The "Good Book"

[DarkProphet]

I'll be the first to admit that I never read through the whole Bible. I did try to read through it but it was just so boring and full of plot holes that I just could not get through it. I did manage to read the book that I was named after but it was arduous. Why is the "Good Book" so poorly written? Or is that just a symbolic title?

 

[seashale76]

I'll be the first to admit that I never read through the whole Bible. I did try to read through it but it was just so boring and full of plot holes that I just could not get through it. I did manage to read the book that I was named after but it was arduous. Why is the "Good Book" so poorly written? Or is that just a symbolic title?

The bible as we know it today contains various books written by numerous people over a considerable period of time. Some of it was only written down after having been orally transmitted. It was written in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and we have English translations that vary in how true to the Greek they may be. The Scriptures don't necessarily mean much out of the context of the Holy Tradition (not that anyone who reads it can't pick up on some things) of which they are an important part.

The Scriptures presupposes the faith of the one reading them. All Scripture points to Christ so that one might believe and attain salvation.

 

[Chesterton]

I did manage to read the book that I was named after...

I knew your name must be Lamentations, you're always finding something to lament.

 

[DarkProphet]

I knew your name must be Lamentations, you're always finding something to lament.

No, but Lamentations is a good example of a boring section of the Bible. It's a poem that supposedly lost a lot in translation.

 

[Chesterton]

Ah, it's excitement you're after. Then I'd recommend watching "America's Most Funniest Dangerous Plastic Surgery Mistakes". (or whatever it is they show on TV these days).

 

[DarkProphet]

Ah, it's excitement you're after. Then I'd recommend watching "America's Most Funniest Dangerous Plastic Surgery Mistakes". (or whatever it is they show on TV these days).

No, it's coherence I'm after. On I side note I don't watch TV.

 

[Proud Christian 2]

First of all, elaborate on the plot holes. I am curious. Second, the Holy Bible is Gods word. God used other people to write it. That's what makes it good.
Does that make sense?

 

[Chaplain David]

I'll be the first to admit that I never read through the whole Bible. I did try to read through it but it was just so boring and full of plot holes that I just could not get through it. I did manage to read the book that I was named after but it was arduous. Why is the "Good Book" so poorly written? Or is that just a symbolic title?

I wonder what you would critisize about the Holy Bible if it was the most exciting book in the world? It actually is you know.

 

[DarkProphet]

First of all, elaborate on the plot holes. I am curious.

I would simply link to apologetics forum but it seems that it's disappeared. The plot holes are all those things that non-Christians point out in the Bible that don't make sense with itself and then Christians defend by reinterpreting it to mean something else or by compromising an aspect of God.

A simple and classic example, Genesis chapter 1 versus chapter 2. The first problem is that they are two completely different stories written in different styles. Easy fix, just shoehorn chapter 2 into a day of chapter 1. OK, but there is another problem. The chronologies between the two stories is also wrong, namely what was created when. That's an easy fix too, let's just have God HIDE the things he created till they are needed. It goes on like this throughout the Bible. Eventually you have more patches then actual Bible.

Second, the Holy Bible is Gods word. God used other people to write it. That's what makes it good. Does that make sense?

I see it has to do with it's origin not it's content.

 

[tansy]

Before I was a Christian, I too couldn't make head nor tail of lots of it...but once I actually did become a Christian, suddenly it was like I was understanding it better (there are stiill things I and other don't understand properly..hence some of the disputes we have)...but generally, it all started to hang together and make sense.
You see, whether you'd believe it or not, it is the Holy Spirit who enables us to comprehend God's word, and it is also the Holy Spirit who leads us to Christ through His word, as and when you are ready.
By the way, if you want excitement and to freak yourself out, read the Book of Revelation (not so much the first few chapters, but the ones later on). I nearly scared myself to death when I first read those, until I realised a lot of or probably most of it is symbolic.

 

[arunma]

I'll be the first to admit that I never read through the whole Bible. I did try to read through it but it was just so boring and full of plot holes that I just could not get through it. I did manage to read the book that I was named after but it was arduous. Why is the "Good Book" so poorly written? Or is that just a symbolic title?

Why is this post so poorly written? When you judge with subjectivity, then any judgment is possible, and every judgment is equally worthless. I can even judge your writing to be of poor quality simply because I don't like what you have to say.

