Holy Bible thread

[Anonymous No.20500120]

ITT we discuss the Holy Bible.

The most influential piece of literature in human history on the board dedicated to discussing literature.

[Anonymous No.20500133]

>write high effort posts
>jannies nuke
So tiring

[Anonymous No.20500147]

>>20500120
Amen. Father have mercy on the jannies for they know not what Satanic faggots that they are. Or do they?

I have been staying in an Ecclesiastes deep dive for about 2 weeks now. I highly recommend using multiple commentaries and doing parallel verse comparisons for all Holy Bible studies.

[Anonymous No.20500196]

>jannies deleted bible thread again
try to conceive of a bigger faggot than janny

[Anonymous No.20500198]

How can anyone justify the batshit crazy laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy? I hear people say "oh it was Mosaic Law for the Israelites only, it doesn't apply to us", but that implies that it was still at one point sanctioned directly by God to stone people for, amongst other things, disobeying your father and not bleeding from your vagina on the first wedding night. New covenant or old, a truly loving god could never sanction that.

[Anonymous No.20500199]

>>20500120
The other threads get deleted or fall off or something?

[Anonymous No.20500259]

>>20500198
Ultimately the answer will come down to the fact that those laws were for the Israelites, and to bring about an awareness of sin, and to convict their conscience of its reality and consequences. It had a pedalogical purpose. A doctor assigns a regimen based on the illness of the patient. Such people needed the discipline of the law, and the law was indeed harsh, and it fulfilled its purpose. The New Covenant is the eternal covenant, and is a far deeper and more profound revelation of God, and of the nature of sin, and who we are and where we are going. Mosaic law was pretty ‘progressive’ in many ways in its concern for the poor, impartiality in judgment, etc.

[Anonymous No.20500273]

>>20500198
The problem with the pentateuch arises not from itself but with the modern Christian teachings of our relationship with God. God is not our "friend", because He is NOT our equal. However, we are not His "property" either and He does not seen us that way. We are his creation, one could say we are His children but again our relationship with him is not the same as a child's relationship with their father.

Our relationship with God is like a soldier's relationship with their king, and a dog's relationship with his owner. Really, He can do whatever He wants. But lucky for us, He is infinitely loving, and infinitely kind, He feels sympathy for all, He only does good, and He Himself IS good. All morality is relative to Him. And all good in the world is attributed to Him.

Slavery itself simply is not a bad thing in the eyes of the Lord. Who enslaves who is actually what matters. The Israelites had the covenant with Him, so they were the most morally pure people of earth, though they were still sinners. So for them to be enslaved by sinners, worshippers of the world and not the Word, is a horrible thing. However, for godly men who worship the Lord and do not worship sin, is not a problem since by virtue of the fact that the slave owners follow god and God is the ultimate good, they shall not unjustly persecute and abuse the slaves. They would use them responsibly and only for physical labour, which is just a fine lifestyle to live indeed as explained in Ecclesiastes. They are not allowed to and therefore did not use the slaves as a source of pleasure through sadism or sexual abuse the way the majority of slave owners in history did/in the present do.

[Anonymous No.20500294]

>>20500273
One more thing.
>The Israelites had the covenant with Him, so they were the most morally pure people of earth, though they were still sinners
>By virtue of the fact that the slave owners follow god and God is the ultimate good, they shall not unjustly persecute and abuse the slaves.
There's no doubt that some Israelites did infact go ahead and unjustly abused the slaves. They were, by virtue of the fact that they sinned despite knowing exactly what not to do, were punished accordingly for their actions

[Anonymous No.20500318]

>>20500198
we really are not under it, but you misunderstood aswell.

the "disobedience" things are not about trifles like missing curfew or something. it's literal rebellion, stealing, violence, and such sins.
tell me you don't feel some sort of disgust at a child that hits their parents and just abuses of their love.
secondly, it's virginity. nobody there had some sort of accident-y way of losing it, and it is merely a "show of virginity" so it's about being a virgin, not the literal bleeding.
you're taking it too literally, and in a translation, to make it worse. check some commentaries on the verses you have such questions about. they're usually explained out. i recommend Biblehub.

[Anonymous No.20500329]

>>20500273
why is it not like a relationship between a father and a child?

