Bible discussion thread

Who's your favorite character from the Bible? How about your favorite story?

>favorite character
Pic related

David

Kropotkin? In a Phrygian cap?

>tfw when going out of fedora atheism and get on to the new testament and get really interested and go visit the christian square at the old city of Jerusalem and get all the comfy vibes from the variety of people gathered around the holy sepulchre and meet an Italian bro monk I already met in the Church of the Visitation last summer and talk to him about religion and he takes me to a chilly inner room and show me cool maps of the place and stuff

Elisha is my guy. Some kids made fun of him for being bald and he made a bear kill them. Forty-two kids dead.

2 Kings 2:23-24

Cain is pretty cool in his own way.

Like a manchild. Lying to a creator God. Talking back to creator God.

And negotiating his own punishment with the creator God.

Respect to David too, and Jesus, and John.

Actually my favorite character is Job (Hiob in german). It's a truly fascinating story.
It starts out as a bet between the "devil"(not in our modern sense) and god, deals with issues of justice and faith and why bad things happen to good people.

lol I was going to say him too.

Jezebel is neat too. First defenestration in history I can think of.

Absalom's rise and the civil war v. David-- Achitophel's fall. Solomon's youth. Story of Ruth. The odd stories in the Book of Judges. In the NT the weird Acts of the Apostles-- back to the OT: most all Genesis.

I think this story displays perfectly how unrewarding being righteous according to god is, and how unjust and uncaring is Jehova.

>missed the point

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
Romans 3:10

"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away."

Isaiah 64:6

Unjust? Impossible. 'Just' --the 'most useless word in the English language' as per a thread on this board yesterday! Un-what? The Supreme Master of the Universe can do what He will with His toys. We wrack the Earth in a similar fashion. Plus, over time, it becomes apparent that the human brain requires disaster piled upon disaster. Escape is vital to our sense of well-being, for instance. To quote Judy Collins, we 'really don't know life, at all.' And it's a good thing we don't!

When Hosea takes his wife. It gave me hope because I realized it might not be so bad to marry a roastie

The point of Job was "Satan" confronted God to say "Job is only faithful to you because you have blessed him with good fortune". The story was to become an example for all time, not just the one time with Job. God said to Satan "fine, take my reigns and do what you want with Job, as long as you don't kill him" this is a common motif of the testaments, as Joseph and the lions, Jonah and the whale, or Jesus and the Pharisees. All those of faith were at some point pitted against great misfortune, danger, or evil.

Satan wrought against Job to turn him from God, whilst God sat back to prove a lesson to Satan, and what resulted was the continuing of Job's faith despite the misfortune brought against him by Satan.

Job was rewarded ten-fold for his despair and faith, and God laid a template for his followers for throughout time, that is to say life is a test of faith and Satan will challenge you and you will meet misfortune, all of which should be met by faith.

Echoes again in the words of Jesus who says "fear not who can destroy your body" but "fear him who can destroy your soul in hell" "what in the world is worth your soul" etc.

My favorite verse is:
>And God created the Earth and made everyone really angry and is still considered a bad choice to this day

That's not a verse, but you should find peace.

Ecclesiastes.

Most patrician book in the Bible. Wraps up poorly but I respect its approach to 2000 BC nihilism (or whatever millennium it was)

No Catholics for Paul?

There's a Judy Collins reference supra; that's kind of Catholic. But let me be the first: David, Jesus, Paul.

Legion the misunderstood meth addict

Are you a Catholic, may I ask?

Mary was pretty tight
id fucking rape her
>thinks she pure because shes a virgin
not for long

One of my favorite stories is at the last supper when Jesus washes the disciples' feet.

Here is God almighty, come down in the likeness of human flesh, and on the night before his unimaginable suffering on the cross, he puts on a servant's towel (he's pretty much naked) and washes the feet of the dunderheads he has so lovingly taken care of for the last 3 years.

Favorite character is probably Peter. Dude was mad passionate, had a good heart, but just kept fucking up. I relate. Also David, for the same reasons.

Or correctly understood meth addict. You ever been around long time meth users? It IS like they're possessed.

I could never get into it. Characters all seemed flat and unreal.

But I've never really gotten into ancient literature.

A few favorite verses on my favorite character in the Bible:

Part of Isaiah 14:
For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’

Part of Ezekiel 28:
You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.


There is some speculation on who this is referring to, but I like to think they are the same guy. Also, are there any verses like this that I don't know about? I haven't studied the Bible intensively yet.

There's good humanity in the bible. Even 'let it rain fire' Elijah, asking God to end his life after fleeing Ahab. He literally lay down to die in the desert but God sent messengers with food to say, arise and eat, for the journey ahead is great! And great it was.

This is a reference to the falling star, the dawn star? Some say arch Michael ("Who is like God?"), others Lucifer.

