Why read the bible?

Because the Bible is a collection of text from some of the earliest recorded history and the central text to Christianity, one of the most prominent religions in history. Even if you don't believe in a god, gods or the Abrahamic God in particular, it is a massively influential text in the history of the west, with its influence still seen today. If you're interested in literature, history, or the humanities, there's almost no reason not to read it.

Are you a layperson, user?
Your quints have been corrupted.

>dubs
check em

and you're stupid,
that quint was 700 replies before his...

/pol/ is definitely well read. Read enough and youll discover truths they don't want you to know. The /pol/ recommended reading is top tier for finding them.

The christian canon forms the metaphysical foundation for western society. It affects your actions, your thoughts and everyone else in ways that aren't exactly evident, so reading it is definitely enlightening.

I say "Christian Canon" rather than the Bible because the bible itself was metatextual in its inception since it came from multiple different sources, and it continues to be metatextual with the additions of what are considered great books (Dante, Milton, Kierkegaard, Augustine, etc)

tldr you can't understand yourself without understanding the bible

>The christian canon forms the metaphysical foundation for western society
That's where you are blatantly wrong, kiddo.

"a very large portion of the West's metaphysical grounding"

how's that

It's got some cool sounding chapters

read simone weil

>pol/ is definitely well read
On internet info-graphics and image macros maybe. There are well read people but the vast majority lack both the capability and motivation to read books.

>hasn't been on /pol/ and just spouts opinions of /r/politics and other aubreddits.

/pol/ is full of retards my dude.

Cleaned up that chart a little bit. I tried to be as generous as I could, especially with the fiction.

Only edgy atheists read the bible. You're better off reading the greeks.

WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB!

You really need to remove The Shack from this list. Read a summary of plot and it should be obvious why. From Wikipedia:
>He enters the shack and encounters manifestations of the three persons of the Trinity. God the Father takes the form of an African American woman who calls herself Elousia and Papa; Jesus Christ is a Middle-Eastern carpenter; and the Holy Spirit physically manifests as an Asian woman named Sarayu.

>The Greeks were a singularly genius people
>a tradition of learning unlike the world had ever seen
>then they all converted to Christianity and closed their minds to the brilliance of science (philosophy is a subset of science btw)
atheists actually believe this

check my fix

You might as well just make a separate Orthodox list. I think the original was trying to give a broad overview, including different (lowercase) orthodox traditions. Stuff like The Shack is beyond the pale, though, and there was a significant reaction against it back when it became popular.

I probably will make one and post it on Veeky Forums eventually. That one is really bad though (and not just because I don't like Latins). Putting Maximos in Intermediate and City of God in advanced shows the creator probably hasn't read either of them. Intermediate theology: T.S. Eliot, William Lain Craig, St Maximos the Confessor. lol. The Desert Fathers and Kierkegaard together in a category called Beginner Spirituality--what in the world? Should have called the whole "Spirituality" column Misc. The Fiction column is so bad I can only imagine it was intentional.

What's wrong with fear and trembling?

I'm reading the Bible right now, though I'm not very far (just got to Deuteronomy.) Quite a few stories I had forgotten, or was wrong on the details. There are a lot of people who are familiar with the Bible, so you have a lot of people to talk to about it. Also some of the poetry is nice.

Surely Aquinas is worth reading even if you're not Catholic, no?

pol has bretty good christian general threads.

>Surely Aquinas is worth reading even if you're not Catholic, no?
Some Protestants read him. I don't know that many Orothodox do.

Kierkegaard was a fideist. He felt there was no rational motivation or convincing argument to believe in god, that god's existence cannot be known, god was not a rational being, but that nevertheless one should believe.

He also said that believing in Christ as God is an absolute paradox, because it would mean the eternal and perfect being manifested as a simple man affixed to history at a certain point and time. (but that nevertheless one should believe)

First time reading the Bible.
I picked KJV due to literary significance with regards to Moby Dick and Blood Meridian.

What should I know beforehand reading the Bible? I have a basic grasp of Christianity from "Lutherian" perspective - I am Finn and our largest religion was Lutheran Christinianity. How does it differ from what is in KJV?

It's proto-evangelical Lutheranism. He begins from his belief that paradoxes can't be rational. Faith cannot be reasonable. The key tenets of Christianity are absurd. We must believe because they're absurd. What his philosophy looks like in practice is people swaying back and forth with their arms up and altar calls.

>What should I know beforehand reading the Bible? I have a basic grasp of Christianity from "Lutherian" perspective - I am Finn and our largest religion was Lutheran Christinianity. How does it differ from what is in KJV?
You're fine. The KJV is properly an Anglican translation, but it became essentially the standard Protestant translation in English, so it was and is still used by many denominations, including some Lutherans.

>Surely Aquinas is worth reading even if you're not Catholic, no?
It can be useful to understand Aquinas in terms of understanding much of Western philosophy. I've heard it said that the history of Western philosophy is a history of solving the errors / filling the gaps in Augustine. Aquinas is very important in that process.

In terms of theology, Aquinas isn't useful. I don't want to put it this way, because I know Latins are going to think I'm just trying make them mad, but Aquinas is just a mish-mash of Aristotle and Plato with a Jesus fish sticker slapped on the end.

>what should I know beforehand
it will take you a month to read the old testament and a day to read the new testament

Wut

'Cause hell hurts.