/lit/ - Literature

>>6850989
Absolutely, if able to.

Just like an engineer needs to read in order to learn physics.

What do you think?

It would be difficult to understand your religion otherwise.

Not to mention they could finally see all the parts where Jesus refutes parts of the OT that zealots often quote to justify wrongs.

For the larger part of Christianity's extant history, most practitioners had not, in fact, read The Bible.

I would actually cite the rise of literacy as one of the reasons for Christianity's decline.

I would, however, say yes.

If you are to call yourself a Christian, you should know what it is you are entering into, so you can accept or reject it on your own terms.

Yes they should, Christians should read the Bible and spread the word of the Bible. We are called to discipleship and called to spread the word of the Bible and to give it to others as spiritual nourishment.

>>6851011
>I would actually cite the rise of literacy as one of the reasons for Christianity's decline.
But there are more Christians now, making up a bigger portion of the world's population, than at any other point in history.

>>6851516
Only in uneducated countries, which I assume that anon was setting aside

>>6850989
"I'll wait for the comic book or moovie. Didja know the Japs have made it into a chinese mango?"

>>6850989
No, absolutely not. The profundity and divine obscurity of the scriptures mandate that not everyone is meant to read it. It's not necessary for salvation anyway.

none of them should

>>6850989

Yes starting with the New Testament.

The OT is mostly metaphorical and allegorical and shouldn't be weighed too heavily.

>>6851720
There's a Lego comic-book version of the entire Bible, I think, whose author had plans of its being visualized being some sort of idk deterrent -- like, look how ridiculously violent and abhorrent the Bible is, stay away!
so.

>>6851780
>There's a Lego comic-book version of the entire Bible,
Jesus christ.

>>6851751
>The OT is mostly metaphorical and allegorical and shouldn't be weighed too heavily.
No, the narratives in the OT are sacred history. Genesis and Exodus are supposed to have happened (they didn't).

>>6850993
But that only leads to protestantism or worse, agnosticism!

>>6850995
OP doesn't care, he's only here for the meme of it.

>>6850997
>It would be difficult to understand your religion otherwise.
Hardly. What do you think the clergy is for? They have weekly instruction session on how to understand it. What planet are you from?
>could finally see all the parts where Jesus refutes parts of the OT
And then says he's not here to refute anything from the OT. Yeah. This is why they leave it to the clergy.

It's wonder this damn faith hasn't been dropped centuries ago.

>>6851866
>Genesis didn't happen

it happened, in the sense that God did create everything and it was Good. But Genesis uses metaphorical and poetic language to describe the process, it shouldn't be read literally as a 6 day creation.

Even Peter said a day to God is like a thousand years to humans.

>mfw some of these fags thing God is real

>>6851894
>mfw he didnt get his copy of the Summa

>>6851884
Peter would have accepted, as all people of his time and prior would have, that a deity formed people from clay and animated them, which is what the story reflects. It's not meant to be documentarian, no, but it's metaphorical nature is limited.

>>6851894

>implying beauties like this can exist by random chance out of nothing

>>6851930

> as all people of his time and prior would have
>its metaphorical nature is limited

Not really, its metaphorical mystery is very deep. Pic related

>>6851933
Presupposing that the universe requires a creator, how does that lead one to Christianity versus another form of creation? And what is the origin of God?

>>6851930
why do people have this much of a presentist view?

>>6851944
>how does that lead one to Christianity versus another form of creation?

it's a process of searching and thinking.
Just because you understand algebra doesn't mean you'll understand calculus instantly...gotta read more and think more

>>6851962
I've read a bunch about Christianity, it's fascinating, it's something I've given a lot of thought to for a long time. But as envious as I am of smug fucks with faith, I still don't see any reason to have faith.

>>6851939
I get that highly educated Christians in the 3rd century considered the possibility of non-literal readings of the Bible, but Genesis and Exodus both precede them by some thousand years.

>>6851944
>Presupposing that the universe requires a creator, how does that lead one to Christianity versus another form of creation?
You have to think the Trinity is tenable. Tough luck.

All people should read the Bible.

>>6851981
some of the apostles were highly educated, i mean platonic works got passed around like crazy, i'd be really surprised if none of the apostles ever read them (John did)

>>6851992
It's kind of boring tbh, a few nuggets but hidden among a pile of poor or non-existent storytelling.

