The Bible, Christian reading. (2 Viewers)

[ay0_x]

Hey all.

I'm agnostic, and I'm interested in learning about Christianity on a purely intellectual/literary level. & I want to learn about it from a Christian perspective, not a scientific or agnostic or atheist or anti-christian level.

So with the 3987349749048034804 editions of the Bible, I have no idea where to "start". Could some of the Christian members of BOS help me out please?

 

[Lukybear]

Well i think the New International Version of the Holy bible is certainly good. Thats what most of churches, at least that i am aware of, use. But i would suggest Mere Christianity, by CS Lewis, which is a fantastic book , for Christians and non-chrstians of all ages/level. Currently reading now, and its brilliant, the logic that CS Lewis uses.

 

[anom1ly]

wikipedia ftw

 

[ay0_x]

Well i think the New International Version of the Holy bible is certainly good. Thats what most of churches, at least that i am aware of, use. But i would suggest Mere Christianity, by CS Lewis, which is a fantastic book , for Christians and non-chrstians of all ages/level. Currently reading now, and its brilliant, the logic that CS Lewis uses.

Thanks.. would you happen to know if the Orthodox churches use the NIV?

anom1ly.. wikipedia is for learning shit like the history of cheesecake. No ty.

 

[Iron]

get a douay-rheims inta ya

translated from the original latin vulgate, been officially used by the church for 500 years, has some magnificent language, and none of the faux inclusive mistranslations occurring in recent Protestant/ecumenical translations

 

[Lukybear]

get a douay-rheims inta ya

translated from the original latin vulgate, been officially used by the church for 500 years, has some magnificent language, and none of the faux inclusive mistranslations occurring in recent Protestant/ecumenical translations

I wouldnt trust Iron if i were you. Just look at his face!

But nevertheless, any Christianity is great with me. But I do hope, you get to read Mere Christianity by CS Lewis, who dosn't promote either denominations.

 

[ay0_x]

get a douay-rheims inta ya

translated from the original latin vulgate, been officially used by the church for 500 years, has some magnificent language, and none of the faux inclusive mistranslations occurring in recent Protestant/ecumenical translations

Shall look into that also.. Okay.. since I have no idea about any of this stuff.. where would I get these books? Borders? A church? :S

 

[anom1ly]

anom1ly.. wikipedia is for learning shit like the history of cheesecake. No ty.

mmmm cheesecake

 

[Iron]

Bibles & Commentary

This site is quite good if youre willing to wait ~ a week for delivery from the states. It's rare to find simple quality in any Oz bookshop, but you may have lower aesthetic standards and have no problem with multicoloured 'graffiti-type' "Cool Christian Bible, Dude' stuff

 

[Lukybear]

O dear Iron. We're not all rich catholic people. Some of us are poor protestants ok?

Im sure if you visit any church, they will have little pocket book bibles that will be the basic starter kit of Christianity.

Im just jking Iron. You know I love you. And I recommend CS Lewis to you as well.

 

[ay0_x]

Bibles & Commentary

This site is quite good if youre willing to wait ~ a week for delivery from the states. It's rare to find simple quality in any Oz bookshop, but you may have lower aesthetic standards and have no problem with multicoloured 'graffiti-type' "Cool Christian Bible, Dude' stuff

There's multiculoured graffiti type bibles? Major lol.

Ty for the site.

 

[Iron]

O dear Iron. We're not all rich catholic people. Some of us are poor protestants ok?

Im sure if you visit any church, they will have little pocket book bibles that will be the basic starter kit of Christianity.

Im just jking Iron. You know I love you. And I recommend CS Lewis to you as well.

Yeah i've enjoyed a lot of CS on the matter. But he still kinda infuriates me bc he IS a Catholic, I tell you...
It's hard to believe that he was Anglican. Anglican of all things. No doubt things were different 50+yrs ago, but the CofE is the most tired and divided force of Christianity around - surrendering or retreating along all the major modern battlelines, foresaking their Catholic 'allies' on some of the biggest questions of the age - esp the dignity of life - so as not to offend potential converts

Appeasement I say!

 

[ay0_x]

Yeah i've enjoyed a lot of CS on the matter. But he still kinda infuriates me bc he IS a Catholic, I tell you...
It's hard to believe that he was Anglican. Anglican of all things. No doubt things were different 50+yrs ago, but the CofE is the most tired and divided force of Christianity around - surrendering or retreating along all the major modern battlelines, foresaking their Catholic 'allies' on some of the biggest questions of the age - esp the dignity of life - so as not to offend potential converts

Appeasement I say!

Seeing it's my thread I'm going to be totally rude and interrupt and badger you with questions =]

When Henry the 8th created the CofE, what other types of Protestant(ism?) were around? And what's the difference between them?

