Are there seperate sales of each book... I mean can one get the book of John as a seperate book?
Printable View
Are there seperate sales of each book... I mean can one get the book of John as a seperate book?
Well, I've read the first four.
Genesis and Exodus are the books that I know best, so they were the most rewarding to me.
I personally think Numbers mostly just outlines rules, good if that's what you are interested in.
It makes more sense to read in order, I think. Particularily because it is hard to understand when you have no ideea who the people they are talking about actually are and how history has created them.
That is just what I think though.
I suggest starting from the beginning, it made sense to me like that.
I think Psalms and Revelations, Songs of Solomon, are pretty good to start with. They don't always have anything to do with any particular story in detail and can quite often just be offering praise, I think.
Maybe I should just quit while I'm here, whenever I talk about topics as religion, politics, economics, I always end up in an arguement.
You can buy the books separately but with so many inexpensive Bibles why would you?
Bibles are not all the same, the first thing to do is decide from which base text you would like to read, Alexandrian, Syriac or Byzantine. My preference is the Alexandrian Text because it is the oldest and most reliable. With all the hubbub about the different texts the Alexandrian OT matches the NT very well (They were both Greek Texts) One reason the organized church does not like the Alexandrian texts is because they contain the Intertestamental books the church has banned and it can be found and read minus the translation manipulations of later theologians.
However each to his own.
Threads on this and similar topics have proliferated recently. I wonder why?
I agree with Gilliatt Gurgle that a passion for reading is fundamental.Quote:
Originally Posted by G4C Chiodos
Some books of the Bible are more enjoyable to me than others. I noticed that many respondents in this thread identified Psalms and Proverbs as favorites; for various reasons, I have a hard time reading those two.
Ecclesiastes, by contrast, hooked me immediately, and perhaps I've continued to enjoy it so much because I identify with it. Song of Songs is another that I've liked from the start. There are so many different ways to approach that book, and so much to extrapolate from it, from both literary and theological perspectives.
I agree that a timely Christmas reading might be in order. My interest in the Christian religion began when I read the 4 Gospels during a Christmas week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilliatt Gurgle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maryd.
You can get each book of the Bible separately. The reason to do so, I think, would be the space available for textual notes and commentary. I've got a 300 page book on the Gospel of Luke that I hope to read someday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rozzy
Hi Rozzy. Do you know whether modern editions/translations of the Bible include the most historically viable material from all available texts? I know well that each translation contains bias, but I'm curious as to how they are derived from the earliest copies. I get the impression, from reading skeptics and believers alike, that there is something of a consensus regarding the earliest, most viable Biblical material.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rozzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Sounds like a great idea. However I don't own a bible at home... Except the children's one, that they had to purchase for school. May have to consider getting one. :nod:
I think it will be a great addition to your life. :) If read and contemplated at all (even from a skeptical point of view), I think think the Bible contributes greatly to a liberal education generally, and an understanding of the world at large.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maryd.
I have a couple dozen Bibles, and these translations seem to always be hanging around:
ESV
KJV
NLT
NAB
NASB
RSV
HCSB
NKJV
Let me know if you ever want help picking a translation. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Shoutgrace
I can see what you mean by the convenience of using individual books with lots of room for notes.
Bible versions and the texts they are based on is always a controversial subject because of intense indoctrination to a particular view or set of doctrines. My personal conclusions are drawn on a very long time of research and discovery.
I do not know of one modern Bible version, edition or publication that is true to the text it is drawn on. Even on the Bibles I do use I am also aware of the translation manipulations in them and recognize them as I read them. Although I can teach out of any version there is, there is a lot I do not like about a lot of them. Key and main doctrines of the christian church have steadily morphed since the late 1800's through to now. There are key points in history in which major change has taken place, controversial at the time but soon forgotten by the next generation, much of which is hidden and even denied today even though there are many smoking guns from the past showing up all over.
A good example of what I mean concerning Bible translations, the new publication of scriptures called "The NETS Bible" claims to be a fresh and timely translation of the Septuagint. You would expect this Bible to then be faithful to the original Greek MS and in a more modern English, right?
What the NETS Bible actually is is an attempt to bring the ancient Greek text closer to the Masoretic text there by artificially harmonizing scripture from two completely different sources.