As a Christian I think that Christians should read and critically analyze the Bible while learning Koine Greek, but hey. I would settle for people who call themselves Christians to at least read a couple books in the NT.

>>6852007

you sound like a complete pleb tbh

>>6852007
is there an edith hamilton for the bible? who rewrites it so it's readable and takes all the shit out?

>>6852016
I'm not denying it's historical, cultural and religious value. And some of the stories are timeless, but anyone who claims it can stand on its own two feet on purely literary value is the true pleb.

>>6852005
I think you missed my wider point, anon-kun.

>>6852021

I was being playful with the whole pleb thing but nah bruh the Bible's an excellent set of literature particularly with how the books respond to each other and through the creation of an internal, continually building development that grows underneath and influences the external plots it moves under.

>>6852029
the same point applies, do you think no one was skeptical around those times?

>>6852012

>koine greek

there are good concordances online, to look up any interesting or controversial passages.

I don't think learning greek is really critical.

>>6852035
It doesn't matter if people were skeptical. What matters is the nature of their skepticisms. The only reason an ancient person would have been skeptical of the Hebrew genesis story was on the grounds that it contradicted a myth they were more familiar with.

>>6850989
Just finished reading it yesterday. Not having grown up religious I still think it's at least worth getting familiar with, Christian or non-Christian. It's left an indelible mark on an endless list of things (lit, art in general, law, etc.) throughout history, and reading it helps put a lot in context to say the least--especially from a literary standpoint.

[Mostly boring as fuck though. Goodreads gives it a 4.4/5]

>>6852055
how do you know the nature of their skepticisms?

>>6851848

>>6852018
probably the monks tbh

>>6852087

>>6851470

>>6850997
>mfw atheists conflate ceremonial law and moral law and tell me that if i am going to oppose gay marriage then i should also abstain from eating pork because the bible says so

>>6852159
>mfw theists think their ideology is magically exempt from being consistent / coherent

>>6852174
>mfw atheists don't realize that ceremonial law only applied to the nation of israel to get them back in good standing with god and to prepare them for the coming of the messiah
>mfw i am a gentile whose messiah has already come so i can eat pulled pork sandwiches any time i want

>>6852159

the Old testament never makes that distinction, to a jew the ceremonial law was part of the moral law since it dealt with absolving sin (through sacrifices) and preventing sin (through abstaining from unclean stuff).

telling a jew that his ceremonial laws aren't necessary is like telling a Catholic that baptism isn't necessary...it's actually a really big deal.

>>6852190
they aren't necessary to christians. i thought it would be obvious that i was talking about christians because this is a thread about christians and the christian bible.

>>6850989

I'm an agnostic atheist, and not only do I think Christians SHOULD read their Bible (because they actually believe it), but I think anyone with literature sense should read the Bible. If you read Classics, authors continually allude to the Bible in some way. It's a very enriching experience to understand these allusions.

>>6850989
no if you are catholic

>>6852272
>he's never heard of lectio divina

>>6852174
If enough people believe it then it might as well be true, and they are experts in that category.

>>6852021
The only argument you could make this for is the OT; The OT is filled with pure tripe like Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and all of the prophet books. But there's some good books that have literary merit like Job, Psalms, and Songs of Solomon.
NT is more letters than stories, but are pretty good as far as Roman autobiographies and letters go.

>>6851550
Oh yeah, let's just set aside the majority of the world

>>6852555
trips confirms the truth

>>6852038

In order to understand how those verses you need to understand more than just what Greek words mean, you need to understand how Greek language and sentence structure works. If you only know the words then you actually might confuse yourself more because you don't understand the larger picture of context and grammar and you start to assume that Greek works just like English. As a teacher once said to me, sometimes a little knowledge is worse than none at all.

I don't think knowing Greek is necessary for belief, but it is necessary to being informed and definitely necessary for theological controversies.

>>6852318

fuck you dude Leviticus is boss

>>6852318
>all of the prophet books
>implying Isaiah is bad

#justplebthings

No.

The Catholic Church has condemned the follow propositions:

>It is useful and necessary at all times, in all places, and for every kind of person, to study and to know the spirit, the piety, and the mysteries of Sacred Scripture.

