things and many others. paul the apostle was a real person and sought out testimony of jerusalem within 5 years of jesus death, returned 14 years later and none of their stories changed. him and peter were executed for this, along with thousands of others under nero. you can keep subscribing to naturist explanations of things, such as 500 people and the disciples hallucinating, an illogical lie about resurrection(even though that is completely contrary to israeli beliefs at the time), "Q" sources, but you are just being dishonest with yourself if you deny how rooted in history jesus was. jesus was based beyond belief and i think atheists have a problem even ever believing a "miracle" could happen; hume's definition of a law of physics or law of nature breaking event, which is ironic since the start of the universe depends on one. i pray you give it a second chance.
the illiad is proof that the greek gods walked among the humans, there are thousands of witnesses that prove it, drop your herectic israeli religion and return back to hellenism.
false equivalency and you know it. you could say the same thing about apollonius with his divinity and resurrection based off a story someone told one time without any other references.
Yes
>How did you go about it?
I bought the book and read it over the span of a month or so.
Outside of Ecclesiastes and some of the Psalms, I've never read any of it, much as I enjoy baroque oratorios and such with Biblical themes. As for what you mean by literary purposes, for me these are mostly a matter of making dreams of day or night a little more civil and pleasingly ornate.
>How did you go about it?
Are you moronic? You start at page 1 and don't stop until you're finished.
Yes. Best book ever. Once you start to see its influence on all literature you realize that nothing else compares to it.