I'm re-reading the Bible

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Greenleft, Apr 16, 2018.

  1. Greenleft

    Greenleft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Recently I've been reading religious texts of various religions. It's taking longer for the next set of books to arrive, so I decided to do a re-read of the whole Bible. In 2015 I read the NIV (New International Version) translation cover to cover. Last year I got an NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) translation and read the Apocrypha which is wedged in between the Old and New Testaments.

    Now I'm going to read the whole NRSV Bible along with the Apocrypha cover to cover. Now most people here will say 'Whatever works for you'. But I realize what I'm doing will make some evangelicals and fundamentalists cringe. I just find it weird how easily people can be displeased.

    Here is why they disapprove:

    Some people believe the only English translation that is acceptable is the King James Version and all others are perversions. I'm reading the NRSV.

    Some people think the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible. I'm reading it after the Old Testament and before moving on to the New Testament and put it into the overall narrative.

    Catholics and some Bible based new religious movements like Jehovah's Witnesses and Iglesia ni Cristo believe you should not form your own opinions on what the Bible says when reading it and rely on their religious authorities to interpret the text for you. Obviously I'm not going to do that.

    Anyway, what do I hope to get out of the exercise? Well it will probably reinforce my decision to renounce my faith back in 2012. Also I've read online that the NRSV is the Bible preferred by liberal minded Christians and many Biblical scholars use it. It will be interesting to find out why. Also, I've never read the whole Bible combined with the Apocrypha cover to cover. It will also give me an excuse to purchase a third Bible of which I want to read (never purchase books you have no intention of reading) that is the Geneva Bible. I don't intend on reading all English translations. Just the ones that grab my interest.
     
    DennisTate likes this.
  2. DennisTate

    DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    31,489
    Likes Received:
    2,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Excellent.......
    I have probably read the Bible itself fifty times or more.......
    You may wish to liven up your readings by going into this..... about fifty pages can be read just by clicking on the link.....
    "Preview this book...."

    https://books.google.ca/books/about/The_Thomas_Book.html?id=kbiGjKJl4D4C
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2018
  3. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You get out of it what you put into it.

    If you are reading it as a non-believer that means you are probably looking for flaws and you will probably find them.

    As a Christian I can say I've never read it cover to cover and I never intend to.

    Instead its a tool I use to help me along my path.

    When I am going through issues, or have time, I will pray to God and the Holy Spirit will guide me to where I need to go and, without fail, I find something relevant that I can use in my personal life.

    The Bible isn't a bunch of words to be dissected, its a way for us to communicate with God. For him to show us examples to strengthen us and give us hope when we need it, to see how we should live, to see what we should strive for and what should be important in our life.

    It's not really of any use if you don't believe.
     
    usfan and Gatewood like this.
  4. YourBrainIsGod

    YourBrainIsGod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    478
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Good luck.

    Never read the new versions, only the King James’ which I find to be ambiguious at times. These days I open it every now and then, read a few passages to see if it’s saying anything relevant I can take in.

    The King James’ is certainly more historical, but even that could be considered a perversion considering how ancient the text really is.
     
    DennisTate likes this.
  5. YourBrainIsGod

    YourBrainIsGod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    478
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I disagree, depends on how you look at it. I’m not personally a believer, but I look at it in a similar way to reading Plato’s dialogues or Aristole’s Metaphysics. There are certainly things to pull out of it even if you aren’t a ‘believer’. I simply don’t take it as divine authority.
     
    Aleksander Ulyanov likes this.
  6. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well those guys never pushed a belief, not sincerely, sure you had the Just City but the planoist was a cult made up of their own, not something encouraged by their "creator".
     