The following is a public comment I made on the comment part of a sales page for NETS.
Though the NETS Bible calls itself a new translation of the Septuagint it is really a publication designed to draw the Septuagint closer to the Hebrew text. The NETS translators consider the Septuagint subservient to the Hebrew (Masoretic Text) while not taking into consideration that the Septuagint and Masoretic texts are from two separate and distinct sets of MSS. The idea that the Septuagint is an inferior text has always plagued translators when in fact this is not the case. The publication of the DSS proved the existance of two separate and distinct MSS of the Hebrew scriptures though the proof was withheld until 1991 when outside pressure forced their release. All this monkey business in churchdom..............
Typically you can get the New Testament by itself, but it usually isn't broken down any more than that. Some of the books are really books at all. Philemon is only a page long...a partial page at that. It was a letter written by Paul to Philemon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maryd.
Check out...
www.biblegateway.com
I use the NKJ, but the ESV is another accurate modern day translation. There is a difference between translations (word for word translations), and those that are merely version (some are paraphrases).
I think the major contemporary editions are all quite good. From what I've read (upfront, I'm no biblical scholar) they tend to reach a consensus position on the meaning from various sources of "original" texts. I put original in quotations because there are no original texts. For instance when it comes to the New Testament we certainly don't have the ortiginal texts, we don't have copies of the original texts, we don't have copies of the copies of the original texts. What we have is probably at least four copies removed. At best we have fragments of a page from the Gospel of John from the middle of the 2nd century, and that wasn't an original either. I don't think we have a full text of a single book or epistle prior to the third century. That's three hundred years from when the events were reported to have happened. And just think of all the errors that handscribing accumulates, from one to the other to the other. Things are inserted in some that are not in others; things are left out in some and not in others. What scholars do is compare the early surviving texts and come to some assumption as to what the original was like, based on a comparison of the surviving texts. It's not different at all from what scholars do with ancient classical texts. Same issues there too. If you look across the good translations, they seem to agree for the most part. You can find all the translations on the internet (just google or yahoo it) and have side by side comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Since I'm Catholic I usually go to the NAB, but I do like the NIV also. For me, I go by the sound of the English rather than accuracy, simply because I have no idea which is most accurate. If accuracy is important to me for any particular verse I'm looking up, I will compare across the various translations. I prefer the modern language translations, because I'm usually more interested in clarity.
For the more frugal amongst you, you can always track down a Gideon and get a free Bible! I have like 5 Gideon New Testament Bibles hanging around my house, and I'm an atheist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
I shop for mine in hotel rooms, I even scored a book of Mormon once.
Virgil
Most people think the translators have played it straight with them, to bad they have not.
Simple and easy to spot, where your bible says "end of the world" the real text says end of the age, that is no little difference. Where your bible says "eternal punishment" the real text says age of correction or you can even go age of punishment if you like but no where does the real text say eternal punishment for any one. If you think I am off my rocker all you have to do is check it out. That is only a sample but it gives you an idea what they have done.
The entire OT has been switched from the original text, sounds preposterous doesn't it? Well all you have to do is go into the NT in about any English translation you like and then find verses that are quoting OT verses, comments by the Disciples or even Christ Himself. Then match them to the appropriate scriptures in the OT of the very Bible you got them out of, they do not match. Then take the very same quotes and match them to a Septuagint OT and they match perfectly.
Odd how theologians denigrate the Septuagint and called it inferior when all the time knowing full well it is the Bible of the Apostles and Christ Himself.
Feel free to test the text against what I have posted and see if it is right. Do not be to surprised at what you will find when you do because there is a whole lot more.
If, as believers believe, it's a story, I'd suggest starting at the beginning.
Failing that, do it by your preferred genre.
Biography - Luke or Matthew
Sword and Sorcery - Revelations
Sex - Song of Solomon
Travelogue - Paul's letters
Talking animals and Fantasy - Genesis
War and tribal myth - Exodus
Heroic adventure - Samuel, and the middle books of the Old Testament
Growing a new business - Acts of the Apostles
So many people are telling me to try different books, and I still don't know which one to start with. I think I'll either try to start from Genesis or Randomly place my finger on the list of all of the books. But thanks for all of the help and advice on the translations.