4 ms·

> 1984 Agree, without exaggeration it's the book that had the most impact on me. > Brave New World Read it when I was a teenager, I think I didn't get the po

> 1984 Agree, without exaggeration it's the book that had the most impact on me. > Brave New World Read it when I was a teenager, I think I didn't get the point at the time. > The Bible I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible?

Udo 6y ago
> I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? I went to a school that taught ancient Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. With that came loads of bible passages to translate. Having grown up a non-believer (many people tried to literally "cure" that during my lifetime, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to know there is a simple drug I could take to make me normal) I can honestly say it's about what you'd expect from religious texts of those time periods. I found it less relatable than, say, Greek mythology. What I found interesting is how many parts modern Christians habitually ignore, either because they'd be arrested if they'd follow them, or because those parts don't fit in with their personal beliefs. Of course, the entire corpus of text has also seen numerous redactions, in an effort to streamline it and make it more coherent (with mixed results). Is it culturally significant? Honestly, I'm not sure. The Bible as an idea sure is, and certain famous passages are. But a given group's or individual's interpretation of it seems more informative, and that's often only losely based on those ancient texts. Needless to say, I don't think there is anything in there to convince a non-believer of the existence of dieties, much less that one specific pantheon. And to be fair I don't think that's what the authors had in mind. It was probably intended as a shared folklore for groups that already strongly believe. Conversion, I suspect, comes through missionaries, not through the text.
- humanrebar 6y ago
  > What I found interesting is how many parts modern Christians habitually ignore, either because they'd be arrested if they'd follow them, or because those parts don't fit in with their personal beliefs. Of course, the entire corpus of text has also seen numerous redactions, in an effort to streamline it and make it more coherent (with mixed results). The parts you describe are a history book. They are not meant to be normative to someone living in a modern Western Democratic context. They are background to explain a people, a time, and a discontinued form of government. Other more pertinent parts of the Bible (see the prophets or the epistles referring to The Law) make sense with that background available. I also suspect there's some deeper truth buried in those laws about what happens if a community stays distinct, and how that can be enacted (clothing, food, calendar, etc.). And there's certainly a lot of history of the Hebrew people to describe what happens when distinction and noteriety happens, even through long periods of diaspora. Finally, it's worth having some historical context. Considering the Israelites of the time to be unconscionable doesn't take into account what the typical society looked like in that time and place.
krebs_liebhaber 6y ago
> I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? You could say the same thing about the Iliad or Aeneid, or the Arabian Nights, or pretty much any long-standing work of literature. I'm not a Christian either, but I love the Bible - it's a book of great beauty and wisdom, and a foundation / moral guide for many of the world's great civilizations. If that isn't reason enough for you, then nothing will be. "In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness."
- Joker_vD 6y ago
  Do you mean New Testament or Old Testament? The New one is mostly pleasant (mostly) but the Old one... oh boy. Casual genocide, god-assisted, even, what's not to love? And even better, the stories of literally defrauding the god (Moses was told by the god he has to keep his arms up for Israelis to keep winning the battle, but he gets tired, so his sons(?) keep them up with their hands for him, yeah, that's totally not against the spirit of the god's challenge). Honestly, the Greek myths are better in that they weren't at least claiming those gods were omnibenevolent and stuff.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    I think I read somewhere once that the stories in the bible shouldn't be taken as literally true, but rather that they use metaphors to convey ideas. Not sure how true that is though.
    - Joker_vD 6y ago
      Ah, "figurative interpretation" defence. Except that one or two thousand years ago such "figurative interpretation" was considered an apostasy: people actually believed those stories to factually be true. Try to deny their factual truth, get stoned (with stones).
themaninthedark 6y ago
I would not say the bible is boring. Yes there are inconsistencies in it. One thing to remember when looking at the inconsistencies is that the bible itself is a collection of separate books that for the most part are telling unconnected stories. The new testament is more interconnected as it is several of the disciples accounts of Jesus's life but the old testament is books by separate authors throughout time. Depending on what you mean by learn. If you are trying to understand Christianity, so might get a better idea but maybe not. From what I remember as a child going to church, each season would have a section of the bible that the pastor would pull from and there was not much variation on the theme from year to year. i.e. Easter being rebirth, pulling from Mathew, Mark and John. But to say there is nothing to be learned is rather harsh, it does try and set out guiding principals and morals for people. From the old testament 10 commandments to the new testament "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". It has some nice poetry in it in places, it has some epic tales such as David and Goliath and it has some really crazy stuff such as Revelations.
sp332 6y ago
It's not organized to be read in order. The books are loosely grouped by type: Law (which is heavily history), poetry, prophets, the life of Christ, letters, etc. I would definitely start with a Gospel, probably Mark.
- mcv 6y ago
  I'm partial to Matthew myself, but I think Mark and Matthew are both the most readable and the most accurate. John is more mystical, and Luke seems a bit too embellished.
mcv 6y ago
> "I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? " The bible is not a single book; it's a collection of dozens of books written at very different times. Just reading it front-to-back is not a very productive way to read it. Genesis and Exodus are okay, but Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are just dreadful. The best place to start is the gospels, at the start of the NT. That gets you right to the heart of what Christianity is about, they're good stories, and there's quite a bit of wisdom in there. Absolutely worth reading. If you want a philosophical treatise about the meaning of life, read Eclessiastes. The stories of David in the books of Samuel are exciting adventures as well as the most central part of the history of ancient Israel. It's also worth reading a couple of psalms (23 probably being the most famous) but if you read them all in one go, they might get a bit repetitive. And of course there's the erotic Song of Songs. For more adventure stories, Judges also has a couple of good ones.
- cblum 6y ago
  Ecclesiastes was absolutely life-changing for me.

