Nice. Why did you choose that edition? (And what Wii game?)

>>2
Read good reviews about the accuracy and lack of bias of the NSRV translation and the added annotations of this annotated bible. I was also looking for one that contained more apocrypha rather than less apocrypha: it contains the larger canon of eastern churches. It also utilises dead sea scrolls for information, which is important to do: it means the translators accept that the bible has had multiple different variations, created by humans, not by a god.
I opened it up, and I'm excited to read it. However, the pages in the one I got (the cover says College Edition but that's not mentioned anywhere other than on the cover) are incredibly thin, and feel fragile. The font size for the notes is maybe too small, but the font for the actual bible text is fine.
Since I've already read the torah before, I'll actually be able to make some sort of comparison as for that part, as I plan to read it again in this book.

The game is Wii Play Motion. I know it's been poorly reviewed for being yet another nintendo minigame collection, but I hear the actual minigames are fine, and I thought ``Since I have all the Wii series games for the Wii, except Wii Chess and Wii Play Motion, I may as well get the final game I can get. Wii Chess isn't available in the US. I should get Wii Play Motion before it becomes expensive or out of stock, as with the release of the Switch, if Nintendo considers it to be a console rather than a handheld, the Wii will be two consoles behind.''
I'm excited to play it when I have some time. I don't have time for most of this month, either to read the bible or play games, as I have a BSD system administration cert test this month.

>>3
I made a mistake in my post: NRSV, not NSRV. Sorry for double-posting.

Make sure to update us with your thoughts in the currently reading thread! (Or here if you prefer that I guess) I just reached Exodus and I'm enjoying it a lot so far.

>>5
Genesis and Exodus are both pretty fun to read. From a plot-driven perspective, the book after it, Leviticus, is probably the most boring in the whole torah. It's got a lot of lists of people and laws and religious rituals, and less story. However, as with all parts of the torah, it's educational about semitic culture.
The fact that methuselah and enoch and other characters get so much fanfiction after only appearing in single sections of the torah is amazing. Some of the characters at the end of Genesis and in Exodus are clever guys. Also, if you pay close attention, you'll see in Exodus that the hebrew god takes away the pharaoh's free will.

>Leviticus, is probably the most boring in the whole torah
I have to admit that I basically skimmed/skipped all the x begat y sequences in Genesis. I hope that Leviticus is not quite as dry -- as much as I am interested in the Bible's cultural influence, the plot is most of what has kept me engaged.
>spoiler
That does sound interesting. Thanks for the heads up, I'll keep an eye out!

>>9
Whoops. That's to you, >>8.

>>9
It's not as repetitive as x begat y, as each law is different, but it's a lot of laws.
I think it was in Leviticus, but somewhere in the torah, these two priests say ``hey how about we do MORE for god than what he asked for'' and god throws a tantrum and swallows them into the earth.
Ahh, what a fun book. When people say god is love, I seriously doubt whether they've read the torah.
As for the spoiler I wrote in 8, god does it a second time later in the torah, too, to a second person.
Enjoyee!

>>11
>repetitive
Oh dear. Leviticus, as interesting as certain parts have been, has been a real chore. The descriptions of the tabernacle's construction and the rules for sacrifice felt pretty samey throughout. Luckily I'm reading the KJV and the poetry of it is enough to keep me interested.
>god throws a tantrum
If it's the same thing I read, you were right -- it was the beginning of Leviticus. Pretty brutal. However, (and this might be a difference of translation) in my copy they were consumed by fire.
>When people say god is love, I seriously doubt whether they've read the torah.
I could be wrong, but it seems like God sort of "became" loving through the sacrifice of Jesus. Or, rather, that humans became "worthy" of love after this sacrifice was completed on their behalf. I've also heard some pretty interesting theories of New vs. Old Testament God and how they might be different: something about a demiurge? I'll have to look into that some more.