[Anonymous No.20500368]

The Israelites were given an offer from God, which was being freed from the natural worldly order of things which had resulted in their enslavement in Egypt, in exchange for adhering to His very strict code of rules in order to be shaped into His sanctified representatives to all humanity in earth. If they did not wish to follow such rules, then they could return to the natural worldly state. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.20500388]

>>20500199
Was moved to >>>/his/

[Anonymous No.20500398]

>>20500329
Every father and child have a unique relationship. Everyone has the same relationship with God. There are some similarities between, the relationship between fathers and children in the bible and between them and God, sure, but I try not to think of it that way since it easily leads to one equating themself with God the way people can now compare and equate (or even surpass) themselves with their father nowadays. Also, God created us all out of His will alone. Our fathers cannot and did not do that without our mothers. Finally, we consider fathers not directly present in their child's life as bad fathers, since we see the father's goal as to teach their children all that they themselves have learned so their children can avoid making the same mistakes they did. This doesn't accurately describe God at all, and it'll probably lead you into an "absent father" joke every time you try to compare God and us as with a father and child, which is sorta funny but it's wrong to insinuate God is cruel like that

[Anonymous No.20500413]

Do you include the pericope adulterae (story about Jesus forgiving the adulteress in John 7&8) in your readings of the bible?
It was always one of my favourite passages and I was immensely disappointed to hear it was a later interpolation by another scribe.

[Anonymous No.20500421]

Thomas Nelson. Premiere collection. Thinline KJV. Goatskin cover. Red letter edition. 2k Denmark comfort print on 36gsm European paper.

[Anonymous No.20500466]

>>20500413
It’s found in a majority of existing manuscripts and has a long history of church writers referring to it. It could very well be authentic. I don’t listen to what academics tell me should and should not be viewed as ‘authentic’. I don’t think they have the best motives in mind. It’s like the long-ending of Mark, even Irenaeus references it, as do a few other mid 2nd century writers. It’s far less clear cut than people say.

[Anonymous No.20500490]

>>20500466
Yes, I have to say that I also dislike "critical consensus" on bible texts. Wikipedia for example dates loads of the NT texts very late when there is significant evidence they could all have been written pre-70AD, even epistles like 2 Peter.
I find it so confusing, I struggle because I don't know how much biblical research is genuine, and how much is ideologically motivated attempt to discredit the Bible. I especially don't know what "overwhelming majority of scholars" means in the context of Bible study, because whenever I read that, I look it up and find very well-researched stuff that totally contradicts the supposed overhwelming consensus.

>It’s found in a majority of existing manuscripts

But it's not found in any of the early ones, right?

[Anonymous No.20500537]

>>20500490
Yeah, when it comes to the Gospels and many NT texts, I think that the secular dating is just flat-out wrong. It all hinges on the singular assumption that Jesus could not have predicted the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, and that these words must have been put in his mouth by the ‘anonymous’ post-70 AD authors. This is why it saddens me to hear Christians so often parrot the claims of academia, and not believe in things such as apostolic authorship for the Gospels and other epistles, even despite of the universal witness of Church tradition, even among those who are hardly even removed from the Twelve such as Irenaeus. A lot of it is absolutely ideologically motivated, and even if we were to be charitable and claim that they are not out to discredit the Bible, the paradigms and presuppositions that they interpret the evidence in accordance with will never allow them to conclude certain things about the Bible that would confirm it.

And as far as I know, it’s true that among surviving manuscripts that are said to be the earliest that this section doesn’t appear. It looks like there’s been some debate on the issue over time, regardless.

[Anonymous No.20500595]

Imagine reading anything besides KJV

[Anonymous No.20500603]

>>20500595
The NASB is alright

[Anonymous No.20500615]

>>20500595
Sorry, I read the Bible.

[Anonymous No.20500696]

Bringing back the Geneva Bible when

[Anonymous No.20500725]

>all Christians know the Decalogue
>hardy any of them know the Beautitudes
What caused it?

[Anonymous No.20500796]

>>20500595
EOB has all that though

[Anonymous No.20500806]

>>20500725
Under-emphasis on the Gospel in favor of the Old Testament. Especially severe among some Protestant groups

[Anonymous No.20500823]

>>20500796
>can't be arsed to make an OT

[Anonymous No.20500894]

>>20500823
Newrome Press said they're working on it and have been since 2019 iirc. It'll be a revision of the Lexham to conform to the PT.

[Anonymous No.20501260]

>>20500198
That was YHWH, not God.

[Anonymous No.20501284]

>>20501260
Imagine how dumb you have to be say this given how Jesus is defined in the NT

[Anonymous No.20501292]

>>20501284
?

