Read the abridged version ;)

I went straight through, chapter by chapter, with a strict read-it-in-40-days regimen. It all blew by that way - I was reading as fast as I could. So I guess my advice is to think of it as a race, if, that is, you're talking about how to get it ALL read and get it read as a whole book.

If you just mean certain parts of the Bible, I don't know what to tell you. But reading the Bible in 40 days really gave me some different and unique perspectives on how the whole thing is woven together that I doubt I would have had if I'd read it more slowly.

Oh and let's be brutally honest - if you notice that what you're reading is just a list, skip it. If what you're reading are a lot of laws that have a formulaic structure, recognize the patterns and skim for different looking words.

You get pretty good at recognizing when one law in Leviticus is pretty much a paraphrase of another one. The second you realize that you can just move to the next law. You come away having read in full the relevant parts and having identified the meaningless/useless parts that you didn't need to read.

That's as good as reading it, if I'm honest. If someone says they read through the lists of names one by one they're a liar, or pious as all get out.

The Qu'ran is even worse about that, the repetition I mean. Reading the Qu'ran made me appreciate being raised Christian not because of anything about Islam but just because the Qu'ran makes the Bible look like Star Wars.

You know Obi, the Bible isn't intended to be fine literature meant to amuse you. If the purpose of reading a book was only for amusement, then the world would be mostly void of Engineers, Chemisists, etc. I had to read a lot of horrifyingly dull books to become a EE...not that I don't enjoy the knowledge I gained, but...

The Bible is *very* interesting if studied because you are interested in it, and not read for the purposes of criticizing, as you admit that is your purpose. When you have resources to aide you in your study, when you know enough to cross reference passages and divulge deeper meaning...it is quite fascinating. When you study the culture and history of the period in which a given book is written, and therefore have that insight to the writing, it is very interesting. If you are just reading it to justify being a dick to Christians trying to discuss their faith, then I suppose it ins't very interesting...

Enough said...

AT Thucy -- to theologians, the lists of names have a purpose. They provide lineages, for example, related to Christ. They provide time frames for things happening, etc. I don't know it all...not a theologian and haven't studied it. I have read a lot of stuff in science that I don't understand....that doesn't mean it is useless. It mean *I* don't understand it's purpose or meaning.

Are you being intentionally shallow? You seem intelligent...I expect better of you. Accept, for just a moment, that there is a meaning and purpose greater than you - who has open disdain for the Bible - can admit, for those who do have a belief and faith built around it.

"I had to read a lot of horrifyingly dull books to become a EE...not that I don't enjoy the knowledge I gained, but..."

Honestly, I fell asleep more times reading A Tale of Two Cities than I did reading Introduction to Semiconductor Physics. : )

Abge -- Never tortured myself with a Tale....I actually found my EE education fascinating and miss it...but I mostly listened to my lectures, skimmed the books and did the homework as fast as possible before all my non-technical major friends went to the bar! lol But *reading* a book about semiconductor physics is not stimulating reading...and to truly understand semiconductor physics, you must read various other tomes of knowledge as well so that you have a *more* complete knowledge (but never a complete knowledge....as there is still ongoing research...)

To expect taht reading the Bible once, as fast as possible, is a useful endeavor, as some here seem to think, is so blatantly intellectually disengenuous it really makes me lose respect for those who make such statements.

Ive read tue Bible through quite a lot of times and I still read it. I found that when you treat it like any other book, its dry and boring. However, if you know that this is work is a very intricate historical work, and you read each book and compare it with what you read in other books of the Bible, take notes, make references, and work to learn the meanings behind the words as well as try to understand it from the point of view of the writers knowing about daily life of the human race at that time, the Bible comes alive. It gives you a deep appreciation for it and opens you up to many other things and you begin to desire to read it.

Compare it loosely to someone who tries wine, someone who drinks wine and someone who is a wine taster. Clearly, the wine taster--who has mulled over the flavor and takes time to appreciate a wine for the subtle details and flavors--has a deeper appreciation than the others.

The Bible deals with the Creation of the Earth by God, but leaves out the dinosaurs. I'm wondering whether dinosaurs were just made up by the writers of Jurassic Park or eveil scientists.

"They provide lineages, for example, related to Christ."

Dude I was raised Christian, I know that. But I am not a theologian and neither is anyone else here now are they?