Udo 6y ago

> I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? I went to a school that taught ancient Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. With that came loads of bible passages to translate. Having grown up a non-believer (many people tried to literally "cure" that during my lifetime, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to know there is a simple drug I could take to make me normal) I can honestly say it's about what you'd expect from religious texts of those time periods. I found it less relatable than, say, Greek mythology. What I found interesting is how many parts modern Christians habitually ignore, either because they'd be arrested if they'd follow them, or because those parts don't fit in with their personal beliefs. Of course, the entire corpus of text has also seen numerous redactions, in an effort to streamline it and make it more coherent (with mixed results). Is it culturally significant? Honestly, I'm not sure. The Bible as an idea sure is, and certain famous passages are. But a given group's or individual's interpretation of it seems more informative, and that's often only losely based on those ancient texts. Needless to say, I don't think there is anything in there to convince a non-believer of the existence of dieties, much less that one specific pantheon. And to be fair I don't think that's what the authors had in mind. It was probably intended as a shared folklore for groups that already strongly believe. Conversion, I suspect, comes through missionaries, not through the text.

humanrebar 6y ago
> What I found interesting is how many parts modern Christians habitually ignore, either because they'd be arrested if they'd follow them, or because those parts don't fit in with their personal beliefs. Of course, the entire corpus of text has also seen numerous redactions, in an effort to streamline it and make it more coherent (with mixed results). The parts you describe are a history book. They are not meant to be normative to someone living in a modern Western Democratic context. They are background to explain a people, a time, and a discontinued form of government. Other more pertinent parts of the Bible (see the prophets or the epistles referring to The Law) make sense with that background available. I also suspect there's some deeper truth buried in those laws about what happens if a community stays distinct, and how that can be enacted (clothing, food, calendar, etc.). And there's certainly a lot of history of the Hebrew people to describe what happens when distinction and noteriety happens, even through long periods of diaspora. Finally, it's worth having some historical context. Considering the Israelites of the time to be unconscionable doesn't take into account what the typical society looked like in that time and place.

krebs_liebhaber 6y ago

> I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? You could say the same thing about the Iliad or Aeneid, or the Arabian Nights, or pretty much any long-standing work of literature. I'm not a Christian either, but I love the Bible - it's a book of great beauty and wisdom, and a foundation / moral guide for many of the world's great civilizations. If that isn't reason enough for you, then nothing will be. "In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness."

Joker_vD 6y ago
Do you mean New Testament or Old Testament? The New one is mostly pleasant (mostly) but the Old one... oh boy. Casual genocide, god-assisted, even, what's not to love? And even better, the stories of literally defrauding the god (Moses was told by the god he has to keep his arms up for Israelis to keep winning the battle, but he gets tired, so his sons(?) keep them up with their hands for him, yeah, that's totally not against the spirit of the god's challenge). Honestly, the Greek myths are better in that they weren't at least claiming those gods were omnibenevolent and stuff.
- mistermann 6y ago
  I think I read somewhere once that the stories in the bible shouldn't be taken as literally true, but rather that they use metaphors to convey ideas. Not sure how true that is though.
  - Joker_vD 6y ago
    Ah, "figurative interpretation" defence. Except that one or two thousand years ago such "figurative interpretation" was considered an apostasy: people actually believed those stories to factually be true. Try to deny their factual truth, get stoned (with stones).

themaninthedark 6y ago

I would not say the bible is boring. Yes there are inconsistencies in it. One thing to remember when looking at the inconsistencies is that the bible itself is a collection of separate books that for the most part are telling unconnected stories. The new testament is more interconnected as it is several of the disciples accounts of Jesus's life but the old testament is books by separate authors throughout time. Depending on what you mean by learn. If you are trying to understand Christianity, so might get a better idea but maybe not. From what I remember as a child going to church, each season would have a section of the bible that the pastor would pull from and there was not much variation on the theme from year to year. i.e. Easter being rebirth, pulling from Mathew, Mark and John. But to say there is nothing to be learned is rather harsh, it does try and set out guiding principals and morals for people. From the old testament 10 commandments to the new testament "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". It has some nice poetry in it in places, it has some epic tales such as David and Goliath and it has some really crazy stuff such as Revelations.

sp332 6y ago

It's not organized to be read in order. The books are loosely grouped by type: Law (which is heavily history), poetry, prophets, the life of Christ, letters, etc. I would definitely start with a Gospel, probably Mark.

mcv 6y ago
I'm partial to Matthew myself, but I think Mark and Matthew are both the most readable and the most accurate. John is more mystical, and Luke seems a bit too embellished.

mcv 6y ago

> "I'm 100% atheist but I've considered reading the bible because it's culturally significant. But isn't just a bunch of boring and inconsistent tales? is there really anything to be learned from the bible? " The bible is not a single book; it's a collection of dozens of books written at very different times. Just reading it front-to-back is not a very productive way to read it. Genesis and Exodus are okay, but Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are just dreadful. The best place to start is the gospels, at the start of the NT. That gets you right to the heart of what Christianity is about, they're good stories, and there's quite a bit of wisdom in there. Absolutely worth reading. If you want a philosophical treatise about the meaning of life, read Eclessiastes. The stories of David in the books of Samuel are exciting adventures as well as the most central part of the history of ancient Israel. It's also worth reading a couple of psalms (23 probably being the most famous) but if you read them all in one go, they might get a bit repetitive. And of course there's the erotic Song of Songs. For more adventure stories, Judges also has a couple of good ones.

cblum 6y ago
Ecclesiastes was absolutely life-changing for me.