  7. Guess Who

    Guess Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2014
    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    1,189
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IMO the Bible is not something you just read it is a quest and intense study. Some things in it will never be understood by any of us.
    Not saying don't read it just be ready for lots of questions as you do.
    Even the Bible tells us there are some questions we will never know because our minds are not capable of it.
    After about 50 years of study I still just say a prayer and take breaks from it now and then.
     
    yabberefugee and catalinacat like this.
  8. YourBrainIsGod

    YourBrainIsGod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    478
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I would say they did push beliefs, but it might be a bad example.

    More modern works to consider are Moby Dick and Ulysses. They are more than just the words on the page and their inventive prose. There is great wisdom within that took years of study to culminate.
     
    Aleksander Ulyanov likes this.
  9. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh please, Moby Dick was rejected 8 times before it was published as a last chance.

    Not sure about Ulysses but I'm sure it wasn't all that when it was put out.

    There is no great wisdom there except what you read into it and for that you might as well read the bible.
     
  10. YourBrainIsGod

    YourBrainIsGod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    478
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Have you read either? I wouldn’t make such comments if you haven’t.

    Being rejected has nothing to do with how good a book is. All great authors have been rejected. Especially books that push the bounds of language at the time. These books have endured, they are certainly special.

    If the bible was written today if would have never made publication, long winded, and a meandering sense of purpose. Both Moby Dick and Ulysses are better for a modern reader.
     
  11. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All great books haven't been rejected and are you therefore saying all books accepted are great?

    What exactly are you saying?
     
  12. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All of the Bibles had the Apocrypha until the 1880s when it was deleted from the latest revision to save on printing costs. Plus two English guys didn't like it so they got it dumped.

    All of the KJVs are based on the 1769 KJV revision.

    The NRSV deletes Acts 8:37, which says that you have to believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God before getting baptized.

    If you want to understand the biblical stories you first have to know what the real Ten Commandments are. If you don't know that then you are just reading a bunch of meaningless words.
     
  13. Greenleft

    Greenleft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    There are overlaps in the commandments like 'do not commit adultery' and 'do not covet another man's wife' as well as 'You shall have no other gods' and 'do not make idols'. So it's sometimes hard to determine if there are 10 overall.

    Are you suggesting that another translation will give me a better interpretation of the commandments?

    I acknowledge that speaking as a non believer makes this a moot point, but regardless, that's why we (as a former churchgoer) have something after baptism called confirmation. Confirmation is where you stand before the congregation and accept Jesus as your savior verbally. It's weird how confirmation is rarely discussed among Christians. Confirmation is the Christian equivalent of the Jewish Barmitzfa. I had to get confirmed if I were to have a church wedding.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2018
  14. it's just me

    it's just me Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,269
    Likes Received:
    381
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I'll save you the trouble: the main difference between the KJV and the Geneva Bible is in the margin notes, not in the text.
     
  15. it's just me

    it's just me Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,269
    Likes Received:
    381
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Actually, Confirmation is when the Bishop confirms that you believe the Christian faith.
     
  16. Greenleft

    Greenleft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Ummm... Is what I experienced Confirmation or was it something else? My story: I was baptized as an infant. In 2003 when I was still a believer and I had turned 18, I had to spend about 6 weeks of Bible studies at my church. After that, on the occasion with my Bible study classmates, I stood in the front row of the church wearing white and was asked if we accepted Jesus as our savior. We all replied with a yes. Then we took the bread and wine.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2018
  17. it's just me

    it's just me Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,269
    Likes Received:
    381
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I suppose they think of it as confirmation, although Biblically and historically Confirmation is usually done by a Bishop, after which he prays for you to receive the Holy Spirit.
     
  18. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do not commit adultery is not one of the Ten Commandments that was written on the stone tablets. It's obvious that you should be more careful in reading the fairy tale.
     
  19. xwsmithx

    xwsmithx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,964
    Likes Received:
    1,743
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bar Mitzvah*

    Confirmation isn't something that occurs in most Protestant churches because most Protestant churches don't believe in infant baptism, and Acts 8:37 is a big reason why.