[Anonymous No.20501303]

>>20501292
What I said. Jesus Christ is Yahweh, and any other claim is based on a profound ignorance of Scripture.

[Anonymous No.20501318]

>>20501303
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.20501324]

>>20501318
He's a gnostic, just ignore them

[Anonymous No.20501395]

>>20501318
Christ is the fulfillment of the promises to Abraham, Moses, David—all nations would be blessed through the offspring of Abraham, a prophet like Moses would rise up among Israel, and a king like David would come and rule all nations, being like a son to God, ruling forever. God’s steadfast love is revealed all throughout the OT, he is like a husband to his wife, forever trying to draw her back even when the relationship is shattered. This theme is particularly noticeable in Hosea all through the prophets. If in the OT we see these themes not at the forefront, they become strikingly obvious in the NT, in which God in a theophany of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God’s promise to dwell among Israel is fulfilled, as are all of the blessings, prophecies and promises of a New Covenant given to Jeremiah. God demonstrates his infinite love, his solidarity with man, his desire for us to love him and repent (realign our lives towards him). Christ is the new Moses leading us on a spiritual Exodus from bondage and slavery into the promise land, which is the Kingdom of God, and not even death can separate us from his love. If you read any book of the New Testament, you would see that the fact that Christ is the Messiah, and is God, is revealed through references to him being the prophet that would be risen up after Moses (Acts 3:22, Deuteronomy 18:18), to him being the messianic king promised to come from David's line (2 Samuel 7:12-17), to him being the one like a son of man coming in the clouds of heaven in Daniel 7:13-14, and many, many more verses such as Isaiah 7, Isaiah 9, Isaiah 53, etc. Isaiah 9 says that the Davidic king will be Prince of Peace, Mighty God, Everlasting Counselor, etc. and that this will be established by the zeal of the LORD of Hosts (Yahweh Sabaoth). The Prince of Peace is Jesus Christ, and Yahweh is the name for the Christian Godhead, translated as Kyrios, or Lord, in the Septuagint versions of the Bible that the NT references. Genesis 19:24 says "Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven" - both of the LORD appearances here say Yahweh in Hebrew - we have two Yahwehs here, then. Sirach 51 says " I appealed to the Lord, the Father of my Lord, not to forsake me in the days of affliction, at the time when there is no help against the proud." - this is another reference to Christ and his Father. Wisdom of Solomon 9 has a direct trinitarian verse too: "Who has learned thy counsel, unless thou hast given wisdom and sent thy Holy Spirit from on high?" - thou (God the Father), wisdom (The Son), who is the Wisdom of God, and the Holy Spirit. Psalm 33:6 is a classic verse as well - " By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host by the breath (ruach / pneuma) of his mouth" - Christ is the Word of God, and the breath, i.e. the Spirit, which proceeds from his mouth, creates the hosts. LORD is obviously Yahweh. I could keep going, but it's indisputable.

[Anonymous No.20501594]

>>20501395
lol

[Anonymous No.20501627]

>>20501395
incredibly well written.

[Anonymous No.20501641]

>>20501627
lol

[Anonymous No.20501643]

>>20501395
Marcionsiststers…it’s over

[Anonymous No.20501670]

>>20501395
Marcionsisters…

[Anonymous No.20502042]

Bump

[Anonymous No.20502048]

>>20500120
I've been an atheist all my life, but I am in search for spirituality. How and in each order should I read the Bible? Are there any other books I should read besides the Bible?

[Anonymous No.20502062]

>>20502048
ESV Study Bible has pretty much the most of what you need that can be had in a single volume, and it will keep you busy for a *long* while.

[Anonymous No.20502079]

>>20502048
Start with the Gospels and the New Testament, and then work your way into the Old Testament gradually, perhaps starting with Ecclesiastes and similar books. Besides the Bible, I would recommend ‘The Art of Prayer: An Orthodox Anthology’—this work has tons of short little excerpts from saints such Theophan the Recluse that are just great in my opinion. The Sayings of the Desert Fathers is another classic. If you are trying to cultivate faith and explore spiritually, I would pray while reading works such as these. I think it is the foundation of everything, honestly, and if you’re lucky, God willing, He will make himself felt when the time is right. Good luck, I will be sure to pray for you.