Also, regarding what you said in >>8, I looked into it and found a different way of framing God's actions. It seems that God "hardened Pharaoh's heart" because he didn't want him to just change his mind because of God's wrath. That is, he only "hardened his heart" inasmuch as it negated the fear of God. Link for more info, if you're interested: http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/460242/jewish/Why-Didnt-Pharaoh-Release-the-Israelites.htm

The Book of Revelation and Job are pretty dope

>>12
The guy who translated the torah I used at least did a lot of cool math with the numbers in leviticus, in the notes. It made some parts more interesting.
Yeah, your translation doesn't conflict the translation I read. Both things happened. Or maybe my memory is bad.
Ahh, I love mythology.

Interesting article, but it's absolutely wrong in content, while still interesting.
``he would have then been deprived of the ability to make a coherent and true choice'' my fucking ass
that the plagues shouldn’t interfere with his decision-making process but the thing is that every event in a person's life DOES affect a way a person thinks and acts, and to remove that takes away freedom, rather than enhancing it.
Very interesting excuses made for god by jews in that article. Theology is interesting.
>and the article tries to claim god is good
naice naice

I finished Joshua yesterday and really loved it. The tale of Samson was a ton of fun to read. I didn't know anything about his story aside from the image of the lion and honey, but it makes a fantastic argument for self-control.

The role of women was also interesting in this book. The woman who drove the nail through that king's temples, as well as Samson's wife and her attempts to find his weakness were both quite surprising—I had not expected much action from women, at least in the OT.

Finally, the bit about the anonymous Levite at the end shocked me for all its graphic details, and the betrayal involved. Interesting parallel to Sodom, as well. Though, sending his concubine out in 12 pieces -> demonstrating the need for kings seemed like quite a leap to me.

>>14
You said earlier on that the God-denying-free-will event happens again later. Did you mean in Joshua? The king steeled the hearts of the kings of various cities so that they would fight against Isreal, and I wouldn't have noticed the parallel if it weren't for your comment.

>>15
I didn't mean in Joshua, since I've only read the torah so far. Other than the pharoah and egypt, there's some minor battle the jews have while travelling to canaan where some general didn't feel like fighting the jews until yhwh made the general decide to fight the jews, since yhwh wanted the jews to exterminate this guy's country. It's in whatever section had the jews travelling down some highway and battling or ignoring different countries along the way.
Hmm, I have more free time than I had a month or two ago, so I should finally begin reading again.

>>16
Oh, right, I remember now. Seems to be a common theme in the OT.
Do bump the currently reading thread when you pick something up! If it's the Bible I'll be happy to discuss it with you here.

So I (OP) finally began reading it, yesterday. I already have read the torah before, in a different book/translation, so I thought
>``Should I skip the torah, or re-read it?''
I decided yes, I'd read it again, but not read so many footnotes. It's a less interrupted experience that way, and I'll read it more quickly.
But: this bible actually talks abotu the documentary hypothesis! i.e. the sources J, E, P, D. The previous translation I read talked more about Moses being the author, which was insightful, but more so about rabbinical thinking than about the torah itself.
It's interesting, being able to see the different sources more clearly. It also let me see a lot more repetition: even on a single page you can see paragraph A, paragraph B, paragraph A'.
I definitely notice now that J's YHWH is a interesting guy, as he's very human. YHWH: "hey dude, where u at?" dude: "here I am :D"
YHWH in general, though, is a chuunibyou warrior, except he actually has real chuunibyou powers. He's certainly not omniscient: it seems like he has to actually look at things and be near things in order to act on them.
Since I started late yesterday, I'm still in genesis, but I'll definitely finish it today since it's not long at all. I'll definitely finish the torah faster this time, and then work through the whole tanakh, deuterocanonical stuff, new testament, and quran.

>>18
Good choice deciding to re-read it. I'm sure the Bible rewards as many re-reads as you're willing to give it.
>documentary hypothesis
Some very interesting reading, here. Maybe I'll (eventually) find a NRSV copy. Sounds like a valuable resource!
>J's YHWH is a interesting guy, as he's very human
These are some of the most entertaining parts to read. The tension between God's all-powerful nature and his apparently limited ability, at times, makes for a good laugh. Funny, I've laughed harder at the Bible and Homer's works than I have at most works on this side of the 20th century.

