Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
I was referring to the phone book.:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
I was referring to the phone book.:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Maybe what I need is a good dictionary. The phone book might be interesting if you had a dictionary of universal biography to hand :D
The "Penguin Dictionary of the Bible" looks promising. Has anyone had experience of this or a similar dictionary? Would you recommend it?
lost my first attempt. I would first recommend a concordance (Young's, Strongs), then a lexicon, followed by a Greek Interlinear, and finally something on structure and figures of speech (not all treasures lie on the surface, but some do) (E.W. Bullinger?). If it's understanding that you seek, I recommend starting to believe what is written, beginning with Romans 10:9-10.
I'd recommend a good dictionary or encyclopedia of mythology. Unlike gbrekken, I'd recommend reading the bible as text written by human beings with all their dated prejudices and misconceptions. As soon as you believe everything that is written there, then you may as well stop reading: it could say anything and it would still mean the same to you. It helps to have a critical eye when reading anything, especially fantastic claims made in ancient literature like those made in the bible. If you wish to read the bible as gbrekken suggests you might like to read Matthew 27 3-8 and follow that with Acts 1 18-19, and then ask yourself exactly how did Judas die? and who was it who bought the field? This should give you a flavour of the problems involved when believing what you read in the bible.
Fascinating point, it seems that after hanging himself, Judas managed to buy a field and draw and quarter himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
That is the silliest thing I've ever heard. Do you also advise to read the Cliff Notes to War and Peace rather than reading the novel itself? If your prejudices toward religion affects your reading list, by all means do whatever you wish. But to advise in such a way as to not read the single most important book of western culture is incredibly ignorant. Sure read with a critical eye; no one is asking anyone to convert. But no matter what your religious views, don't let prejudices (hateful prejudices at that) affect your understanding of any book.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
As to your discrepency, the bible was not written as a historical document. Having multiple authors of varying perspectives over varying times it creates a layering of thought and connotations. Whether you find those thoughts and connotations as being inspired by divinity, that's your decsion.
I don't think Antiguhya was suggesting that one reads a mythology book instead of the bible; she was merely stating that :Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
1. to begin reading a work with any bias, belief or nonbelief, will sway the persons views
2. also, it is true, that many of the historical accounts in the bible are also shared in several cultures mythology.
As far as I'm concerned, if a person is a great believer in the bible,the fact that so many cultures share one account should be a testament to their faith.
On the other hand, others believe that these stories came from mans need to explain his existance.
I don't think any additional research, on literature, is ever in vain. I have often read cliff notes, Harold Bloom and any other critiques to find out others opinions and perhaps, see something I may have missed in a book. It is obvious that Antiguhya has looked alot more closely at the scriptures than many who are of the christian faith. The point she made about Judas is one I have never heard; and that is why we are on this forum: to exchange ideas and grow from our discoveries.
Some of the books of the Bible, like the Book of Job, work quite well as literature. Many of the psalms are half decent poetry too, but the vast majority of the Bible verges on being unreadable.
If that is so, then I apologize to Antiguha. But I'm not sure that's what she meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundofmusic
atiguhya padma is a boy, not a girl :idea:
Thank you Logos for clearing that matter up. And thank you SoundofMusic for your understanding. I was merely stating that if you read the bible then I would recommend that you read it in conjunction with a dictionary or encyclopedia of mythology. That should then place biblical claims in a larger global mythological perspective. Virgil, I accept your apologies. It is interesting to note that your comments were directed by your perception of my prejudices but maybe should be directed towards your own?
I agree. Interestingly, most of the claims to decent literature in the bible, if not all, refer to the Old Testament. Though books like Kings and Chronicles are terribly tedious, sometimes equivalent to reading the telephone book. And anyone familiar with scientific literature will find Genesis extremely primitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
I wonder when a book does not work as literature...
The gospels are quite fine pieces of narratives. Included the use of Jesus as some short of Scherazad, with stories within frames, references to previous books (obviously the OT), and a wide range of metaphorical constructions that work so fine that we still use it today. Book of Revelations is a great example of allegorical poetry.
The letters are among the most important literary epistolar works we have...
In the OT there is the legal books, if anything they should be those wrongly accused of not working as literature...
You're very welcome. Sorry for refering to you as "she". I have enjoyed your insightful postings!Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
I've seen your comments regarding religion in the past. I know your prejudices.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
It was very admirable of you to review your thoughts. It takes a very open person to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
What a fascinating breakdown of the different styles of biblical literature. I loved the old testament stories as a child; but was disappointed reading them as an adult (I hadn't realized how much my imagination had added). A fundamentalist childhood made Revelations the worst of "Boogey Man" tales. I think I will "give it another go" with your insight...Quote:
Originally Posted by JCamilo
I have gone thru both the Old Testament and the New Testament and of course I like the stories of the Bible, and some chapters like Sermons on the Mounts, proverbs are really fascinating, in point of fact they are full of words of wisdom, and I always got impressed by the teachings in the Sermons on the Mounts, but at times some chapters are really hard to understand or commit to memory. Some chapters are revealing and others are rather evocative. There are family lineages, tales of ancestry. Save a few chapters most are difficult to read. I think the Bible was written at different epochs, and some are uninteresting. There are accounts of ancestral accounts that dull the reader.
The Bible is praise owing mainly to its sacredness; considered a great sacred text and consecrated the voice of God. Barring this we find some chapters unmoving. There are other greater sacred texts, more exhaustive philosophically, spiritually like the Mahabharata. Of course what I said may infuriate some Christian friends but I am speaking objectively. There are countless words of wisdom in the Bible, no doubt but the words in the Mahabharata are all the wiser.
[QUOTE=blazeofglory;798211]I have gone thru both the Old Testament and the New Testament and of course I like the stories of the Bible, and There are countless words of wisdom in the Bible, no doubt but the words in the Mahabharata are all the wiser.[/QUOT
We are all here to learn from each other. So no one should take offense from your opinion. I'm glad you mentioned the Mahabharata, I enjoyed the parts I read. The story, itself, seemed very dramatic and colorful and the lessons were easily understood.
The Family Home Evening group I attend on Monday nights has lately been studying the O.T. at mine [partially because of this thread] and others' requests. We're at the point where Jacob, Isaac's younger son, has hoodwinked his Father-in-law (and reconciled) and is off to start his own life with his growing family.
With others in the group, an all 'empty nester' group, more 'versed' in the Bible than I (not too difficult) it has really helped me with understanding some of the nuances that I hadn't really 'seen'.
Thanks to all who have contributed links and comments - they have been a real help.
I humbly disagree. In my opinion the stories of Elijah and Elisha in the books of the Kings are exciting, adventurous, touching and thought provoking. Marks of great literature.Quote:
Originally Posted by atiguhya padma
And BTW, if a book being considered primitive when compared with "scientific literature" contributes to it's being unreadable..... There are a lot of classics in trouble!
Respectfully yours,
753C
[QUOTE=soundofmusic;799857]I am glad that you have read the Mahabharata. May I know whose translation of the Magabharata?Quote:
Originally Posted by blazeofglory
far reaching this has become. I'm not going to get "hanged" on contradictions in our understanding of what is written, nor on mis-translations. The tools I mentioned are for those who are "workmen" of the words in The Word, to assist in obtaining the original intentions of such in their entirety. Ever set the gospels side by side chronologically to the minute? Even a novice might see something new about the number of Peter's denials, and though I know the meaning of heri-keri, I don't know how to spell it. The flaw lies within me, hence I seek proof of the flawless, not the elevation of my ego, intellect or opinion.
I've been fortunate to read the books of the Bible in other than English and clearly the Bible ain't unreadable as it's widely read
Good point Ennison. It's really quite readable even in English, however the popularity of the King James Version has created a certain view of the language. Whatever the merits and demerits of the KJV are, it has had a negative effect on the readability.Quote:
Originally Posted by ennison
Anything is readable. The point is the bible, and many other scriptures, are often only a pleasure to read for those with a conservative mindset. As a work of literature, for many like me, the bible is weary, tired and only inspiring to those who are out of touch with the current times. It may be a source for better literature, but it is a tedious text for a modern world.
Do most people, apart from their faith, enjoy reading the bible? I loved hearing the stories of the bible as a child. As an adult, I sometimes find it an effort to "plow through the scriptures". It is not a matter of language; not in, at least, the same way that the "Paradise Lost", the "Canterbury Tales" or Goethe are. It is not a matter of belief, for many of the same accounts are reflected in other texts around the world.
What are your thoughts?:confused:
You're assumption is that it's a work of literature. Any literary interest is purely secondary. The writers were not there to enetertain.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundofmusic
Some parts are very entertaining! (Parts of Ecclesiastes, Job, some Psalms...) As literature is about getting the right words in the right order, then 'the best' Biblical authors would have been foolish to not make this interest of paramount importance, surely? It would be strange if they had thought it not worth bothering to express their belief using their best literary efforts. That much of the Bible is unreadable is probably down to second rate writers, collaters, priests, and what have you, sticking their oars in...Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
First you claim the Bible is unreadable in the very first post here, and now you profess to understand what is going on in the minds of the writers in their expression. "Surely it is strange" you say? You claim not to understand it and now you say it is strange? You aren't looking for help in understanding it. You are looking to find fault. {edit}Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
the only time I read something similar was Coleridge talking that prose is the right words at the right momment, and poetry the best words at the best momment.
Order would be very foolish, the order depends on intention and idiom. Legal Literature have different order than a poem, or Alice in the Wonderland, Scientific Literature as well, a dictionary another order, etc. A few books of the bible have multiple authors, "editors" and the text had origem in the oral tradition. The order or words used in a oral narration is not the same for written texts, even in the old times, imagine in the world of best-selling prose or journalism?
I agree - and I'm a committed and happy atheist. The influence of the Bible is so profound that its literary merit is pretty secondary to its cultural importance - and that alone is reason enough to read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Also, some of the language in the Bible is damn good - and although it may be antique, it's not antiquated. Many expressions from the King James Version are part of everyday idiom, and references to Bible stories, with or without the direct quotation from a given version, are scattered throughout our shared use of both figurative and literal language. I'd bet that no literate English speaker makes it through a week without citing, consciously or otherwise, two or three Biblical references.
On top of which, the Bible isn't a book - it's a library. And, like most libraries, it contains some good stuff, some dull stuff, some relevant stuff and some moribund stuff.
I'm not saying one should read it daily. But you'd have to be pretty incurious not to read it at all. Apart from anything else, if you're going to set yourself up in opposition to Christianity, it makes sense to be familiar with the other guy's training manual.
I'm not ingnoring all that's been recently written here, but wish to add, augment. I think I made the point on "hanged" in a private message instead of a post here. The usage in Matthew is singular, non-occurring elsewhere in the canonical script. Neither concordance, lexicon, interlinear, etc. is going to give you much eye-opening understanding. I can imagine hanging on a single point, ala heri-keri, hence the bowels gushing out. I've no proof of the original intention of the word, and nothing within the script itself to support my somewhat imaginative belief in the non-contradictory nature of truth per se. This would be a prima facia case for going outside the text to find uses outside the primary text (secular sources at time of translation), in order to understand the primary. I'm not suggesting Cliff notes, but the fact that at times (such as in unique verbal occurrences), outside sources can support further understanding. Maybe I don't belong here; I understand so little, and can mis-understand so much.
Thank you for that Mark. I think you are right on in your understanding of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
You certainly do belong here gb. Absolutely other sources in explcating the work are warrented. There is a two thousand year history of commentary that has been built up and re-commented upon. I have a disagreement with my Evangelical Christian friends. For them the bible is the sole root of all sources of knowledge and that frankly will only tie one up into knots. Life and experience does not work by human logic and reason, and neither does history or transcendental understanding of the divine, and to pin oneself down to a complex text of multiple authors, varying histories, and different experiences is a condition for failure. The two thousand year commentary (actually even more than two thousand years because of old testament commentary - actually what was Christ but a commentator on the old testament? - amoung other things) in itself is not complete and can never be complete. Whether one is an atheist or a believer, human experience is not founded on reason and rationality, but an evolving conception. And therefore the bible itself, layered across centuries, book upon book, experience upon experience, is an aesthetic representation of life itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbrekken
I too feel the Bible is one of the evolutionary processes and steps of human understanding about the world and himself and the Bible is not the final truth and Jesus is one of the many thinkers like Plato, Russel., Sartre and the like!Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
You are right, of course, Virgil. I sometimes think, however, that it would be wonderful for the stories and parables to be placed in literary form (aside from the King James bible) for adults and children. Most christians I know really have no deep seated understanding of the bible; that is why they become so confused when stories such as DaVinci Code are released.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Actually I believe there are collections where they've gathered such stories. I think I had one somewhere once. I just did a search in Amazon for bibble stories and came up with this: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss?ur...=bible+stories. Over 58,000 results actually!Quote:
Originally Posted by soundofmusic
Some of the stuff is so dull and so moribund that it makes it unreadable "as a whole", I would argue. Have you read it all? If not, you have not disproven my thesis that it is unreadable "as a whole". The only people I have heard say they have read it all are extremely highly motivated Christians--most recently some Jehovah's witnesses, and even they admitted it was really hard slog.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
To oppose Christian arguments with atheist arguments it's the actual arguments that need to be engaged with, not some dusty manual--every Christian sect has its own interpretation of that manual anyway. No atheist need read the Bible to argue against Christian dogmas. Do you think creationists have read Darwin's Origin? No. So if they can argue against atheists without reading their "bible", why should we read theirs?
If you really want to, you can read the 100 Minute Bible to get reasonably familiar with "the other guys traning manual" -- no need to torture yourself by reading the whole thing. Though even the 100 Minute Bible is a tough chew in places! But I did finish it. So I *have* read the Bible!
But many of these are for small kids, or are re-tellings by second-rate writers out to make a fast buck, or have other factors counting against them. Few have any literary merit at all for adult readers. The most promising abridgement I found was "Testament" by Philip Law. But I still found myself grinding to a halt on reading it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Which of these 58 000 collections of Bible stories come closest to maintaining most of the literary merits of the original?
I don't need to. I was brought up with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
You're the kind of person who flicks through the comic strip Hamlet and thinks he's read Shakespeare, aren't you?Quote:
Though even the 100 Minute Bible is a tough chew in places! But I did finish it. So I *have* read the Bible!
I have no desire to respond to any of your statements any longer here. You aren't here to understand. You are here to undermine. I really don't care whether you understand it or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
I think this thread has become unreadable too with all the personal comments and bickering going on.
Such comments and disrespectful/intolerant attitude towards those who do not share your views will lead to infraction points in future.