I don't think you've fully thought this through. By your own admission you haven't read the whole Bible, but you claim that it has plot holes. Even if you had read the whole of Scripture, you should wonder how much your opinion is tainted by your personal disdain for the Bible. Scholars of literature widely regard the Bible as an important cornerstone of American literature, as well as of literature from all over the world. Most of these people probably don't personally believe the Bible to be true. It seems that you're speaking from an obvious bias.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

I did try to read through it but it was just so boring and full of plot holes that I just could not get through it. I did manage to read the book that I was named after but it was arduous. Why is the "Good Book" so poorly written? Or is that just a symbolic title?

It isn't poorly written.

There are two problems that come up when people who are hostile to the things of God try to read the Bible.

The first is that the carnal man cannot understand the things of God.

The second is that they simply don't know how to read the Bible and they sit down and try to read it front to back, like a novel, or they just open up to a random page and start reading, both or which are going to lead to confusion because the Bible doesn't go in order and very few of the books are meant to be read without foundation from other portions of the Bible.

You admit that you've never read the Bible all the way through (and, by the way, "reading" the Bible is not the same as studying it for understanding), so how do you know that the parts you skipped were not a part of the foundation for the parts you say you read but did not understand?

It looks to me like the problem isn't with the Bible, but with someone who is so eager to condemn it that they're not even willing to honestly look at their own failure in studying it properly.

 

[DarkProphet]

It isn't poorly written.

There are two problems that come up when people who are hostile to the things of God try to read the Bible.

The first is that the carnal man cannot understand the things of God.

The second is that they simply don't know how to read the Bible and they sit down and try to read it front to back, like a novel, or they just open up to a random page and start reading, both or which are going to lead to confusion because the Bible doesn't go in order and very few of the books are meant to be read without foundation from other portions of the Bible.

You admit that you've never read the Bible all the way through (and, by the way, "reading" the Bible is not the same as studying it for understanding), so how do you know that the parts you skipped were not a part of the foundation for the parts you say you read but did not understand?

It looks to me like the problem isn't with the Bible, but with someone who is so eager to condemn it that they're not even willing to honestly look at their own failure in studying it properly.

So what, to truly understand the Bible I would need a college degree in theology or something? Clearly God's message is accessible to all if that's the case.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

So what, to truly understand the Bible I would need a college degree in theology or something? Clearly God's message is accessible to all if that's the case.

I do believe it's accessible to all. However, that doesn't mean that you can read it superficially and expect to understand it.

 

[DarkProphet]

I do believe it's accessible to all. However, that doesn't mean that you can read it superficially and expect to understand it.

How should I read it then? With the Bible in one hand and a study guide in the other? Or should I just get an annotated Bible?

 

[salida]

Actually, its not poorly written but its because you greatly don't understand it.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

How should I read it then? With the Bible in one hand and a study guide in the other? Or should I just get an annotated Bible?

It depends on what you hope to get out of it.

If it were me, I would suggest starting in Romans, specifically cc 5-7, getting a good concordance, and then working your way backwards to look at the passages Romans 5-7 is based on.

 

[DarkProphet]

It depends on what you hope to get out of it.

If it were me, I would suggest starting in Romans, specifically cc 5-7, getting a good concordance, and then working your way backwards to look at the passages Romans 5-7 is based on.

Paul before Jesus then? I would say a story is poorly written if the only way for the stories to make sense is for someone to have to explain them after the fact. Worse if you recommend the explanation before the story. I will try it your way though.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Paul before Jesus then?

Yes. All of scripture is equally God-breathed so there's no reason we should consider Paul's words any less inspired than Jesus'.

I would say a story is poorly written if the only way for the stories to make sense is for someone to have to explain them after the fact.

It's not a story. That's the whole point.

If it were a story, then you could simply start in Genesis and read it through to the end.

Worse if you recommend the explanation before the story.

In this case, I'm talking about reading the premise first and then studying the basis for the premise.

 

[tansy]

Paul before Jesus then? I would say a story is poorly written if the only way for the stories to make sense is for someone to have to explain them after the fact. Worse if you recommend the explanation before the story. I will try it your way though.

Yes, well the thing is, the Bible's not like a technical manual, nor is it a story written in the way a novel or a historical account would be.

I suppose if God had really wanted to, He could have dictated verbatim to someone, an account from start to finish, dotting all the "i"s and crossing all the "t"s. But, you know, I reckon, had He done that, the Bible would have been volumes upon volumes long, and you'd need forever to tackle it.
As has been stated before, it's a collection of writings, basically about God's dealings and relationship with people. Maybe, in a sense, it's a little like a detective mystery, where you find out various things, and have to put them all together to get the answers to the whole thing...not an exact analogy, of course.