>The reading of Sacred Scripture is for all.

>The Lord's Day ought to be sanctified by Christians with readings of pious works and above all of the Holy Scriptures. It is harmful for a Christian to wish to withdraw from this reading.

>To snatch away from the hands of Christians the New Testament, or to hold it closed against them by taking away from them the means of understanding it, is to close for them the mouth of Christ

>To forbid Christians to read Sacred Scripture, especially the Gospels, is to forbid the use of light to the sons of light, and to cause them to suffer a kind of excommunication.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Clem11/c11unige.htm

There's a good reason for this.

Remember:

1. The first martyrs and Christians didn't even have the (New Testament) Scriptures, yet they were full believers and saintly.
2. Throughout most of history, most people have been unable to read.
3. Throughout most of history, it has been extremely expensive to produce books, and they were, relative to today, quite rare.
4. Throughout most of history, most Christians may have gone through their own lives not even so much as seeing a Bible.
5. Countless sects and heresies have been built on the idea that one can interpret Scripture as one pleases. St. Peter himself says in his biblical Epistle, that people even in his day were interpreting St. Paul's epistles to their own damnation because of the difficulty of interpreting them.

The idea that every Christian should own a Bible wasn't even technologically feasible until quite recently. And in this era where the Bible is the most widely available, a great apostasy has taken place.

>>6852181
>mfw atheists don't realize that ceremonial law only applied to the nation of israel to get them back in good standing with god and to prepare them for the coming of the messiah

Half of these laws were completely retarded and arbitrary. Avoiding mixed fabrics had nothing to do with helping the nation of Israel.

>>6852876
Oh, yeah, and

6. The Holy Spirit is perfectly capable of sanctifying men's souls without them studying Scripture. The important thing is for them to have the faith and to practise it in charity. The study of Scriptures is only really important for those who have been called to learn the subtleties of the faith and preach. It's better to know only the Apostle's Creed and believe in it firmly than to know the entire Bible by heart and have lukewarm or no faith at all. There are scholars today that study the Bible in an academic setting that have no faith whatsoever. That goes to show how reading the Bible is not in itself conducive to holiness. The Bible itself states that it is a closed book to most people and that only those whom the Holy Spirit inspires can have a chance of understanding it.

I've become more of a Christian by reading Zizek, than reading the Bible.

>>6852883
Last comment.

There are phrases in the Bible that if you took them to heart you would become a saint without a doubt. The problem is not knowing enough, it is taking it to heart and applying it. Do you think the Blessed Virgin Mary studied the Scriptures? I doubt it, but:

>But Mary kept all these words, pondering them in her heart.

This is the important thing. I've already mentioned the Apostle's Creed. If you believe those 12 articles alone you would become a saint.

The Christian faith isn't hard. It's not only for people with subtle minds. Children can understand it, and often are quicker to understand because all it takes is humility.

>>6852876
>We can't have people reading the Bible without their worldview being filtered by our child-molesting institution first

>>6852276
>practised almost exclusively by priests

>>6852895
Well yeah. The Old Testament was written by prophets and handed down by the priests of Israel. It was read and copied almost exclusively by them. The same goes for the New Testament and the Catholic priesthood. The Bible wasn't meant to be a catechism. It was meant to be an inspired record that learned and pious men could reference. God did not send the Bible to earth to preach of its own accord. He has always sent men (Moses and the prophets, Christ and the apostles) to preach. You're thinking of books in a mystical postmodern way as being an entire universe unto themselves that must be decoded, deconstructed. The Scriptures are a tool to serve preachers and a historical record to pass down sacred history and doctrine.

Mass literacy is a modern innovation.

>>6851866
>the bible is to be taken literally
Not according to the Roman Church, it isn't. And that goes back at least to medieval academics.

>>6852895
What are you >implying

>>6851933
Attractive traits tend to be selected? Who knew?

If I want to read the Bible, which books are important? I've gotten through Matthew and Mark, and they just seem the same...Is most of the new testament just repeated summaries of how Jesus was crucified

>>6854002
Definitely read all four of the gospels. There are some minor (and in the case of John, big) differences between them all that are important.

In the Old Testament start with the Books of Moses. Gauging how you felt about having read those, you'll have to decide if you want to continue with some of the prophets (like Isaiah and Jeremiah). Take a look at the poetry books as well. Would highly recommend Job, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and some of the Psalms.

