What is the best way to go about reading the Bible?

this means: read KJV

is this pic effective?

Amerimutts like you give protestants a bad name. I bet you need JBP to explain the bible to you, faggot.

Having followed it, it’s a little rigid at times. I read the whole Bible in a month, but the pic sticks to a very strict number of chapters a day structure, so sometimes a reading will end with you reading the ending to one book, then one or two chapters of the next book. (Day 3 is an example of this. You read 8 chapters of Matthew then 2 chapters of Mark). Often what I did was I would end a reading early one day then read a longer reading the next day

While KJV onlyism is a bad meme, the KJV is a fine translation. If you’re gonna read the Bible multiple times, you should read the KJV at least once

>shits on poster, JBP projection, mutt projection, offers no alternative
Then which translation do you prefer? Since clearly the KJV raped you as a boy?

Attached: complete_set_250w.jpg (250x339, 99K)

Start with Gospel of Mark, followed by Gospel of John, Romans, Galatians, Ephesians. Read 1 John, 1 & 2 Peter, James, Jude, then Hebrews, then Revelations.

For Old Testament, start with Ecclesiastes. Read a chapter of Proverbs and two or three psalms each day.
Read Genesis and Exodus (you can skip the chapters about building the tabernacle, chapters 25-31 and 36-29). Read Leviticus chapters 8-12, 15-16, 18-20, then Numbers chapters 11-25. Then Judges, Ruth, Jonah, the books of Samuel, Kings, Daniel. Then finish Deuteronomy and Joshua. Finish Isaiah before you attempt Jeremiah or Ezekiel.

There are no shortcuts. COVER to COVER.

By the book, ignoring chapters and verses, they have nothing to do with the actual content and were placed practically randomly. Just discern what the book is for, and read it as such.

If you are dying to understand the Bible but don't want to read it just quietly sit in on Sunday services at a church. It is free, and so long as you keep your likely skepticism to yourself you can continue to go and be spoon-fed what people actually try and pull out of the Bible instead of reading some old testament then making a "christfag btfo" thread because mythbusters already disproved walking on water.
If you go, after about 2 or 3 weeks you'll probably start to see the recurring themes throughout the books like being kind to others and standing your ground for what you believe in. And you probably won't have to actually open or read a Bible to get any of it

I recommend it differently based on if you're reading for spirituality, for literature, for history, etc.

As an atheist heathen who read the whole thing, I can't imagine reading the New Testament before the Old. There's an almost narrative progression there that you see being built, and it makes it a lot less disorienting to follow it in (more or less) chronological order.

All I can say is make sure you read the standard Catholic/Orthodox OT apocrypha, no matter what you or your creed think of them as far as the canon goes. They're very important (and I thought some of the most entertaining books). And they have a bonus of showing some links in history and thought between the Old and New Testaments.

go to warosu and text search

Shouting projection is really no different from going ''no u''. RSV, NSAB, and NWT are all preferable if you want to read it in English.

well, now that you've gotten your anger out, would you like to join the discussion?

None of these are preferable. The NASB is practically unreadable. Bibles that are based on ((critical scholarship)) are all garbage.

Attached: Asimov's Guide to the Bible_ The Old and New Testaments (2 Vols.) - Isaac Asimov.jpg (884x1333, 202K)

People will laugh but here’s how I learnt about the bible:
Start with Genesis, watch chuck missler’s videos on YouTube (you donot have to believe it but he gives a good epistemological framework for reading through it). Then I would argue go to the first 4 gospels to get a good idea of who Jesus was.
Then go back and go through the books of the law. Then from there I guess it’s up to you, however the Old Testament follows a direct line straight to Jesus; that is to say all of the prophecies, blood lines, morals etc all point to Jesus the messiah. I think this is good to keep in mind no matter what part of the bible you are reading.
And for goodness sake don’t try and unpack revelations. Assume it to be purely symbolic of the churches at the time of Paul.

New World Translation has some serious errors which are based on Jehovah's Witnesses theology, not the text.