How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Dare I say, you and I know we are edging dangerous territory.

Raised Episcopal in an entirely Catholic quarter of town--

the point of him marrying a hooker was to represent how Israel's idolatry to God was like Israel prostituting themselves out in the way a married hooker would.

Ezekiel and a lot of the Old Testament compares Israel's chasing after foreign Gods being like a man's wife prostituting herself out to other men. It is disgusting, is it not?

You're a sharp bean. I like this.

Sampson is pretty cool as well. Beating people to death with a jaw bone is pretty hardcore, plus lighting their crops on fire

Good stuff guys. Keep it up

It refers to lucifer which means "morning star" or "bringer of the dawn"

I was under the impression that Phrygian caps were what the smurfs wore.. and the sans-culottes too, of course.

It is worrisome for those whom wish not to conflate Lucifer with Jesus; in Revelations Jesus appears in a vision and refers to himself as the morning star.

I see no issue with Jesus having been the fallen star 'cast' down to earth. In essence, his message of sin and forgiveness only comes through stronger by that. There are those who conflate Jesus with God himself, so the two lines of thought vary wildly in approach.

"If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand?…"

Interesting line, however.

I'll kick your ass in real life, faggot.

SAMSON
A
M
S
O
N

>He fell for the Ecclesiastes meme

All the info regarding Lucifer as being cast down from heaven comes from the apocryphal books. There's nothing in the protestant bible about the origin of Satan or anybody at all being cast out of Heaven. Jesus certainly wasn't exiled from Heaven, read John 3:16.

Your theory falls apart if you actually read the bible. :)

Lot's wife. She looked back and I love her for it

That's actually kind of sweet. Marcel too looked back....

Anatolians (Phrygia found there of course) was considered by the Greeks to be like Eden. All civilizations came from there. This is where humankind was during its golden age under Uranus/Ouranos.
Their cultural dress is most famous for this stiff red cap (Scythians even wore them) The Trojans are often depicted wearing them.

I haven't read anything specifically but the revolutionaries adopted the custom, and as a symbol it remains in France, the US and Haiti. I guess it was to draw the connection to the golden age

Also odd that Nikolas was recognized as a saint by the western church around the late 1800s. He came from Anatolia you know? This modern depiction of Santa I think looks a lot like Marx and/or Kropotkin, but whatever. The ideology is what strikes me more.
As for the Smurfs, bearded Papa Smurf with the red cap... It's a conspiracy isn't it? I love it. It's enough to make you want to keep Saturnalia

Isaiah 14:12 - How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Revelation 22:16 - I, Jesus, have sent My angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the bright Morning Star.

And to say Jesus was exiled from heaven would be incorrect, because something good and holy and proper was cast down, for reasons of iniquity, and Jesus was born on earth for reasons of divinity to talk specifically about sin.

Convert already you heathen

deus vult

>I haven't read anything specifically but the revolutionaries adopted the custom, and as a symbol it remains in France, the US and Haiti. I guess it was to draw the connection to the golden age
It's a confusion of hats. It used be customary to give freedmen a hat called a pileus during manumission. Phrygian got confused with this since they also wore soft caps which were still in production. The French Revolution just picked up on it being a symbol of having being liberated.

Ironically (or not) you sound like a militant atheist.

salome. what the fuck was her whore mother thinking?

kys faggot cuck

Not much. Do you think Baptist got his head back hm?

...

>Judith: Seduces and cuts off her prey's head
>Heroin

>Salome: Reputation ruined by some clerics slanderous porn writing
>Gets an Oscar Wilde play

It's a shame she can't get more attention, really. Still, Wilde's wit was actually something.

Well? We haven't really moved, we're all of us still under o Ouranos semantically, at least, but yes, I'm familiar with the myth. Also, I knew Nicholas was a Turk but didn't know recognition came so late (Jean d'Arc not till the early 1920's!).

Keeping Saturnalia wouldn't be any good unless a Mardi Gras sized mass kept it with you. Were this a literary confessions thread I would here reveal my secret keeping of Candlemas. I buy a zillion tea candles that day, very quietly bless them, light about twenty or so at sunset, then do something really exciting for the remainder of the evening like read, and maybe drink.

>vive the subjunctive! a bas the woodchucks!

>we're all of us still under o Ouranos semantically
Naw, man.

Ovid's Golden Age
>This was the Golden Age that, without coercion, without laws, spontaneously nurtured the good and the true. There was no fear or punishment: there were no threatening words to be read, fixed in bronze, no crowd of suppliants fearing the judge’s face: they lived safely without protection. No pine tree felled in the mountains had yet reached the flowing waves to travel to other lands: human beings only knew their own shores. There were no steep ditches surrounding towns, no straight war-trumpets, no coiled horns, no swords and helmets. Without the use of armies, people passed their lives in gentle peace and security. The earth herself also, freely, without the scars of ploughs, untouched by hoes, produced everything from herself. Contented with food that grew without cultivation, they collected mountain strawberries and the fruit of the strawberry tree, wild cherries, blackberries clinging to the tough brambles, and acorns fallen from Jupiter’s spreading oak-tree. Spring was eternal, and gentle breezes caressed with warm air the flowers that grew without being seeded. Then the untilled earth gave of its produce and, without needing renewal, the fields whitened with heavy ears of corn. Sometimes rivers of milk flowed, sometimes streams of nectar, and golden honey trickled from the green holm oak.

This we do not have. Not unless we can have anarchism implemented

So I'm currently reading Genesis. My plan is to read Genesis and Exodus, skip to and read the Books of Wisdom, and then read the whole New Testament. If I want I'll go back and read books in the OT that I find interesting. Is this a good approach?

Also, why did Rebekah tell Jacob to lie to Isaac?

My meaning was flatter-- the heavens, the sky. So long as it and prepositions continue to mean, we're under it. Absolutely no one appreciates a Dickinsonian turn to flat accuracy, so I'm not really surprised I was denied the obvious.

yeah but he still has three kids and ends up remembered long after his death

cant really ask for more than that

the seemingly weird morality of the Old Testament makes a lot more sense once you read the New. Tons of theology regarding the Law, the old and new covenants, etc.

I preached a sermon on Cain. With a little bit from Stienbeck, you realize Cain got a raw deal. But at the same time, God told tim he had a choice. To do right or to do wrong. His sacrafice offered was leftover trimmings aganist Able's firstborn calf and fat portions.
I'd also reccommend Daniel and Jonah. Both are short. Both are worth reading, particually comparing chapters 1-2 of Jonah to 3-4. The parallels are intersting.

Did anyone else have a giggle when Joseph enslaved all those Egyptians by hoarding food?

Thanks, I'll read those too.

Where do these extra details about Cain's sacrifice come from since it's not mentioned in the Bible?

I use study Bibles and Biblical commentarys. Different ones will say different things. They can usally be divided by ones written by a publisher like HCSB or ESV, or by a single author, like John Mcarthur, Scofeild, or Matthew Henry. Usally publishers show a "safer" docturnal answer or show a few ideas. Indidvidual authors are more likely to be opinion of that author. You also have to take into account different denomations views on things. I am Southern Baptist, so there are things that I believe and preach that mostly line up with with that doctrine. Same with arthors and publishers.

So in the text I studied, one says that God accepts ceral or grain offerings according to Mosaic law, so the problem is in Cain's heart. The verse says "In the course of time Cain presented some of the land's produce as an offering to the Lord." GEN 4:3 (HCSB). The emphasis is on the word "some". The thought is that immidenly, Cain becomes furious when his sacrafice is not accepted. While its not stated, it infered that Cain was not sacaficing his best. It's only a sacarfice if its something you will miss. And from not sacraficing his best, his heart is not in his sacarfice.

Are there any big differences between historical documents and early bibles compared to modern ones?

Ive seen some people post about early documents of Mark and others having different endings or missing stuff.

Sirach and David the Psalmist are my favorites.

Favorite event is when a left handed man killed a man so fat, his bet swallowed up his 20in sword.

Been reading 1John 1:9 lately and need to go to back to Confessions.
T. Orthodox

which bible do you use?

I'm not going to lie, I don't thing I can answer your question to the fullest extent. I know one can still access the origianal greek and hebrew of the Bible. But that involves learning dead forms of both languages. People do it though. I once met a homeless man who had the time, so he had learned hebrew and was working on greek. We talked about kabbalism and other out there ideas in relation to Christianity. Well, he more lectured. But I learned alot.

On Mark the ending is debated. The differance in language is appareny and the last 11 verses don't appear in the oldest manuscrips in Mark. The Bible as we know it was hammered out at the council of Nicea. This was in 312AD. They were all debating what was scripture and what wasn't, as well as the divine nature of Christ.

"And God had not respect for Cain, and for Cain's offering"

It's right in there! Was there a familial feud going at the time also? Something to do with marriages, passion, and heartache?

Who was Cain's father?

That's a terrible idea. The least you should read are the following:

Genesis
Exodus
Samuel 1,2
Job
Psalms
Proverbs
Isaiah

kek
of all the women in the Bible...

So a bit off topic but since you guys seem to know the bible I'll ask : I read (on Wikipedia tbqh) that the authors of the New Testament in the earlier version were pretty clear about their intentions, they were mostly telling a story (as opposed to telling historical facts) to share their message and not really interested in making a "true" story, so what do you think about that? Have you hear about this theory?

PS I don't want to start a fight between pro vs anti, just a comfy discussion about the authors intentions

PS n2 : I meant (vs presenting the New Testament as historical facts) I'm not asking if it's true or not but rather if the authors present the stories as historical (true) or not

That's the Islamic point of view, correct.