Tbh, like you mentioned, there is a lot of repetition. This is something that makes most of the bible pretty dry. It all depends on how much time you'd like to spend reading the lists of people etc. and endless threats from God that appear throughout the Old Testament.

There is no one here in this thread that understands the context of the Old Testament. If you walk up to one ancient historian and ask him he will tell you the context. If you walk up a evolutionary biologist he will give you another context. If you walk up to middle eastern archaeologist he will give you another context.

It is very important to know any record about the Middle East will contradict another record from the Middle East.

I am a Roman Catholic. Once I heard a Protestant theology teacher say, "The Bible is a love letter to you."

Stop trying to frame the Bible in a context of real, literal, allegorical, false, written by men, or written by God or sacred truth.

The Bible is like listening to someone talking on the phone and you cannot hear the other person. You never will.

Give response.

>>6854188
>Stop trying to frame the Bible in a context of real, literal, allegorical, false, written by men, or written by God or sacred truth.

>I am a Roman Catholic

I'm still waiting for you to do that

>>6854202

I can't kick you in the balls over the internet so I'm forced to type.

In modern times we've lost teacher/student interaction. That is critical to religion.

>>6854211

>>Stop trying to frame the Bible
>we've lost teacher/student interaction.

Do you realize these two contradict each other?

By the way, why do you follow a sect in the first place? Do you not realize that not only the pope's guess is as good as yours, but that your personal interpretation of any work is probably superior to that of an outsider?

Also, why just one book? Why not a set of books that can be changed to fit the times? You're already picking and choosing, if you're not, please tell me about the last time you gave away all your belongings to the poor

>>6850989
Of course.

Though I don't understand the American "fascination" with the Old Testament.

Chao Chou, teaching the assembly, said, "The Ultimate Path is without difficulty; just avoid picking and choosing. As soon as there are words spoken, this is picking and choosing," this is clarity." This old monk does not abide within clarity; do you still preserve anything or not?" At that time a certain monk asked, “Since you do not abide within clarity, what do you preserve?” Chao Chou replied, I don't know either." The monk said, "Since you don't know, Teacher, why do you nevertheless say that you do not abide within clarity?" Chao Chou said, “It is enough to ask about the matter; bow and withdraw."

- Blue Cliff Record

>>6854220
>>6854258

In consideration of this I ask you, who is teacher and student?

>>6854267
>duality
Bow and withdraw.

>>6854296

How?

>>6854220
>Also, why just one book? Why not a set of books...
>mfw people still dont realize the bible literally means "the books" and it's not a single book

>>6854396

And by 'set', I meant books that actually don't all have the same message. To have options in life is actually a good thing

>>6854402
what do you mean by not having the same message?

>>6850989
How the fuck are you supposed to be a true Christian without reading the Bible?
This thread's point is beyond me

>>6854418

Anything that differs from monotheism, abrahamism, messianism, that sort of thing.

You'll never get anywhere in life if you stay in your little bubble of pre-approved ideas

>>6854423

>point is beyond me

>>6854441
you'll never get anywhere if you have that much of an open mind, do you have any strong convictions or just mold into whatever you want based on your surroundings?

>>6852887
This tho lol.
God in Pain is more mandatory for Christians than the OT or NT haha

>>6854423

You can if you're a catholic

>>6854527

this. Only protestants are actually required to read the bible. What's the point of reading the bible as a catholic, if your interpretation isn't regarded as valid or true

For Catholics/Orthodox the bible is a man-made creation, written by pious men inspired by God, but still just men. They are prone to errors and contradictions. The bible is in no way necessary to be a good Christian. In fact many saints were illiterate.

Protestants are heretics so their opinion doesn't matter.

Historically/quantitatively most Christians were either illiterate or to poor to buy a bible, so yes you can

>>6854628

>>6852159
if you were a being of ultimate good why would you deny people love? How is denying people gay marriage in anyway intuitively the wish of God?

I want to read and understand the bible. Where should I start first? I googled and there are many gospels as well as old and new testaments. Should I start first the new testament or the gospel of john?