NASB is a pretty standard modern translation, it's perfectly readable. Meme brackets don't invalidate all of bible scholarship.

>I prefer flowery language over the word of god

Cover to cover is the best way, there's no denying it.
>b-but it weren't meant to be read that way
Nigga fuck you, there's a reason Genesis is the first book and Revelation is the last. The books are ordered so that later books build on earlier ones in the optimal way.

A lot of people read the Bible for its literary and philosophical tradition, not in order to "get to the truth of it". For this purpose, the KJV may indeed be a good choice compared to contemporary critical scholarship. Personally I'd say get the most acessible edition in your native language and stop worrying so much about translations, but whatever.

Skip the old testament. It is the story of a bad people and their evil god.

Read Plato, and KJV NT.

No, they're ordered roughly according to genre. Law, History, Poetry, Wisdom, Prophets, Gospels, Epistles, Apocalypse. The Bible was put together primarily for liturgy, it most certainly is not meant to be read cover to cover as if it's a novel.

I agree with this.

what is the reason for the order?

All you need to do is read the new testament (king james version)

I'd recommend the Ignatius Study Bible. You get all the books you'd get in KJV, with the added books the Church considers canon, as well as a commentary on the verses. Read all the books, don't skip parts you might find boring, they are important for understanding it as a whole.

Why didn't YHWH just teleport the Jews to Isreal?

Attached: moses-valentin-de-boulogne.jpg (708x900, 150K)

Because they were meant to wander around for 40 years as a trial.

all those milkers are heavy, user. too heavy even for god.

Attached: qtkzrmlkrs.jpg (900x900, 107K)

You could read it according to the liturgical lectionary of the church of your choosing.
Otherwise for a standard Christian perspective it might suit to read the gospels first, specifically Mark and Matthew, then perhaps to look into Isaiah which seems to be referenced the most in them, then the most verifiable epistles, then the Torah for a clear backdrop on Hebrew culture and thought.
After that all those the books which correspond to the Jewish division of the Nevi'im are probably the most important with the rest of the OT with the Ketuvim and the apocrypha being last. Much of modern and historical scholarship places greater importance on OT apocrypha than on the NT antilegomena. This is why there is so much crazy fanaticism in the world today with mostly divergent post-early modern sects placing greater importance and basing their most important beliefs and doctrines on these.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanakh
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilegomena

Another thing to look into would be the historical development of the chapter and verse divisions and to try to follow a more organic reading by paragraphs in accordance with historical religious traditions.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible

I’d like you to know that it’s poor form to inb4 as op.

Interesting fact: Moses has two horns made of light in that painting due to a medieval belief in Moses having horns because of a mistranslation. The Hebrew word which probably meant "shining" or "flashing" was translated by Jerome to a Latin word which could mean "horned". Jerome was aware of the ambiguity but was trying to preserve the semantics of the Hebrew, in which the word for "horned" was a homonym for the word for "shining" or "flashing".

This subtelty was lost and Moses was frequently depicted with actual horns in many renaissance images, such as Michelangelo's sculpture.

Attached: 3717.jpg (380x508, 52K)

Some NT apocrypha with specific examples being the Shepard of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas are probably of more informative value for the understanding of early Christian thought than some canonical texts even.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_Fathers

An atlas makes a great supplement -- it will help the long catalog of places be more than just names, and make the setting stand out as an integrated geography that continues into the present day.

Attached: Screenshot_2018-03-14_12-34-25.png (1001x890, 1.04M)

That's really interesting actually

>reading the bible
>not just praying

plebs, all

Read a gospel or two
Read a few of the letters of Paul
Start reading the Old Testament. Here's the books I think are essential:
>Genesis
>Exodus
>Joshua
>Judges
>1 & 2 Samuel
>1 & 2 Kings
>Ezra
>Nehemiah
>Job
>Psalms
>Ecclesiastes
>Song of Songs/Song of Solomon/Canticle of Canticles
>Isaiah
>Jeremiah
>Daniel
>Malachi
Then read the entire New Testament.

I'm guessing Asimov is an atheist because he writes scifi, and because of the religion aspect in Foundation.