 

[anom1ly]

Cheesecake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wow you were right. wikipedia really knows its stuff when it comes to cheesecakes

 

[ay0_x]

Cheesecake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wow you were right. wikipedia really knows its stuff when it comes to cheesecakes

I wiki food for fun. It's a hobby.

Oh wow, that sounded uber lame.

 

[Iron]

Lol well almost as soon as Luther split, he found that his supposedly more pure form of Christianity was already a minority group (Lutherans), as others made astonishing concessions on the eucharist etc.
The core of Christianity was strong and potent enough to remain kicking in society for a few hundred years, but it's only within the last century that we've seen the reality of the reformation; ie a tragic weakening of the Christian message in which people find excuses to acknowledge their creator less and less, and defer to self-interest more and more. With the reformation, the appeal was state-interest (freeing governments from Roman authority). Then it was about freeing the individual to worship their God in increasingly more private ways. Now it's about legally enforcing ways in which to deny God in both public and private life

 

[Lukybear]

Oh Iron the tragedy. Such matters of denominations, are terribly trivial. Ask yourself this, on Judgement day, is Christ gona say, "alright Tom, your a protestant, go to hell" OR is he going to announce "come come, you had faith, and no matter how correct you were about your denominations come to heaven".

Althought that is very simplified, I think it will be enough for now. And even CS Lewis avoided this topic of conversation.

And BTW, CS Lewis is "an ordinary layman of the church of england". Last I checked, that purely protestant. And if some of his teachings are Catholic based, then so be it.

Its in wiki. It never lies.

 

[ay0_x]

Lol well almost as soon as Luther split, he found that his supposedly more pure form of Christianity was already a minority group (Lutherans), as others made astonishing concessions on the eucharist etc.
The core of Christianity was strong and potent enough to remain kicking in society for a few hundred years, but it's only within the last century that we've seen the reality of the reformation; ie a tragic weakening of the Christian message in which people find excuses to acknowledge their creator less and less, and defer to self-interest more and more. With the reformation, the appeal was state-interest (freeing governments from Roman authority). Then it was about freeing the individual to worship their God in increasingly more private ways. Now it's about legally enforcing ways in which to deny God in both public and private life

I see, well, one more question (though this may be a little personal, you dont have to answer it if you dont want to =])

How literally do you personally believe that the bible should be taken?

 

[Teclis]

Lol well almost as soon as Luther split, he found that his supposedly more pure form of Christianity was already a minority group (Lutherans), as others made astonishing concessions on the eucharist etc.
The core of Christianity was strong and potent enough to remain kicking in society for a few hundred years, but it's only within the last century that we've seen the reality of the reformation; ie a tragic weakening of the Christian message in which people find excuses to acknowledge their creator less and less, and defer to self-interest more and more. With the reformation, the appeal was state-interest (freeing governments from Roman authority). Then it was about freeing the individual to worship their God in increasingly more private ways. Now it's about legally enforcing ways in which to deny God in both public and private life

So what's your opinion on Evangelical Anglicanism... such as the Sydney Anglican Church?

Oh and to the OP... don't get a Latin translation. The bible was originally in Greek and Hebrew... so translating it from such is the best way to read it... sorry Iron...

The ESV is slightly more difficult to stomach than the NIV, but is a slightly closer to the original translation... but the NIV is an easier read.

I would start with the Gospel of Luke. If you find that interesting, have a look at Acts, then Romans through to Revelation... but don't read Revelation as tempting as it may be. Revelations is a letter in code to the Roman Christians (not some armageddon description) and will confuse the hell out of you without proper understanding and reference.

Then I'd read the other Gospels. Genesis and Exodus, and then after that I think you'll be getting a good understanding of what's going on.

You can also get them from Koorong. Most Dymocs have copies of the Bible, although they're probably shitty ones

 

[Iron]

I see, well, one more question (though this may be a little personal, you dont have to answer it if you dont want to =])

How literally do you personally believe that the bible should be taken?

It depends entirely. The Bible, like our faith, is a living thing which can evolve over time. For instance, before the theory of evolution, there was no problem in imagining the actual creation of Adam and Eve, let alone the creation of the earth in 7 literal days. But given the contradictions scientific developments pose to this literal reading, it is our duty to set ourselves to the theological task of ending such contradictions. Therefore Catholics dont insist on a literal reading of Genesis - Adam and Eve can be read as symbols of early humanity etc etc.
Christ Himself knew that there were problems with this, so he often spoke in parables.

However it should be stressed that this is a seporate issue from our faith. Before the discovery of further scientific truths, Christian faith was not in any way inferior because it was popularly believed that the sun rotated around the earth or whatever. Faith is not an intellectual or scientific question - it is something within reach of any man, something that will always appear 'foolish' to non-believers. It cannot be explained with clever speech. The individual must make his peace with God on his own.