Also your capacity to read your own shit onto other people astounds, krellin. I really liked the Bible. There is some awesome shit in there - for real.

"Judge not, lest ye be judged."

This is one of the most profound things I have ever read.

Also I second the notion of reading it slowly and more than once.

But I thought obi wanted to know the best way to read the whole thing, i.e., to be able to say "yes I have read the Bible," or "You know, when I read the Bible, I thought..."

In which case my method is a good one. When what you read in Deuteronomy is fresh on your mind as you're reading Acts, it gives you a different perspective than if you go like three chapters a day and barely remember the order of the books by the time you get to Revelation.

PS I don't think that the Bible overall is dry and boring. My God. Did I stutter in my original post? I don't see anything about disliking the Bible. So, fuck off. I really don't have the patience for that kind of bullshit this evening. I was responding honestly to the OP. Shitheads. All the advice I gave was things I learned in the course *of actually reading the Bible.* They were invented as I went for the sake of functionality and practicality and nothing more, and isn't that what the fuck obi was talking about? Douche.

Call me anti-Christian again. Go ahead. Do it. I'll wait.

Oh and by the fucking way, my neo-Nazi fundamentalist parents were thrilled to hear about my 40-day plan. They agreed with me that it is a unique and useful way to read the Bible, especially for the first time. So.......................

It's a lot like reading Mein Kampf. Just keep at it, and you will persevere.

Hey krellin and anyone else I may have insulted. Sorry for that outburst. I apologize, it was out of character and out of line.

I was frustrated that I was being misunderstood, which is a button of mine. It doesn't justify my rudeness, though, apologies.

@Thucy -- I was not insulted at all, just for the record. And I don't think I suggested that I was personally insulted by what you said....I just thought it was intellectually dishonest.

No I meant the stuff I said just now where I cussed you out. I stand by my original post as I do not believe it was offensive nor was it meant to be.

No worries. I guess you misunderstood, but you know now.

And, further, suggesting that you were raised Christian and therefore understand why the lineages are there...after you said they are a waste of time....saying you like the Bible...and yet, apparently even though you were raised "Christian" your reading experience with it is a 40-crash reading....I would suggest that you not only lying to us, but lying to yourselves about your great love and appeciation for the book.

Yeah...to become an EE, a professioan I was very much enjoyed...I ignored lots of what I was taught and read the books as fast as possible, skimmed 'em really...and ignored most of what my teachers taught me. That's pretty much how you describe your own Christianity. i.e. You are full of shit.

What version/translation are you reading?

Abridged version:
God created the world and spawned a bastard son who was executed for treason.
End of story.

Ignoring that krellin..

Ah yes dipplayer raises a good point, translations.

I found that NLT was the easiest to read if you're going cover to cover. It can even be funny at times in a way that is lost on modern readers with more oblique or archaic translations. I recommend it highly.

If you are quoting verses though or studying closely I would say KJV is to be used when the wording is famous (e.g. judge not lest ye be judged) or beautfiul, NIV is best for just straightfoward Bible study and verse-quoting.

Those are my opinions.

Maybe try looking at the Message. Most (or perhaps just most Southern Baptists) are suspicious of it and tend to think of it more as a cute adaptation and not actually the Bible. If you do the read the message, definitely don't quote it ever. And don't get disappointed if you really like a passage, go and look up the corresponding real verses, and find that what you liked is now gone. Lol.

Or maybe God didn't create the world and so this is just a ridiculous story to deify the bastard son of a poor Jewish lady, who, for reasons unknown, had to submit to this media propaganda.

ESV is pretty good too, I think. Slightly more accurate and slightly less readable than the NIV.

You know, maybe it would help to find a good analysis of one of the passages you're reading, initially, just to see all the things people find in it. I don't mean necessarily an evangelical theological analysis, and I certainly don't mean an atheist ranting analysis, just somebody discussing the text, bringing out cross-references and themes, talking about the literary/poetic structure, and allusions that are being made that you might not have caught.

Just a thought.

If you wish my address, you can have it, but it's going to take you at least 12 hours to get here. So prepare your itinerary.

semtex: What a lot of shit you speak. Wake up. That's actually not what life's about.
EG "bringing out cross-references and themes, talking about the literary/poetic structure"
What the fuck is that? Get real. Get virtual. Play WebDiplomacy. I get commission :~;

@Thucy:

Alright, I'll try that...probably a playlist of the Bible on YouTube as an audiobook (if they have everything from Moby Dick and Tess of the D'Urbervilles to stuff like THG and HP, chances are they have the most influential literary text in Western history this side of Homer) so I'm sure if I pace it I can get through it in 40 days...