What does Asimov's guide say about the Bible? Does he hold contempt or respect for the Bible?

Attached: Trantor_ZUPZUP_031111.jpg (1200x720, 350K)

I'll add that for all the translation issues with the KJV, it preserves (or at least supplements in english) much of the weird majesty, poetic structure, literary devices, and turns of phrase of the original hebrew. Everything else is hot dogshit in that regard, most 'literal' translations completely fuck up word order that doesn't even need fucking with and dynamic equivalents are just shit.

That said, read and compare whichever 3 NT translations are violently literal and come with the most footnotes. You're basically reading esoteric sutras and that shit needs proper context. It's not literature.

Read it straight through because the NT is meaningless without the context of Jewish history and thought. Protestants focus on the NT to their own detriment and it's why they believe so much retarded shit.

Can we talk about the superiority of single column paragraph format?

Attached: IMG_20180314_162446973.jpg (3207x1867, 1.28M)

This. Worth noting it's the RSV Catholic edition

Traditional conventions employ the use of columns. The are also used in many of the early NT papyri.

Attached: Luxembourg_City_Synagogue_Sefer_Torah.jpg (1360x1020, 737K)

>~10 words per column
>paragraphed
That's pretty much what I said, doubly so for the NT which has a more comparable word length because vowels.

Christians did not use scrolls because they were too expensive. Scrolls were a pagan tool. Books are the only authentically Christian format.

The Ignatius Study bible only includes the New Testament.

thanks user

Just turn your brain off.

If you just want the story without repetition, follow this plan:

Genesis (can skip: 5, 10, 36)
Exodus 1-24, 32-35, 40
Numbers 10-36
Deuteronomy 34
Joshua 1-13, 22-24
Judges
1 Samuel
2 Samuel
1 Kings
2 Kings
Ezra
Nehemiah (can skip: 10)
1 Maccabees
Luke
Acts

Why do people say NASB is the most literally accurate translation?

KJV
>Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven

NRSV/ESV (identical)
>Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven

NASB
>Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great

ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 5:12 SBL Greek New Testament (NA28)
>χαίρετε kαὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς·

---
>χαίρω • (chaíro)
be happy, be glad
---
>kαὶ
and
---
>ἀγαλλιᾶσθε
Ἀγαλλιάω is a strong word of Hellenistic coinage, from ἄγαν and ἅλλομαι, to leap much, signifying irrepressible demonstrative gladness.
ἀγαλλιάω from agan (much) and G242; properly, to jump for joy, i.e. exult:—be (exceeding) glad, with exceeding joy, rejoice (greatly).
---
>ὅτι
because
---
>ὁ μισθός
Definition: (a) pay, wages, salary, (b) reward, recompense, punishment.
misthós (a primitive word, so NAS dictionary) – a reward (recompense) that appropriately compensates a particular decision (action).
1. dues paid for work; wages, hire: Romans 4:4 (kατά ὀφείλημα); in a prov., Luke 10:7 and 1 Timothy 5:18; Matthew 20:8; James 5:4; Jude 1:11 (on which see ἐkχέω, at the end); μισθός ἀδιkίας, wages obtained by iniquity, Acts 1:18; 2 Peter 2:15 (cf. Winer's Grammar, § 30, 1 a.).
2. reward: used — of the fruit naturally resulting from toils and endeavors, John 4:36; 1 Corinthians 9:18; — of divine recompense:
---
>ὑμῶν
your (of you)
---
>πολὺς
(with nouns of multitude) large, great
(of amount, with mass nouns) a lot of, much
---
>ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς·
in heaven

Is there any good Bible with a commentary (Old Testament and New Testament)?

Robert Alter has done most of the OT.