>>6855252
The Gospels are the most vital part of Christianity. The letters, less-so. Read through the Synoptic Gospels, then go on to the letters, then go on to the Old Testament works, then the Apocrypha. I also suggest the RSV, or the NRSV, as your translation of choice. Oxford publishes a great version.

>>6850989
There is no objective way to be a Christian. You could be atheist and consider yourself christian if you wanted to.

>>6851751
are christian women stuck in the 90s or is this comic just from then?

>>6852887
can you explain or give a relevant link?

>>6852159

>my book exclaims flawless, unchanging rules commanded by a divine being
>so I will pick and choose from it whatever I like, obviously

>>6850989

No, not read. Study. Reading about it is just as important as reading it itself, as the Bible is very complex and many things in it for example require knowing some cultural context.

>>6855296

What sets the RSV apart from the others?

>>6855342
>he thinks christians obey moral commands because they are in the bible and not because they are part of the natural law

>>6850989
>Should /lit/ read the books they post about?
fixed

>>6855455
Get off this board

>>6855501
No

>>6855415
True for example:
>--- The first three gospels say that Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus carry the cross to golgotha. But John 19:17 says that Jesus carried the cross the full distance himself, and doesn't mention Simon of Cyrene.

I can't figure it out either.

>>6855580
John's Gospel is meant to complement the already existing gospels. He didnt mention it because it was already in the other gospels

>>6855339
Zizek on Atheism and Christianity:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tABnznhzdIY
Zizek on why Judeo-Christian Worldview is Uniquely Accurate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDtoRydIzjI

See also his books The Fragile Absolute and The Puppet and the Dwarf.
His book God In Pain: Inversions of Apocalypse with Boris Gunjevic gives a really good overview of this kind of religious thinking, with treatments of Dante, the Koran, feminist theory, and multiple other fantastic parallaxes.

Also recommended for anti-Christian Christianity is The Antichrist.

>>6852887
I think you missed the point Zizek was making.

>>6855665
Zizek makes a point of theological revolution consistently, which is also where a proper reading of Jesus gets you. "Come bearing not peace but a sword..."

>>6855670
But his ideas include non-existence of God (the rejection of a "Big Other") and a strict materialism. Ultimately, Zizek believes that Christianity negates itself into atheism.

Further reading:
http://zizekstudies.org/index.php/ijzs/article/viewFile/271/346

>>6850989
I think everyone should in any country with a decent Christian population (AKA probably yours if you're reading this). You can like it or not, but it helps to actually be educated when such a massive thing is floating around the world.

Just read one of the modern "Bible for moron" versions, see what its got in it.

>>6856994

I did read the "Easy to Read" version of the Bible, but I feel stupid I had to resort to that. I just didn't have the patience to parse the fancier language of the "normal" versions.

>>6851751
God, that girl with the earrings looks like a massive slut

>>6852909
Yes, and this is the modern era.

>>6855593
>>6855580
Adding on to this, Roman biographies (eg. Sallust's Catiline) were meant to capture character rather than accuracy. There are more contradictions that you said, such as order of events and factual occurrences. Just enjoy them as different interpretations from the disciplines about Jesus.
>>6852840
The only way Leviticus is entertaining is as an examination of Hebrew hygiene.
>>6852842
The prophets say nothing that you can't understand from earlier stories or the NT. There are a few quality verses, but as a book they are dreadful to read.

>>6850989
No, just the nerdy ones.

Most Christian just need to listen to their priest.

>>6851992
>>6852077
>>6852262

This. Anyone who wants to read Western literature, regardless of religion, needs to read the Bible just to be culturally literate. I performed in Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat in high school, and one of my friends who was raised agnostic didn't even know the story it was based on. Shit was embarrassing.

>>6850989
Yes. Just like all neonazis should read Mein Kampf.

>>6850989
i think everyone should read the bible, especially someone interested in art and culture ie /lit/, how can you hope to become educated when you are unlikely to understand half the allegories or allusions in which every great work of literature is steeped in and our culture for the last 2000 years has been so strongly moulded by and grounded in

>>6851875
>Hardly. What do you think the clergy is for? They have weekly instruction session on how to understand it. What planet are you from?
Clergy are for people apart of Christendom, not Christians. How does it feel not to understand Christianity at all?

>>6860678

>>6860726
>

>>6850989
If you're going to base your core beliefs on a book, it's probably a good idea to read that book.