Regardless of beliefs it is possible to appreciate a piece of literature on it's own merits, and the king James is beautifully written.
It's pretty boring. The pacing is way off and there's a lot of 'telling not showing'. The characters' motivations are often suspect and the God character is impossible to relate to. I enjoyed Jesus in small doses, but overall it's a snooze.
Although I'm a Christian I've never read the full thing. I should though, and this is hypocritical of me, because I don't believe you can put your faith in a thing or have grounds to criticise it without reading it yourself. Same reason as I would never criticise the Koran - I haven't read it, only extracts and without context extracts can be twisted to mean anything. I was chatting to a guy a few weeks ago who said "The Koran is evil because it says *this, this and this*" and then immediately went on to say "Of course I've never read it myself, but.." - no buts about it, if you haven't read it yourself how can you criticise it? Same as any book.
I will read it all though. To be honest I've read most of it, but never cover to cover. The thing is, I find some of it difficult to understand - such as St Paul's sentences running on and on making me lose track, or just the archaic language used.
I saw a plain English translation once so will give that one a go, might be easier to understand and get through it all in modern English! Which might in turn make me appreciate the older translations...
Not since I was a child at school, I did not believe in a god then and I don't now. There may be something in some of the stories, but the whole Adam and eve thing, a virgin birth and other things, I do not think so.
The Bible is the most unpleasant character in all fiction, jealous and proud of it, unjust, unforgiving control-freak, a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser, a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, genocidal, sadomasochistic, malevolent bully.
But we pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly.
The Bible's a character now? Man, that's some next-level metatextual Jorge Luis Borges shit.
My favourite parts are the weird parts in Revelations, seems to have been written on drugs.
Revelation is the sister book to Daniel - in order to understand it, you need to understand Daniel first, because they explain each other. Most of Revelation is prophecy and metaphor - there's a site here that explains both books together:
Try reading it as an atheist. Leave god out as I did. What you are left with is the philosophy of the New Testament. Then you will understand why this religion swept the world. As for the Old Testament, leave god out because he was just a way of explaining the upheavals of the world- all cultures have that much in common - and what you will find is all human life , including the nasties, and much wisdom.
After having a quick flick through the illustrated one that I have, I think it could be quite a good read for a, in my opinion, a story book. I don't believe all the supernatural stuff in it for a second, but I think it will make a good read though.
It does have one characteristic that makes it preferable to the Koran.
No one claims the Bible is the revealed word of a God. Or at least not many do. Hence its followers cannot claim it is the immutable truth in the way that Islamists use the Koran to justify fanatical acts.
i like Ecclesiastes. Sorta jewish version of omar khayyam. And Ruth who is clearly a lesbian. And,ezekiel seeing those spaceships. Near the end this bloke nails hiself to a,fence post,.......
Ruth a lesbian? How do you work that out? Just because she was fond of her mother-in-law? I was fond of mine, but I'm not a lesbian.
Try reading it as an atheist. Leave god out as I did. What you are left with is the philosophy of the New Testament. Then you will understand why this religion swept the world. As for the Old Testament, leave god out because he was just a way of explaining the upheavals of the world- all cultures have that much in common - and what you will find is all human life , including the nasties, and much wisdom.
As a non-atheist, I couldn't agree more. Brilliant post.
Try reading it as an atheist. Leave god out as I did. What you are left with is the philosophy of the New Testament. Then you will understand why this religion swept the world. As for the Old Testament, leave god out because he was just a way of explaining the upheavals of the world- all cultures have that much in common - and what you will find is all human life , including the nasties, and much wisdom.
Interesting. I have read lots of it as an atheist - I was impressed with the beautiful poetry in some parts, but other than 'be kind to people' I didn't get a philosophy to sweep the world. Most atheists are kind.
Not since I was a child at school, I did not believe in a god then and I don't now. There may be something in some of the stories, but the whole Adam and eve thing, a virgin birth and other things, I do not think so.
Same here, a complete fairy story, similar to a Christmas pantomime like Aladdin and his Magic Lamp, Jack and the Beanstalk, Goldilocks and the Three Bears or Cinderella, any of which and many more fairy stories could easily be included in the bible stories. Three wise men looking for a star shining in the East and they are looking West "it's behind you"
Same here, a complete fairy story, similar to a Christmas pantomime like Aladdin and his Magic Lamp, Jack and the Beanstalk, Goldilocks and the Three Bears or Cinderella, any of which and many more fairy stories could easily be included in the bible stories. Three wise men looking for a star shining in the East and they are looking West "it's behind you"
In the Wikipedia entry in the below link, the three wise men from the East came to Jerusalem and then followed a star that they had seen rising.