That reminds me. This part (1 Kings 1:51-53) had me giggling for ~10 minutes:
>And it was told Solomon, saying, Behold, Adonijah feareth king Solomon: for, lo, he hath caught hold on the horns of the altar, saying, Let king Solomon swear unto me today that he will not slay his servant with the sword.
>And Solomon said, If he will shew himself a worthy man, there shall not an hair of him fall to the earth: but if wickedness shall be found in him, he shall die.
>So king Solomon sent, and they brought him down from the altar. And he came and bowed himself to king Solomon: and Solomon said unto him, Go to thine house.
Basically: "Please don't kill me!" "Go home loser."

The end of 1 Kings 3, where Solomon tries the old "cut the baby in half" trick is really clever. Probably one of my favourite parts so far, next to Samson's adventures.

>>19
>I'm sure the Bible rewards as many re-reads as you're willing to give it.
Not at all. I plan to never read it again after I finish the entire thing. I have better uses for my time, like moving on to the classics, and reading science fiction.
I don't know if I've ever re-read a book before. I might re-read some Jack McDevitt in the future, since I was very young when I read them, but I enjoyed them a lot.
>>19
>Some very interesting reading, here. Maybe I'll (eventually) find a NRSV copy. Sounds like a valuable resource!
NRSV is just the translation of the actual text: the footnotes and articles are added onto the translation by the editors writing the NOAB. So far I'm enjoying everything, though.
>good laugh
You're right! There's goofy stuff in here.
>God can't wrestle Jacob effectively
wwwww
Semites are crazy, though. Kill ALL the offenders.
>Homer
I read the Odyssey before, I really need to read the Iliad, and then the Odyssey again. The Odyssey was genuinely fun. It reminds me of an important topic though. For people who claim there exist books that are and are not ``genre fiction'' the Odyssey is clearly genre fiction. It's an adventure story.
>go to thine house
I laughed. There are a lot of silly phrases and replies like that, including the yhwh/human dialogue I mentioned in my previous post.
Oh yeah, the NRSV translation has a pretty amusing phrase for fucking.
>come into
>go into
行く～
>1 Kings 3
I need to get there. While holding my book and holding different sections with different fingers to see the physical sizes of the sections, I noticed the new testament looks small in comparison with old testament.
Reading warmly~

>>20
>I plan to never read it again after I finish the entire thing
Well, if that works for you then that's good, although I wouldn't discount the possibility of coming back to it. Same thing for any literary/historical works, and certainly the classics. As Nabakov once said,
"Curiously enough, one cannot read a book; one can only reread it. A good reader, a major reader, and active and creative reader is a rereader.”
>NRSV is just the translation of the actual text
Ah, I see. I guess my search will be a bit more specific. Hope I can find it used!
>Iliad/Odyssey
Why did you read the Odyssey first? It's not like they /need/ to be read in order, but it does seem unusual that way.
Regarding the genre/literary fiction divide, I see them as just convenience terms, basically—people that want a compelling story and an easy read will be better serviced by genre fic, while people looking to spend a bit more brainpower on really digging into a work will be better rewarded by lit fic. There's a lot of crossover, of course, but seeing as the Odyssey is esteemed for its literary elements (and not just its plot twists or whatever), I wouldn't personally classify it as "genre." That said, I'm sure most literary fiction could be fit into a genre if one was to spend the time classifying them.
>come into
>go into
Yeah, the KJV uses these same phrases. One other that I find amusing is "knew/know." The Sodom event made a lot less sense when I thought the Sodomites just wanted to meet the foreigner.
>the new testament looks small in comparison with old testament
Yeah, the OT is a pretty huge book compared to the NT. I can't wait to get there—I've heard that the NT contains some of the most thought-provoking content. Seems to be more valuable as a moral guide as well, which is a big part of why I'm reading the Bible.

>>21
>Hope I can find it used!
It's only 20 USD new on amazon.
>Why did you read the Odyssey first?
Because the Odyssey was required reading in high school, and unfortunately during high school, I had no time to even read a single book that wasn't assigned. My reading skills suffered dramatically because of those four years.
But I did enjoy the Odyssey.
>people that want a compelling story and an easy read will be better serviced by genre fic, while people looking to spend a bit more brainpower on really digging into a work will be better rewarded by lit fic
Generalisation.
>That said, I'm sure most literary fiction could be fit into a genre if one was to spend the time classifying them.
This is correct.
>Seems to be more valuable as a moral guide as well, which is a big part of why I'm reading the Bible.
>moral guide
Religion is for people who don't want to go anywhere in life. To base your morals off of fictional events is a terrible idea, especially when those fictional events were written as propaganda designed to make the lower classes not fight against the upper classes so much.
Religion is incompatible with freedom or rational thought. You can have freedom of religion, or freedom of people, but not both.

