Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Which parts of the bible should I read?

  1. Top | #21
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,835
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
    I do intend to read it all, but given time constraints I want to skip around a bit first. With the number of books I have on the go at any given time, and a baby on the way in four months it'd take me a long, long time to go from cover to cover.
    No problem there. I don't think it's a text that needs to be read sequentially. Indeed, different Bibles are printed in different orders, and none of those orders are strictly chronological or topical, so reading it from cover to cover doesn't necessarily mean the same read for a Catholic as a Protestant, or for a Christian as a Jew. The only books whose order should be maintained are those that were meant as sequels to one another; so Luke and Acts should be read together, as should most books that have a number in front of them. 1 and 2 Kings are actually just one large book, that had to be split into two codices due to technical limitations in the early days.

  2. Top | #22
    Veteran Member funinspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    3,284
    Archived
    10,245
    Total Posts
    13,529
    Rep Power
    63
    And the below is why a good study Bible is useful for context. Abram, per Genesis came from Ur of the Chaldees, a 10th - 6th BCE empire. The Oxford study Bible's intro provides context to when Genesis was put together with guesses to the sources, whether from oral sources or not (10 BCE all the way down to the much later exile).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldea


    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by funinspace View Post
    I won't bother with further clarifications of your foibles on this, as it would be a derail of the topic...

    I'd luv to know when you think the purported Abraham of the Bible existed, as it is commonly put at around 2100 - 1900 BCE.

    https://answersingenesis.org/bible-t...t-mesopotamia/


    Yeah, what's a half a millennia between foibles...
    https://www.ancient.eu/cuneiform/
    This new way of interpreting signs is called the rebus principle. Only a few examples of its use exist in the earliest stages of cuneiform from between 3200 and 3000 B.C. The consistent use of this type of phonetic writing only becomes apparent after 2600 B.C. It constitutes the beginning of a true writing system characterized by a complex combination of word-signs and phonograms—signs for vowels and syllables—that allowed the scribe to express ideas.
    The point here is that Gods Chosen people - people of the book - originated from Mesopotamia where writing was invented.
    Ur which might have been the largest city in the world at the time, was the birthplace of the patriarch Abraham. Surely this perspective is a good contextual starting point for a journey thru the pages of the bible - unquestionably the most important book of all time.

  3. Top | #23
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,335
    Rep Power
    14
    I have heard this before from a Christian. Ancient Jews invented most everything from writing, math, to science. They are responsible for civilization.

    The fundamental problem is Christians tend to see the bible as historically accurate when most of it began as oral tradition. When I read Genesis it seemed obvious the lifespans were made up when putting oral history to paper.

    If Abraham existed who knows when he actually lived or who he really was.

    As god's chosen people they were treated rather badly. I have only seen this broached once in public media. If the Jews are the chosen people, what are they doing wrong to have had so many troubles?

    When did tribes of wandering nomads and goat herders become Hebrews?

  4. Top | #24
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,740
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    29,953
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post

    When did tribes of wandering nomads and goat herders become Hebrews?
    Probably either when the Egyptians rounded them up or when the Assyrians rounded them up.

  5. Top | #25
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Port Clinton, Ohio
    Posts
    2,301
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    2,892
    Rep Power
    62
    I think it was when the first stumbling attempts at Jewish humor emerged. "This manna, it's from heaven? Better you should get take-out from Secaucus." Remember, I said stumbling.

  6. Top | #26
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,335
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by ideologyhunter View Post
    I think it was when the first stumbling attempts at Jewish humor emerged. "This manna, it's from heaven? Better you should get take-out from Secaucus." Remember, I said stumbling.
    Oy Vey! That is actually a very good point. Christians read the bible and recite versus as if the Hebrews were stiff stoic cardboard cut outs. Like Charles Hesston as Moses in the movie 10 Commandments.

  7. Top | #27
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    641
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,527
    Rep Power
    71
    Deuteronomy 20:10-18

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...18&version=NIV

    It involves God commanding slavery and genocide and possibly rape (taking women for yourselves). It is interesting because it forces conservative Christians to justify it as being moral. The Israelites didn't fully obey the command for genocide - and they were punished for it.

  8. Top | #28
    Contributor ruby sparks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    6,498
    Rep Power
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
    Preface to this thread: I'm not interested in arguments about how or why the bible is fallacious or not the literal word of God. I'm starting the thread under the assumption that this is true, but would like to know more about the bible from an objective perspective

    I was given an old, readable study Bible for Christmas and have been picking through it, I'd like to know which parts you'd recommend I read. You can choose a part or section for any criteria you choose, but please avoid the look how batshit this is criteria.
    Possibly, at least as regards the NT, consider watching Monty Python's Life of Brian instead. I sometimes think it has more to say on the subject than anything else I know of.

    I'm not kidding.

    But if you want a suggestion from the actual bible then how about The Sermon on the Mount? It might sum up what I see as one pervasive feature of the whole bible, in that it (that sermon) contains, and is a neat summary example of, what to us look like contradictions. Chapters 5-7 inclusive of Matthew for example. Some of the nice bits are very impressive, given the times in which the speech was made.
    Last edited by ruby sparks; 01-23-2020 at 12:33 PM.
    "Let us hope that it is not so. Or if it is, let us pray that the fact does not become generally known."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •