• SpHaeR schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 24. Mai. 2008, 19:10

    Reading the bible

    For this summer I have planned to read the bible in one go. I've flipped through pages and jumped from chapter to chapter and verse to verse a lot, but never actually got to read the whole thing front to end.

    However, I wanted to ask you which translation I should read, and why (I'm sure Anath can answer this for me, but feel free to post your thoughts on this).

    More commonly known as Waldheri

    Questioning all your answers since 1988
    "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish" - David Hume
  • Depends on what part you want to read.

    If you're just going for the Old Testament at this point, get yourself a Tanakh, preferrably the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) version with the blue cover. I wouldn't read any Christian translation of the Old Testmaent as often you find the footnotes are inane and try to tie the current reading/story to Christ or prophecy, whereas the Jewish footnotes usually have relevance to the text and actually explain what's going on without feeling the need to mix Jesus into it.

    As far as the New Testament, I've found the New International Version to be the best, most readable and with the least errors. Just stay away from the King James unless you want to read it side by side with another translation to see the horrific errors in many places. Also stay away from trash like "The Message". as you can see... not exactly the most accurate translation... and this is not a kid's version! I wouldn't go for any of the youth/teenage guides either, as they're usually nothing but indoctrination devices.

    To be honest, there's actually a lot in the Bible I have not read at all or recently... We should all probably brush up. :P

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
    • jorrizza schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 25. Mai. 2008, 21:41
    I'd recommend a Dutch translation. The Dutch versions are closer to the original texts. At least, that's what I've been told. I've read the educational version cover to cover, but that's not a recommended read. The comments don't make sense half of the time.

    There are a few major translations out there. The original 17th century protestant translation (Statenvertaling) and some more modern ones like the catholic Willibrordvertaling and the NBV (Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling). The Statenvertaling is a tough one to read, but it's a direct translation of the original Hebrew/Greek version to 17th century Dutch. The Willibrordvertaling's source is the same, but it's a second incarnation after being translated from Diets, so it's more prone to contain errors. The NBV is the easiest to read, though. It's also a direct translation from Hebrew/Greek. But the NBV is translated quite recently, somewhere in the nineties.

    So if you're a linguist read the original Statenvertaling, if not grab a copy of the NBV.

    Also, ignore the "good news" bibles. They're full of empty excuses and interpretation guidance to make sure you read it how they want you to read it.

    The awesome link of flaming death, epic destruction and pancakes.
    Warning, clicking this link might cause defects like enlightenment, godlessness and knowledge
  • I wish I had the patience to read things like the Bible tbh... I just can't see the fun to read verses up and verses down even in an educational sense and because i would find it interesting. This goes for any other books written this way such as the Odessey, Kalevala (Finnish folk story for those who didn't know), the Edda etc. I envy those that can read things like these. Myself? I fall asleep. My first and last greatest accomplishment reading something similar to this was a 60s translation (in Swedish) of Nietzsche's So Spoke Zarathustra. Not only was the translation very hard to read (60s Swedish is very different to modern Swedish, our written language has changed a lot during the past century) but the book itself was very boring, even including the philosophical aspects. I'd rather have someone explaining to me what views Nietzsche had than reading that book again.

    • SpHaeR schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 26. Mai. 2008, 20:52
    Thanks for the responses Anath & Jorizza.

    LeaTelamon, I also found it hard to read Thus Spoke Zarathustra. I lost patience about 30 pages into the book. I did read the poetic Edda, and I loved it. It's just so fucking funny to read about gods who want to want to drink themselves silly and go on a quest to find the largest kettle to make mead in.

    I am quite sure I will be amused by the epics found in the Bible. I hope I'll be able to read it without getting too pissed off because people take it seriously, but we'll find out soon enough!

    I'm also planning on reading the Quoran, the Vedas, the Triptaka, et cetera, but I have not found a timeframe for those.

    More commonly known as Waldheri

    Questioning all your answers since 1988
    "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish" - David Hume
  • As said, good luck, I do envy you :p I just simply lack the patience for these things. I guess it's because I find verses to be very hard to read for longer amounts of time in general. It's just a little frustrating because I would like to read these books one day (if not for the sake of doing it. Quite a thing to boast about!) but well, it's not my thing. And to not read the original work is not the same either... meh.

    And I can understand why it's funny to read about our old pissy Norse gods :p Especially when Tor and giants are involved, it always goes to the extreme <.<

    • SpHaeR schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 9. Jun. 2008, 14:02
    Yeah, The Edda had me cracking up all the time. I've also begun reading the Ilias, but it's quite tough stuff to get through.

    More commonly known as Waldheri

    Questioning all your answers since 1988
    "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish" - David Hume
  • Are there good English translations of these stories out there? I don't think I've ever seen them in stores...

    --ignorant American who doesn't know any foreign languages :P

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • No idea Anath, if you specifically mean the Edda and the Kalevala (the Illiad and the Odessey should be able to get a translation of...? Is sort of basic in most history/religious/literature studies).

    I could however look it up for you if you give me some time. I think the Edda is easier to get ahold of an English translation than the Kalevala though. It's more a Finnish folk story written in verse so it's translated into some Scandinavian languages such as Swedish but English I have no idea. I don't think the general English-speaker is so deeply interested in maybe reading Finnish folk stories in verse :p

  • I would really love to read the Edda. I have read similar epics from Norse mythology, and I would love to read about the other mythological odysseys. The Edda are specifically for Iceland right? I am not quite sure. Anyways, I recommend the New King James translation. Basically from what I remember, it is a very close translation to the ancient Greek NT, and it gets rid of the thees thous and thys. The translation stays the same, and is much older and accurate than the NIV (New International Version) or any of the other millions of translations that there are out there. I am not sure though. I've read it a couple times and found it boring, and dry. Not nearly as exciting as the Odyssey, or Illiad. For instance, Leviticus is a bunch of rules. Like 50 pages of if you commit this sin, you must sacrifice 3 virgin lambs and blah blah, and how many cubits the temple needs to be, and all the different items in the temple, omg it is SOOOO boring. Also, Chronicles are 2 books of Assclown lived to be 400 years old, and had 15 sons and daughters. Their names were Shithead, Fucktard, Ballbag, etc. ad nauseum. But good luck. Hope you make it through the first 10 or so books. :p

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
    • SpHaeR schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 11. Jun. 2008, 18:59
    The Edda was written down in Iceland, but in those times it was a settlement of the Norse so it deals with Norse mythology. :-)

    And I was quite surprised to read your bible recommendation, as it is exactly the opposite of Anath's: She argues against the KJV and in favor of the NIV (And for the same arguments, but only reversed). You might want to discuss that with Anath. :D

    More commonly known as Waldheri

    Questioning all your answers since 1988
    "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish" - David Hume
  • The difference is, the New King James Version has language that is more modern than in the KJV (no thees, thous and the like), but does not detract from the original Greek translations. There are several examples in the NIV version where translation is lost in an attempt to make it an "easier read". I found this out through a Father, who was a scholar in theology and spoke both Hebrew and Greek and that was his recommendation based on accuracy to the original texts. That is the main difference between New King James Version and the original King James Version, which is what Anath was talking about. :)

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
  • I don't have much to say on the New KJV, I've never looked it over or compared it to be honest.

    However I'd still go with a Jewish JPS translation of the OT over ANY Christian translation. And if you have a Christian translation; IGNORE THE COMMENTARY!!!! It really does nothing to elucidate verses and really only tries to support Christian claims by drawing random parallels from the OT to Jesus. I recently was reading the Book of Enoch with Christian commentary at the bottom, it was just confusing...

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • I think one of the most true things I have seen, was in the thread where you post rediculous christian stuff, and there was one with a picture of the bible with 66 fairy tales written by 40 authors over the course of 4000 years or something like that. That really is all it comes down to. And Anath, I agree with christian versions propagating the faith. That's what they did with every people they overcame. Take for instance the parallels that they use, coincide with basically every pagan faith that there is, Christmas during Yule, Easter (also the name of the goddess of spring in Norse mythology) during the spring equinox, All Saint's Day (halloween) during the autumn equinox, and so on. The christians seem to steal every symbol, and holiday/celebration/festival, and concoct a "christian" one, just to make it easier to persuade the "ignorant rabble" that christianity is the way to go, and make it an easier transition. The ones that refused....well they just got slaughtered. Fuck christianity.

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
  • The worst part I think, isn't even that Christianity bastardized and assimilated, but that people nowadays are ok with the result and expect you to be too. They also refuse to acknowledge the real origins of their traditions when pointed out, or shrug them off with a "so what? Its this now."

    Then they use the pirated traditions as reasoning... if we were to argue for our "faith" the same way they do, they would never take us seriously. But we have to take them seriously.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • We as in what faith exactly? Antichristianity? Paganism? Whatever other faith there is that isn't Christianity that a member of this group has?

    But yes, I agree the worst part of the whole Christianity, its institution and its believers is the huge amount of ignorance to be found everywhere. Makes you sick and disgusted.

  • Yeah, I don't know what "faith". I just have it in quotations because thats what the Christians think it is and refer to it as.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • Basically any faith or lack thereof has to acknowledge it. Where do you get married? In a church. Where do you get buried? In a cemetary that is more than likely Christian. I have to look at "In God We Trust" on the back of my stupid money. That is bullshit because I don't trust shit. I get people knocking on my door holding Jesus propaganda...I just looked at them, and asked them if they honestly think they need to walk up to my door and invade my privacy; when if I want to hear their bullshit, I would walk the fuck into their establishment? The closemindedness is fucking rediculous. I went on a date with a girl, and because I wasn't a christian, she wouldn't see me again. She said it had nothing to do with me, personally, but with the lack of compatability with our religious preferences. What a load of shit. I told her that she was a close-minded cunt. I fucking hate christianity. My next avatar will be me holding a burning bible.

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
  • hailmarduk666 said:
    I went on a date with a girl, and because I wasn't a christian, she wouldn't see me again. She said it had nothing to do with me, personally, but with the lack of compatability with our religious preferences. What a load of shit. I told her that she was a close-minded cunt.


    WOW irony, a friend of mine had nearly the exact same experience a month ago, but in reverse as he is the Christian. He asked if she wanted to go to church with him, without knowing she was agnostic, and she chewed him out about it. He figured after that, she wasn't going to respect his beliefs, so it wouldn't work out in the long run, and cut it off after the first date.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • I am always willing to give a christian a chance. I used to be one. But I never was one to shut myself off from what others believed; mainly because I wanted to have a basic knowledge of their faiths, or lackthereof, which would give me a more solid foundation for defending my own faith. But the more I delved into the histories of christianity, and seeing the fake, super-christian bullshit (especially when I went to seminary, yes I was to be a priest), I listened to metal, even christian metal, but because it wasn't Delerious? and worship music, had double bass and screaming, they were thinking I was a devil worshipper. The more I read about christian views on secular topics, and music, and what-not, the more ignorant I realised that I, as well as they were. I rejected my faith after I was accused of being a bad christian when I failed to go to afternoon worship/prayer session, and was listening to Pantera when they knocked on my door to confront me about it.

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
  • RageofAnath said:
    Yeah, I don't know what "faith". I just have it in quotations because thats what the Christians think it is and refer to it as.


    Ok, I think we both managed to missunderstand each other but I thought we "as in the people of this group" which confused me but I get it know if you meant faith as a more general matter used by Christians.

  • I am always willing to give a christian a chance. I used to be one. But I never was one to shut myself off from what others believed; mainly because I wanted to have a basic knowledge of their faiths, or lackthereof, which would give me a more solid foundation for defending my own faith.

    Which in turn, once you get to know the person better, is good too as to not offend each other etc but merely respect what you know. Well I think I certainly would have a few issues dating an avid Christian believer (mostly because well... I find their religion a little rediculous and their institution we already know of...) but I would do my best to respect the religious beliefs of that person and if you are going to spend a majority of your time with each other, it might be good to know such basic things since faith is always taken so personally and is rather itchy.

    I cannot say how it would be like in reverse, but wouldn't it be easier to as a believer date a non-believer since the person you date will most often let you handle your religious matters on your own? Well, unless you must have this person taking part of your religious life.

    • afz902k schrieb...
    • Benutzer
    • 22. Jun. 2008, 18:53
    Weeeelll, I've got a certain Kalevala Pdf file I might be able to share. PM me if interested. I've only read like 10 pages of it but am still planning on reading it all the way through.

    I never mean what I post.
  • Yeah, Lea, that is a good question. I guess I can see the point on both sides if you were a christian, or other religion and your partner isn't. I guess on one hand, it would give freedom to both seeing as one could care less, and the other is free to do as he/she pleases. Also, I would think it would be difficult NOT to involve the non-believer, because I would personally want the people that I worship with to know my significant other, but then again maybe not (depending how closed-minded everyone at that particular church is about non-believers), or involve them with church functions...I dunno...I would rather date someone with similar if not the same views, which would nullify the need to have to compromise.

    Antonín Dvořák, Non-Drinkers, and Kauan :) Join if you're interested :)
  • Of course, that is always the most feasible answer to everything. I don't like to fight myself since I am rather laid back and easy going. Fighting is too tedious :p So yeah, I am that lazy.

    But I know some couples where one part is often atheist/agnosticist and the other is Christian/whatever religion. They both handle their own business.

Anonyme Benutzer dürfen keine Beiträge schreiben. Bitte log dich ein oder registriere dich, um Beiträge in den Foren schreiben zu können.