>To base your morals off of fictional events is a terrible idea,
Using stories that were written in part to provide justification for a pre-existing sense of morality to guide your own morality is not such a terrible idea.

>especially when those fictional events were written as propaganda designed to make the lower classes not fight against the upper classes so much.
Not true in the slightest. Yes, Christianity in particular was warped to do exactly that, but that is not why Christianity, nor any other major religion, began.

>You can have freedom of religion, or freedom of people, but not both.
How do you suppose one goes about removing freedom of religion?

>>22
>It's only 20 USD new on amazon
Wow, that's pretty darn cheap. Thanks for the info.
>Because the Odyssey was required reading in high school
I'm curious: in what country do you live? And was it an abridged version? I live in Canada, and we never tackled anything as long/"important" as the Odyssey in high school. Maybe my school just sucked.
>Generalisation
Well, again, the distinction I'm making is one of convenience. They do not always hold true, but there's a reason they're there.
>Religion is for people who don't want to go anywhere in life [...]
I'm not religious, but it's hard to deny that Christianity was one of the biggest influences on Western morality and high culture. Personally, I'm proud to be a part of Western culture, and I'd like to live in accordance with the morality that founded it.
>Religion is incompatible with freedom or rational thought
If morality is opposed to rationality, I'm happy to abandon the latter in favour of the former. Rationality is only useful insomuch as it benefits one's life. There's also an issue of "freedom" here—religion (and the morality associated with it) is a good way of tempering earthly desires, allowing one to focus on more lasting pursuits. >>23 raises some good points as well.

>>24
>>It's only 20 USD new on amazon
>Wow, that's pretty darn cheap
I wish I was this rich...

>>25
Don't get me wrong, I'm far below the poverty line. What I meant was that it's cheap enough to eventually buy new, with some budgeting. I expected it to be much more expensive.

>>23
>that is not why Christianity, nor any other major religion, began.
Religions are made by humans, specifically by humans looking to conquer other humans.
>How do you suppose one goes about removing freedom of religion?
By reaching anarchism (also known as communism).
>>24
>I'm curious: in what country do you live? And was it an abridged version?
Florida, USA, and not abridged. Sadly I did read an abridged version of The Count of Monte Cristo. In retrospect, while I went to a private high school on a full scholarship, I should've went to the public high school my friends went to: they learnt considerably more, and took more AP classes.
>Personally, I'm proud to be a part of Western culture
Me too. I love indo-european european culture. The Greeks, Romans, Slavs, Germans, and all the other peoples are so interesting. While Semites are also interesting, their values conflict with mine.
>If morality is opposed to rationality
It isn't. I think living a moral, ethical life, and living a religious life, are opposed.

I've just started Chronicles. The first ~12 chapters are just lists of names. It's so painful! I might give up on trying to find the poetry of these passages and just start skimming. It takes a long time to read when I've also got to worry about pronouncing these names correctly. Funny, since I had a pretty easy time with Homer's catalog of ships (and even enjoyed it).

>>27
>they learnt considerably more, and took more AP classes
Really? That's quite surprising. The public schools here are not that great, I guess.
>I think living a moral, ethical life, and living a religious life, are opposed
Why is this? Over the past few years I've been coming closer and closer to the idea that it is difficult (maybe impossible) to be totally moral without religion. When you don't have someone to "check in" with (God), there is nothing keeping you from betraying your beliefs and rationalizing the betrayal, when it is necessary or beneficial to do so. Maybe that belief says more about me than it does others, but I believe that humans are all pretty much the same in that regard. We're weak on our own, especially when it comes to things like morals.

>>28
>I might give up on trying to find the poetry of these passages and just start skimming.
Why would you be looking for poetry in it? It's literally just a list of names, there's no hidden meaning.

>>29
I'm not referring to meaning, but the actual sound of the passages when read aloud (or subvocalized).

