/lit/ - Literature

>>20998943
Prophets and wisdom and then from then on it's an absolute joy

>>20998943
ending is pretty kino

The bible sucks.

But I do recommend ecclesiastes and song of songs.

>>20998943
Numbers

>>20998943
The parts where there be raping & weird shit are fun.
None of that wisdom stuff, give me all the stories that are like how Mushamet III sacrificed a flock of sheep & slept with his apprentices wife and then had a terrible vision from the most high of an impending doom.
Or the 30+ pages of family genealogy.
Or do not poop out your butt on the 1st Sunday of the Meshmpt Passover.

>>20998943
First chapter.

>>20998943
The whole thing is good if you are good. It's all terrible if you are evil. It's basically a mirror to reveal the readers true nature to himself. If you find yourself reading the Gospels and seeing Jesus as the bad guy, it means that you are the bad guy irl and you should really do some soul searching (and hopefully you find one there).

>>20998943
Never.

>>20998943
>When does it get good?
In the beginning

Does anyone here have the Norton editions of the Bible?
I'm looking for a good edition of the KJV with the original grammar preserved and extensive annotations

>>20998943
the most fun stuff is from Joshua to Kings, other than that Ecclesiastes is bretty gud

>>20999384
>If you don't like pages upon pages of tabernacle building instructions then you're evil

>>20998943
when you throw it in the garbage.

>>20999384
Ironically soulless reply

>>20999620
>Does anyone here have the Norton editions of the Bible?
Don't recommend it. The 2005 version put out by Norton reorganizes the whole book into paragraphs and has numerous changes from the original. Even the older, 1873 Paragraph KJV - the so-called Cambridge Paragraph Bible - changed a whole bunch of things (introducing a lot of novel readings in various places and so forth), which is why nobody followed the drastic changes that it had. I would just use the standard text. If you're American - Local Church Bible Publishers sells the edition most normal people read.

>with the original grammar preserved
I'm not sure if you really want this, because the word spellings and stuff were originally very loose, as in they would add an extra 'e' to a word or change "and" to & to make the lines evenly spaced due to the archaic printing technology of 1611. This was standardized in the 1769 update, which became the basis of what virtually every KJV owner uses today.

There was actually a guy who complained to Cambridge and Oxford university in the 19th century that they were no longer printing the original 1st edition Bible. This led them to print a huge table of typographical errors which had been fixed in subsequent printings, as the old 1611 1st edition had a decent number of (albeit trivial) printing mistakes in it; a result of mistakes in the early printing plates they made, rather than anything intended by the translators.

Now, if you want annotations, I can highly recommend one of the KJV editions that is a direct ancestor to the one everyone uses today that had tons of annotations in it. This is the 1817 edition. I use it a lot and find their footnotes very interesting myself, even if I don't always agree with them. They draw from a multitude of different sources rather than relying on a single commentary. In many parts of this edition the footnotes take up about half of the page or more. Hope that helps.

>>20998943
Ezekiel 23

>>20998943
>"In the beginning..."

>>21001087
Also forgot to include a link to the 1817 King James Version which can be found here: https://archive.org/details/holybibleaccordi01doyl/page/n5/mode/2up

Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Numbers are literally the only boring parts of the Bible.

>>21001103
KJV is solid but NKJV is the best version

>>21001179
The NKJV changes "went up against" into "went to the aid" in 2 Kings 23:29. This then contradicts where it continues to say "went to the aid" in the parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 35:20. I have a list of 30 to 40 such major differences on the NKJV that can't really be explained.

>>21001172
The Tabernacle bit in Exodus is just as bad.