In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, asking, "Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews? For we observed his star at its rising, and have come to pay him homage." When King Herod heard this, he was frightened and all Jerusalem with him; and calling together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. They told him, "In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet: 'And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who is to shepherd my people Israel.'" Then Herod secretly called for the wise men and learned from them the exact time when the star had appeared. Then he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, "Go and search diligently for the child; and when you have found him, bring me word so that I may also go and pay him homage." When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another path.
I have read it. I don't know why everybody hasn't, it only takes a few hours. In fact I would rather strongly recommend reading it. Obviously in (fairly large) parts it is hard going but one can skip bits. The one I read was the Authorised Version. I have a New English Bible somewhere but although I intended to I have not read it completely.
I have also read The Koran, deliberately recently when people started prattling on about how 'muslims' are evil, and how it advocates bad things. It doesn't of course. It is hard going all the way because there is little 'story'.
Islam does not agree that followers should 'turn the other cheek'. I have never met a Christian who thinks that either but nevertheless many such say that means it is a violent religion. I have known large numbers of Christians, I used to be one (I was a member of Christian Endeavour - i.e. a Methodist) until I was about 17 when I just kind of stopped believing.
It's pretty boring. The pacing is way off and there's a lot of 'telling not showing'. The characters' motivations are often suspect and the God character is impossible to relate to. I enjoyed Jesus in small doses, but overall it's a snooze.
Each to their own, I like reading Genesis out loud in Eddie Izzards James Stewart voice.
I have read it. I don't know why everybody hasn't, it only takes a few hours. In fact I would rather strongly recommend reading it. Obviously in (fairly large) parts it is hard going but one can skip bits. The one I read was the Authorised Version. I have a New English Bible somewhere but although I intended to I have not read it completely.
I have also read The Koran, deliberately recently when people started prattling on about how 'muslims' are evil, and how it advocates bad things. It doesn't of course. It is hard going all the way because there is little 'story'.
Islam does not agree that followers should 'turn the other cheek'. I have never met a Christian who thinks that either but nevertheless many such say that means it is a violent religion. I have known large numbers of Christians, I used to be one (I was a member of Christian Endeavour - i.e. a Methodist) until I was about 17 when I just kind of stopped believing.
Are you serious? You must be a very fast speed-reader then.
(I don't always believe. I just never don't believe. If you get me).
I think I know exactly what you mean, I'm very much like that myself.
I think people should ask themselves just how many times they say 'Oh my God' - or when there's a problem 'Please God ......' - I know they're just phrases but - a it's the first call we make at certain times.
My 'logical' side tells me not to be ridiculous but my 'emotional' side refuses to let go sometimes.
I have read it. I don't know why everybody hasn't, it only takes a few hours. In fact I would rather strongly recommend reading it. Obviously in (fairly large) parts it is hard going but one can skip bits. The one I read was the Authorised Version. I have a New English Bible somewhere but although I intended to I have not read it completely.
I have also read The Koran, deliberately recently when people started prattling on about how 'muslims' are evil, and how it advocates bad things. It doesn't of course. It is hard going all the way because there is little 'story'.
Islam does not agree that followers should 'turn the other cheek'. I have never met a Christian who thinks that either but nevertheless many such say that means it is a violent religion. I have known large numbers of Christians, I used to be one (I was a member of Christian Endeavour - i.e. a Methodist) until I was about 17 when I just kind of stopped believing.
Really? Are you talking about the children's bible or an abridged version. I know serious Christians who have studied the bible extensively but still never managed to read it from front to back in it's entireity.
It does have one characteristic that makes it preferable to the Koran.
No one claims the Bible is the revealed word of a God. Or at least not many do. Hence its followers cannot claim it is the immutable truth in the way that Islamists use the Koran to justify fanatical acts.
To be honest a lot of evangelicals believe it is 100% to be followed literally. I know a few like that - the weird thing is that even with the realm of those types of Christians they often disagree passionately with each other on certain aspects due to "interpretation" especially if you get to Rapture theology.
What is strange is that the chronology was established at a Council a few hundred years after Christ was here. So it was compiled by man. I'm a Christian and do believe that the Bible is the best record of the amazing man Jesus but I don't tie myself up in knots to practice everything in it.
Read bits but not from cover to cover. Too many "begat's" for my liking.
Actually, even as an agnostic, think some of the NT is pretty good. (Michael Stipe vocal impression: "Judge not lest ye be judged; what a beautiful refrain.")
To be honest a lot of evangelicals believe it is 100% to be followed literally. I know a few like that - the weird thing is that even with the realm of those types of Christians they often disagree passionately with each other on certain aspects due to "interpretation" especially if you get to Rapture theology.