>>28
>poetry
>lists of names
Lists of names are always parts to very quickly read through. Also, it's known that poetry doesn't go through translation well.
>The public schools here are not that great, I guess.
The public schools here suck to an extent too, it's just that the private school I went to had multiple reasons to not let kids actually reach their potential. Parents want kids with good grades. Most parents are paying lots of money. Therefore, force kids to get good grades by not letting them into good classes. There were good and bad parts. All in all, I lean more towards regretting going to the private school.
>When you don't have someone to "check in" with
You always have yourself. You are the arbiter of your ethics and morality. Don't be weakwilled! You can become an ubermensch as long as you have self-control. Christianity isn't an Aryan religion anyway, it's a Jewish one. And while all religion is bad, it's even worse to have a religion incompatible with the freedom indo-europeans have been in love with for a long time.
>We're weak on our own
Absolutely wrong. Humanity is so powerful, and that power comes from individuals. Even interactions between individuals are still of individuals. Humans can overcome anything. I believe in the power of the people.
>especially when it comes to things like morals
Religion can only make it worse, not better. Religions endorse unethical power structures and caste systems. And if people really believe in gods, they put themselves in a caste system where they're in a caste lower than the caste of the god(s). No gods no masters has always been important for people who love freedom, like communists and anarchists.
>>29
>Why would you be looking for poetry in it? It's literally just a list of names, there's no hidden meaning.
Agreed.

>>30
If you're looking for poetry, I don't think NRSV is what you want, assuming you're OP. KJV really hasn't ever been matched in that regard.

See: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2023&version=KJV,NRSV
It's the small things that make the difference:
>though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death
vs
>Even though I walk through the darkest valley

>my cup runneth over
vs
>my cup overflows

Also, the lists weren't designed to be poetic, they were literally just lists. There might be some weird linguistic stuff in it, since the Hebrews were all about that, but all of that is lost in translation.

>>31
>people who love freedom, like communists
LOL'd so hard milk squirted out of my nose!

When you finally do reach blissful anarchy, how do you stop people from re-creating those pesky social hierarchies?

I don't want to shit up this thread/imageboard with off-topic politics though, maybe we should stop, or make a thread of about anarchocommie lit or something if you want.

>>32
>If you're looking for poetry, I don't think NRSV is what you want, assuming you're OP. KJV really hasn't ever been matched in that regard.
There's no reason to read any translation that was made without use of the dead sea scrolls.
>When you finally do reach blissful anarchy, how do you stop people from re-creating those pesky social hierarchies?
Because people who have freedom will recognise when someone wants to take their freedom away.

>>31
>it's known that poetry doesn't go through translation well
The KJV is a whole new poetic work of its own. King James hired the best scholars of the time, and it shows in every verse of this huge book (which is a remarkable feat). Even the lists of names have a very nice rhythm to them, though I did indeed end up skimming through them.
>Therefore, force kids to get good grades by not letting them into good classes
Ah, the classic "grades > education" approach. Will the world ever recover from this?
>You are the arbiter of your ethics and morality
That's not really a good thing, considering that it means people can rationalize whatever they want to without remorse. What's to stop someone from killing if they feel killing is right? Moral relativism seems to make sense in theory, but the application of it is horribly flawed.
>Christianity isn't an Aryan religion anyway, it's a Jewish one
What? The OT is Jewish, I'll give you that, but the NT (which is the basis for Christianity) is totally ignored by Jews. It was even written in Greek.
(Also, I don't mean to get political, but "Aryan" and "Western" are not the same thing. The Greeks, for example, were not Aryan.)
>Humans can overcome anything. I believe in the power of the people.
Maybe I'm a pessimist, or maybe I'm just in a bad area, but this is not what I've seen. It all depends on one's perspective.
>freedom
>caste systems
>communists and anarchists
I won't get into this, for fear of derailing the thread more than it already has been (and, if you're the anon I think you are, we may have done this before). Agree to disagree, I guess.
>>32
>I don't think NRSV is what you want, assuming you're OP
I'm not OP, and I'm reading KJV. But I totally agree with your assessment, thanks for the examples. The KJV Bible is an incredibly beautiful book.
>but all of that is lost in translation
See, I'm not talking about some "original" poetic nature that's bleeding through. What I mean is that the words that King James' scholars put down on the page were carefully organized and chosen, giving the whole work an aura of beauty. Even the lists of names have nice rhythms and a pleasing array of sounds and repetition. Very rarely have I encountered something that sounds like "just a list," even in Deuteronomy.