Codices only became popular after the advent of Christianity and were probably influenced by the wax tablets used by the "pagan" Roman military. Before that the usual way of keeping books was in separate volumes around 30 pages long. The early single quire codices were also of similar length before the development of multi-quire binding. There were also the Dead Sea 'Scrolls'. Hebrew scriptures are written meticulously according to specific rules dictating things like what material must be used for the pages, the thread used to sew them together, and the ink for writing. The text is written on the inner side of the parchment leather with the outer hide side physically and perhaps also symbolically protecting the words on the inside. A certain amount or kind of mistakes made during the process requires for the scroll to be burned or buried privately.
The early Christians employed the use of papyrus due to it being more readily available at the time as scrolls were written with the same material. The Roman domains began to use parchment only after being cut off from the papyrus trade in Egypt and the manuscript bindings of the early medieval period exhibit a considerable deficiency in quality when compared to manuscripts produced in eastern domains during the same period.

What could perhaps be potentially at odds with attestable historical Christian ethics my be things such as using different color inks, extravagant fonts, illustrations, and decorations with jewels, gems, and precious metals.

From the Wikipedia article on purple parchment
It was at one point supposedly restricted for the use of Roman or Byzantine Emperors, although in a letter of Saint Jerome of 384, he "writes scornfully of the wealthy Christian women whose books are written in gold on purple vellum, and clothed with gems...".

The Little Rock Bible.

Buy a contemporary English version.

None of that King Jame shit.

Also contemporary and medieval Jews did employ the use of codices and printed texts which are called "chumash" in Jewish tradition where contemporary Masoretic texts are derived from just that these don't hold the same physical and sacred value that a Torah scroll does.

KJV
>Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

NRSV
>“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near.

ESV
>“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near.

NASB
>“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;

>now
>from

>parable
>lesson

>his
>its

>is yet
>becomes
>has already become

>puts forth
>puts out

KJV
>Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power,

NRSV
>He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word.

ESV
>He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.

NASB
>And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power.

>who
>he is
>and he is

>brightness
>reflection
>radiance

>his glory
>god's glory
>glory of god

>his person
>his being
>his nature

>upholds
>sustains

>word of his power
>his powerful word

KJV
>Take thou no usury of him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee.

NRSV
>Do not take interest in advance or otherwise make a profit from them, but fear your God; let them live with you.

ESV
>Take no interest from him or profit, but fear your God, that your brother may live beside you.

NASB
>Do not take usurious interest from him, but revere your God, that your countryman may live with you.

>usury
>interest in advance
>interest from
>usurious interest

>increase
>a profit from them
>profit
>[nothing]

>fear
>revere

>brother
>countryman

>with you
>beside you

It follows the English sentence structure more naturally so perhaps it's read more clearly by users whereas other translations strive to follow the Greek text as closely as possible. I personally prefer literal translations though.

I'd like to know this as well. Always enjoyed Asimov, but I know he's a devout atheist.

The 1971 NASB was indeed very literal, that reputation stuck despite the 1995 update changing it to more natural English. People are just misinformed.

Get the Didache Bible. RSV translation with commentaries based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Also get the New Jerome Biblical Commentary and the Catechism.

Then you open them up and start reading.

Start by reading it in Greek

This will give you an understanding of contemporary Christianity, not the Bible.

pick a random book, then pick a random verse in that book, and then interpety the entire religion of christianity through that single verse

/Prot

I got a copy of "The New Translation of the The Holy Scriptures" off a Jehova's Witness friend of mine, is that a sufficient version?

I tried to read this. I hated it. One thing you can do is just look up the best and most interesting stories online and flip to those. I think there's a reason why most people just read passages.

Nothing flowery about the language of the KJV (if thats whats being referred to). Its written in the era when English was at its most muscular and arististic, by theologians and scholars who were the best and brightest minds of their time. That isnt going to be true anymore.

Surely that should be the other way around...

It’s five chapters of the Pentateuch, nine chapters of the history books, nine chapters of the wisdom books, seven chapters of the major prophets, three chapters of the minor prophets, and ten chapters of the New Testament everyday

There's these people called Jehovah's witnesses , they come round each month with a pamphlet so you don't have to go through the whole thing.

He mainly rehashes critical scholarship, points out what KJV verses are not in the "original" manuscripts, and contains some exegesis of the original languages, word and character studies.