    As an atheist, what's your favorite book of the Bible? Mine as both a believer and now as an atheist was/is Ecclesiastes. I tried reading the Apocrypha and it was so deadly dull I gave up on it. I read the Gospel of Thomas, too, and what a load of crap that is. Same goes for the Gospel of Sophia.


    The main reason to read the KJV in my opinion is not the adherence to literal translation, though I believe that's also true, but because it's the most poetic translation. Consider, "Bless the Lord, my soul," to, "Bless the Lord, O my soul." (Psalm 103, had to look it up.) The meaning is identical, but the poetry of the second is completely lost in the first.
     
    DennisTate likes this.
  20. Greenleft

    Greenleft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    My church was a Protestant Church but we did Confirmation because of infant baptism. You said 'most' so that means my church was the exception to the rule.

    As for your opinion on the Apocrypha, I actually enjoyed Sirach more than I did Proverbs. The New Testament Apocrypha which is NOT included in any Christian denomination Bible will be a piecemeal process for me to find and read as they are not all compiled into a single volume as the Old Testament Apocrypha is.

    My favorite book/books in the Bible is Ezra-Nehemiah. Because I liked the first person narrative in it (sort of like reading a journal) and the idea of rebuilding after much loss. It also shows the importance of preserving cultural identity and there is less emphasis on nationalism and independence. Though the returning exile statistics and the assignment of who builds what parts of the Jerusalem walls was dull.
     
  21. xwsmithx

    xwsmithx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,964
    Likes Received:
    1,743
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When I started digging deeper into the Biblical roots, I found a lot more than just historical inconsistencies. For example, did you know there's still another set of books that were excluded from the Bible before the Apocrypha? They are called the Pseudepigrapha, but I didn't bother reading those because I was already moving toward atheism by that point. Here's the Jewish take on both: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-apocrypha-and-pseudepigrapha
     
  22. Swensson

    Swensson Devil's advocate

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not sure if you're trying to take a particularly scientific approach, but don't you risk influencing your conclusions if you go into it already knowing what you think your conclusions will be?
     
  23. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most of the fairy tale was written centuries after the alleged events. Including such a concept as "soul" is an example. https://www.etymonline.com/word/Soul

    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/soul

    The Apocrypha, especially the books of Wisdom and Sirach, contains the best ideas in the Bible. It also contains a couple of detective stories and some good war stories.
     
    JET3534 likes this.
  24. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,682
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your source contains a lot of BS. Almost every Bible version contained the Apocrypha until the 1880s. It was always an integral part of the Bible. But around the 1870s some people got a bug up their butt to revise the Bible. There was a couple of English guts, Westcott & Hort, who thought that they were super special so they influenced the other twits to delete the Apocrypha. The twits also wanted to save money and maximize profits so they cut overhead costs by deleting the Apocrypha from their revision. The Catholics told them to shove it and kept the original Bible with all of the books. So the Apocrypha has only been missing from the BIble for about 136 years.
     
  25. xwsmithx

    xwsmithx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,964
    Likes Received:
    1,743
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You make this claim about when the Bible was written repeatedly with absolutely zero evidence of your contention. And as one of your heroes might say, that which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    I'm not sure what you're referring to. If you mean the link from the Jewish website, he isn't referring to the Bible of the Christians, he is referring to the Tanakh of the Jews. So the English deletion of the Apocrypha is completely irrelevant. But just so you know, the books of the Apocrypha were set aside as non-canonical as early as the 4th century A.D., when Jerome set them at the end of the Latin Vulgate Bible with a note to indicate that they were not to be considered part of the canon. https://tabletalkmagazine.com/article/2018/01/apocryphal-deuterocanonical-books/

    Just an observation, you seem mighty huffy about defending the Catholic version of the Bible for someone who denies its authority and authenticity. If you were to tell me Donald Duck wrote the New Testament, I might argue with you about it, but I wouldn't get huffy about it.
     

Share This Page