Go back a few chapters. Cain is only the second generation. His father Adam was created on the 6th day of creation. Adam walked with God and became lonley without a companion. So God created Eve. Then comes Ch 3 The fall of man. Then the Birth of Cain and Abel. Then the first murder.

Like I said, in my study, the issue is with Cain and his heart. Cain's parents both walked with God and Cain got a personal pep talk from God. God wanted the best outcome for Cain. But Cain had the choice. This is what Steinbeck talks about in East of Eden. Timshel- Thou Mayest. One has a choice to do right or wrong.

The story of Jonah, and I mean the whole story.

I like that he gets genuinely pissed at God being apparently arbitrary, and then God actually explains Himself.

Sin croucheth at your door. There is route or interpretation says the "snake" fathered Cain, and so was the rivalry between Cain and Abel (not to mention a diverse gene pool) and likewise the fire and miser found in Cain.

One could then say Cain was the redeeming factor for sin in the world.

But your rabbis wouldn't have this common knowledge, for reasons, I'm sure, you can tell. Likewise the discussion of Cain's whereabouts today, seeing he's exiled to earth till 'enders.

I'm not sure if you're baiting or what, can you elaborate?

>In the course of time Cain presented some of the land's produce as an offering to the Lord.
That's interesting, I've never seen it translated like that. For comparison, here's the take of some formal translations that I use

nJPS
>In the course of time, Cain brought an offering to the LORD from the fruit of the soil

NRSV
>In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground

NASB
>So it came about in the course of time* that Cain brought an offering to the LORD of the fruit of the ground.
>* Lit: at the end of days

Most are taking it to just mean his offering is from the ground, and don't specify if it's a full or partial offering.

"Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah . But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient."

Which translation do you prefer, user?

Excluding Christ: David, Josiah, Jephthah.

I really like Apollos of Alexandria as well.

I'm illiterate sorry I can't see how this is relevant to my question?

The quote posted did align with your views. I recommend you learn to read lest you continue to ask silly questions.

i think he's probably okay with it being cut off. he's probably still wearing a hair shirt in heaven.
to be fair, judith gets a lot of annoying fans, like Tool. and salome's mom is so fucked up that most people wouldn't want to delve into her story because an audience will refuse to believe a mother would get her daughter to sexually arouse her husband so she can get revenge for being rejected by a boyfriend. that's just not a story that plays well any way, and especially not in the current climate.

I find the NRSV easy to read, and it's the most commonly used version in academia, so must be pretty accurate (I can't check because I don't know any greek or hebrew). I like it the best if I just want to read some of Bible and mostly understand it.

nJPS is a translation of the Masoretic Text by jewish scholars, so it doesn't reflect the earliest manuscripts, but it's perfect if you want to know what the Tanakh says. Even textual corruptions are translated, with a possible correction in a footnote. Also it has good notes on hebrew wordplay.

NASB is if you want a more traditonal Christian rendering in English, e.g. Isaiah 7:14 with "virgin" rather than "young woman". From what I've read of both, I think it's in the same ballpark as the ESV, but just edges out the ESV for me because of the latter's constant updates (4 versions in circulation already!), the latest of which was criticised on certain points.

I like NABRE too for the take of Catholic scholars, it's pretty easy to read and has good footnotes, which take a surprisingly historical-critical approach.

I use the Orthodox Study Bible

Luke 10:18

>[Jesus] replied, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

When Cain was exiled who were those other tribes he went to? I thought only Adam, Eve, Cain, and Able were on Earth.

>"In 1st person. It was mad goys"

Genesis only says he had a wife, there's no information about who she was. Probably one of Adam and Eve's daughter's if you want an explanation, but it's a myth at the end of the day, the meaning is more important than making sense.

Also, you forgot Seth, the third son who's the ancestor of everyone through Noah.

Married his sister and built cities, weapons with which to hunt, musical instruments etc.

All trying to replace God, whom turned his face from Cain.

Cain's line definitely still exists, and a fool would say otherwise with concreteness.

Oh shit, is this the bible thread from /pol/?

What do you guys think of Saint Augustine?

Not a biblical character, but Luther was badass.

>Cain's line definitely still exists, and a fool would say otherwise with concreteness.
Didn't the flood wipe out everyone except Noah, his sons and their families?
Maybe if a female descent from Cain was a wife of one of Noah's sons it might still be around.

It's plausible, or perhaps some survived the flood in some way.

Either way, you'll find in plenty sects the line of Cain thriving well and good. As said, they are ones with the fire.

The LDS think that Cain himself is still wandering the earth.

Why did David's wife despise him after he saw him dancing for the lord? Never understood this.

I think you got it mixed up, they used to preach that Africans are descendants of Cain. They do believe that 3 ancient American jews are still wandering the Earth though.