What is strange is that the chronology was established at a Council a few hundred years after Christ was here. So it was compiled by man. I'm a Christian and do believe that the Bible is the best record of the amazing man Jesus but I don't tie myself up in knots to practice everything in it.
It was the product of various communities of believers as a record of their story, to make sure it all got passed on to future generations of members.
It was never meant to be a book of proofs for non-believers.
Comments
It's pretty boring. The pacing is way off and there's a lot of 'telling not showing'. The characters' motivations are often suspect and the God character is impossible to relate to. I enjoyed Jesus in small doses, but overall it's a snooze.
I will read it all though. To be honest I've read most of it, but never cover to cover. The thing is, I find some of it difficult to understand - such as St Paul's sentences running on and on making me lose track, or just the archaic language used.
I saw a plain English translation once so will give that one a go, might be easier to understand and get through it all in modern English! Which might in turn make me appreciate the older translations...
The Bible's a character now? Man, that's some next-level metatextual Jorge Luis Borges shit.
I've read almost all of it, and am trying to read some every day.
The best way to find out what the bible is all about, is to read it yourself.
Revelation is the sister book to Daniel - in order to understand it, you need to understand Daniel first, because they explain each other. Most of Revelation is prophecy and metaphor - there's a site here that explains both books together:
http://understanding-daniel-revelation.com/index.html
After having a quick flick through the illustrated one that I have, I think it could be quite a good read for a, in my opinion, a story book. I don't believe all the supernatural stuff in it for a second, but I think it will make a good read though.
No one claims the Bible is the revealed word of a God. Or at least not many do. Hence its followers cannot claim it is the immutable truth in the way that Islamists use the Koran to justify fanatical acts.
The Bible mate. Come on, you've heard of it. It's in hotel rooms in America.
Ruth a lesbian? How do you work that out? Just because she was fond of her mother-in-law? I was fond of mine, but I'm not a lesbian.
I love the Book of Ruth. And the Song of Songs.
As a non-atheist, I couldn't agree more. Brilliant post.
Interesting. I have read lots of it as an atheist - I was impressed with the beautiful poetry in some parts, but other than 'be kind to people' I didn't get a philosophy to sweep the world. Most atheists are kind.
I love the Song of Songs. I wish I believed in God like you do.
Same here, a complete fairy story, similar to a Christmas pantomime like Aladdin and his Magic Lamp, Jack and the Beanstalk, Goldilocks and the Three Bears or Cinderella, any of which and many more fairy stories could easily be included in the bible stories. Three wise men looking for a star shining in the East and they are looking West "it's behind you"
In the Wikipedia entry in the below link, the three wise men from the East came to Jerusalem and then followed a star that they had seen rising.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Magi#Biblical_account
I have also read The Koran, deliberately recently when people started prattling on about how 'muslims' are evil, and how it advocates bad things. It doesn't of course. It is hard going all the way because there is little 'story'.
Islam does not agree that followers should 'turn the other cheek'. I have never met a Christian who thinks that either but nevertheless many such say that means it is a violent religion. I have known large numbers of Christians, I used to be one (I was a member of Christian Endeavour - i.e. a Methodist) until I was about 17 when I just kind of stopped believing.
Well, you can if you want.
(I don't always believe. I just never don't believe. If you get me).
Each to their own, I like reading Genesis out loud in Eddie Izzards James Stewart voice.
Are you serious?
I think I know exactly what you mean, I'm very much like that myself.
I think people should ask themselves just how many times they say 'Oh my God' - or when there's a problem 'Please God ......' - I know they're just phrases but - a it's the first call we make at certain times.
My 'logical' side tells me not to be ridiculous but my 'emotional' side refuses to let go sometimes.
Really? Are you talking about the children's bible or an abridged version. I know serious Christians who have studied the bible extensively but still never managed to read it from front to back in it's entireity.
To be honest a lot of evangelicals believe it is 100% to be followed literally. I know a few like that - the weird thing is that even with the realm of those types of Christians they often disagree passionately with each other on certain aspects due to "interpretation" especially if you get to Rapture theology.
What is strange is that the chronology was established at a Council a few hundred years after Christ was here. So it was compiled by man. I'm a Christian and do believe that the Bible is the best record of the amazing man Jesus but I don't tie myself up in knots to practice everything in it.
Actually, even as an agnostic, think some of the NT is pretty good. (Michael Stipe vocal impression: "Judge not lest ye be judged; what a beautiful refrain.")
Be the end of GD though. ;-)
It was the product of various communities of believers as a record of their story, to make sure it all got passed on to future generations of members.
It was never meant to be a book of proofs for non-believers.