[Anonymous No.20502125]

>>20502048
if you want a concise order: Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, John, Epistles, Revelation, OT.
i recommend Mere Christianity, amazing book.

and a little tip, if anything doesn't sound right while you're reading, check commentary and explanations of it (Biblehub and gotquestions are two great sources for those). i'd do it whenever you find something really important, as it's a nice idea to be sure.
you'll especially see that (and have to search) reading the Epistles and OT, they're complicated and translation doesn't really help.

[Anonymous No.20502136]

>>20502048
Just read the four gospels, that is the key message. Devour them and study everything that Jesus Christ says.

The rest you can read and explore on your own time. I personally never finished the old testament until years after conversion.

[Anonymous No.20502504]

Reminder that many of the early Christians believed reincarnation is real, and believed the "God" of the Old Testament was literally Satan

Where did it all go so, so wrong?

[Anonymous No.20502527]

>>20502504
Thank God such blasphemous products of pagan syncretism and worldly philosophy have been destroyed and refuted endlessly by the Holy Fathers.

[Anonymous No.20502534]

>>20502527
"God" in the Old Testament IS Satan, and the Edomites are his children. Cry about it

[Anonymous No.20502537]

>>20502527
>what people believed less than two centuries after Christ is somehow less accurate than ideas from Medieval and Renaissance periods

[Anonymous No.20502549]

>>20502534
Marcionism has already been debunked in this thread: >>20501395.
>>20502537
Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, the witness of the Gospels, the epistles and the rest of the New Teatament refutes your blasphemy. Everyone knows that heresies attempted to destroy the budding church in the beginning, Nicolaitans, Simonians, Docetists, the list is endless.

[Anonymous No.20502555]

>>20502549
Gnostic Christianity is the only perception that answers the age old question
>If God is real, why bad thing happen

Cope

[Anonymous No.20502561]

>>20502555
Gnostic Christianity is no Christianity at all. I genuinely pity you if you’re not trolling

[Anonymous No.20502569]

>>20502561
Enjoy getting trapped by the cube, anon

[Anonymous No.20502585]

>>20502555
gnosticism is not true Christianity. it's for people who want to be special

[Anonymous No.20502588]

>>20502569
Enjoy LARPing, I hope it’s worth it.

[Anonymous No.20502688]

>becomes human
>drops timeless wisdom
>dies for you
>invades Hades and smashes the gates and chains holding the dead
>rises again
>ascends into heaven
>sends the Spirit
What a bro, honestly

[Anonymous No.20502689]

>>20502048
Start with the Torah, move on to the Nevi'im, and end with the Ketuvim.

[Anonymous No.20502895]

>>20502048
Pick a reading plan. If you don't mind reading on your phone there are several great bible apps with plenty of plans to choose from.

I'd also recommend 'Mere Christianity' by C. S. Lewis. He is respected by all denominations and his book is a great introduction to the faith.

[Anonymous No.20502938]

>but that which I hate, that do I.
I keep coming back to Paul's words on sin. It seems to me that part of the process of conversion is a growing and painful awareness of my own sinfulness and the consequences of my actions and intentions in light of the truth about God.
In the past, though vaguely aware of the moral quality of things such as lying or excessive anger or lust, I barely thought as I did these things, being almost like an animal in my ignorance and pursuit of whatever satisfied my base nature. Now, though, every fall to temptation is a reminder of the frailty of my own human will in the face of seemingly towering mountains of temptations and passions, which sweep me along like currents in the sea, and yet are so fragile and powerless that a prayer of a mere 12 words can dispel them instantly.
I feel so incredibly vain and stupid when I struggle against some lustful desire or ill-tempered urge for hours or days, fighting with all I have before giving in, only to look back and realize that I held the key to my own prison all along and simply had to open the door to be freed, to bow my head, make the merest movement of my right hand, and repeat a simple prayer. In that moment my excuses and justifications for falling yet again into sin seem embarrassing and childish. I hate the corruption and distortion of this world, and the taint it leaves on me when I act according to its ways, so why do I so often find myself pleasuring in it, savoring it, joying in what I should not, when peace and freedom from this self-induced slavery is always in my reach?
I wonder if there exists some process by which I could eradicate utterly the pathways by which my worst temptations take hold of me, or if this cycle of sin, guilt, repentence, complacence, and sin will repeat my whole life. Paul wrote that we must endure to the end as runners in a race. Am I enduring onslaughts of sin in a battle I will eventually win with myself, or am I running from the start line a short ways and then back to the start again as the rest of the racers disappear over the horizon?