>>34
>best scholars of the time
And the best scholars of today have more resources than the best scholars of his day.
>Ah, the classic "grades > education" approach. Will the world ever recover from this?
Sadly, probably not until the school system itself is abolished. Since my high school also used the tactic of assigning a lot of homework, to raise the grades of kids who could cheat on homework but couldn't cheat on (and therefore got bad grades on) tests, I, since I don't do well with busywork, got very low GPAs in high school, and thus my high school is one of the major reasons I didn't get into any decent colleges, despite perfect test scores on many standardised tests.
>That's not really a good thing
Ah, so freedom and individualism are bad things.
>means people can rationalize whatever they want to without remorse
Correct, but most people won't rationalise murder. It's not in anyone's best interest to do that anyway. How can people keep freedom if they take away the freedom of others?
>What's to stop someone from killing if they feel killing is right?
What stops people today? Nothing. The legal system punishes people after they do bad things: the legal system never prevents bad things from happening. It's reactive, not proactive.
The best hope to stop this is to make sure everyone has his own gun and reacts fast enough to stop murders before they occur. The same thing that works today, since as said before, the legal system prevents nothing.
>What? The OT is Jewish, I'll give you that, but the NT (which is the basis for Christianity) is totally ignored by Jews. It was even written in Greek.
But just as English language VNs are often written by wapanese, the NT was written by people who saw inspiration in semitic culture when inventing a new religion.
>(Also, I don't mean to get political, but "Aryan" and "Western" are not the same thing. The Greeks, for example, were not Aryan.)
I specifically used that word, even though I don't use it often. If you use the word Western, you have to agree with who you're talking about whether semites are Western or not. You can see semites, judaism, christianity, and islam as western or not western. But all four of those things hold the same values. And those four things are at conflict with a free Europe.
>Maybe I'm a pessimist, or maybe I'm just in a bad area, but this is not what I've seen. It all depends on one's perspective.
I think that most people are taught to be bad, and aren't born bad. Very few people might be ``naturally'' bad but they've been quite effective in forcing or teaching others to be bad.

>>35
>And the best scholars of today have more resources than the best scholars of his day
It's not so much a matter of resources as it is intelligence and knowledge of the craft (poetry and writing). The best writers of the past cannot be said to be less talented just because they're older.
>my high school is one of the major reasons I didn't get into any decent colleges, despite perfect test scores on many standardised tests
That's ridiculous, I'm sorry to hear that. In my high school homework wasn't even mandatory.
>Ah, so freedom and individualism are bad things
I never said that. I think that they are good things to a point, just like most other things. Moral relativisim is freedom and individualism taken to a destructive fault.
>Correct, but most people won't rationalise murder
Maybe true, but they could rationalize theft or other crimes. It's easy to do that when you're stealing from a business that "already makes a bunch of money." People are primarily motivated by selfish desire, at least until they realize how toxic those desires can be. This is a central "thesis" of the Bible, and I'd say it holds true beyond the scope of Christianity.
>the legal system never prevents bad things from happening
Do you not think the rate of petty theft would rise if it were no longer illegal? The "reactive" punishment is also, in part, proactive. Not many people want to be punished. It's the same way we learn about right and wrong as children.
>the NT was written by people who saw inspiration in semitic culture when inventing a new religion
You're right, I'll concede on this point.

Anyway, we're getting a bit off track here. Perhaps we should make a debate board for these arguments.

>>36
>Perhaps we should make a debate board for these arguments.
>>>/bol/

My grandpa let me have/borrow this really nice edition of the Book of Proverbs published by Heritage Press. He has over a hundred of these Heritage Press books, they're all excellently made. I wish I knew of a publisher around today that made such nice books. They also published the Book of Psalms, next time I visit I'll ask if he has that.

The bible is super inconsistent, it's like it's its own fanfiction.