Come to think of it...

I actually asked this to a friend the other day, and so why not, I'll ask it here--

40 days and 40 nights for Noah...
40 years wandering for Moses...
The OT is ALMOST 40 books long, at 39...
The NT starts with Book #40...
Probably other instances...

Of ALL the numbers--why repeat 40?

(And I mean that in a half-joking way, so while I appreciate the sincerity, if indeed it is so, please, no one try and explain that it's some sort of divine something-or-other...after all, the Bible is an EDITED book, and I can't stress that enough--Captain Kirk asked "What does God need with a starship?" well, What Does God Need With An Editor, then?--so I'm not buying into the religious side of it, just curious what folks think from a literary/historical/cultural standpoint...why 40? Coincidence, symbolism, or some cultural reference I'm not getting?)

Anywho, where was I?

Oh yes--

"You know Obi, the Bible isn't intended to be fine literature meant to amuse you. If the purpose of reading a book was only for amusement, then the world would be mostly void of Engineers, Chemisists, etc."

1. Literature--by which I mean the sort of literature that really endures and "means" something and we can be pretty sure won't die until the human race itself goes--is NOT, in almost every instance of true "literature," simply for "amusement.

Literature is worthwhile and means something more--

It can be moral--that's what large portions of the Bible attempt to be, morality tales...that's what something as old as Aesop's Fables or as classic as "Antigone" or "Macbeth" or "A Tale of Two Cities" are...the first, among others, teaches the moral that love for one's family and love and trust earned supersede love of the State, and that, as is shown with Creon's downfall, if a ruler is unworthy of rule, he or she shouldn't be followed blindly, even if it means sacrifice...the second teaches the counterpoint, that ambition is a good thing, and it makes Macbeth a great general, but a dangerous thing, and to allow it to run wild it to allow things to get out of hand, whereas someone like Malcolm, totally lacking ambition and courage, isn't great leadership material, either, and only takes the throne once Macduff fights his battle for him and Macbeth is so loathed, so it's a balance...and the third is a combination of the two, pitting personal love and sacrifice against the injustices of the State, and teaching that it is INDEED a far, far better thing to do than has ever done before to give up your life for a cause in a situation like that (and on that note, I'll say I look forward to getting to the NT, as obviously Jesus is the most famous/infamous martyr figure in history, so but given the theological side to it, the story to me seems off, so we'll see.)

It can be politically important--"Orwellian" is a term and with good reason, "Animal Farm" and "1984" are both great cautionary tales and examples of politics and states gone wrong (and I know Putin doesn't like it, but I'll cite them anyway) and books like Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin," Mark Twain's "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn," and Harper Lee's "To Kill a Mockingbird" all have had a profound social impact on American society, up to and including pushing for Abolition of Slavery, condemnation of the mistreatment of blacks, and illuminating social injustices.

It can be inspirational--there's a reason Plato, who thought authors were powerful enough with their ideas to destroy the perfect conformity he needed for a state like his republic (that speaks to the power and importance of literature right there, actually...free literature doesn't exist in Plato's Republic or Nazi Germany or modern Iran and North Korea) said that certain passages of "The Iliad" should still be read, because he felt they would inspire others with some of the acts of courage and valor...poems like Tennyson's "Ulysses" or Kipling's "If" are good examples of inspiration from literature again...

It can be intellectually satisfying--why else would we torment college kids with "Hamlet" for centuries? ;) But it's true, to an extent, that works like "Hamlet" and of Shaw or Beckett or Woolf or Dostoyevsky, whomever...literature gives food for intellectual thought, and that's, perhaps, our truest and greatest gift and asset over all the rest of the creatures on planet Earth...

It can be liberating--in an era when women couldn't vote and had little power, literature gave Jane Austen, the Bronte Sisters, and George Eliot some power through the written word, even if some of them did use male pseudonyms at the start of their careers...and while blacks were mistreated for, well, let's say all of American history until, conservatively, at the very earliest, the mid-20th century (1964 being a landmark year, give a take a few for different areas) there were black authors who rose and who still have risen to prominence...literature provides a voice for the voiceless and a platform for those denied one politically.

And so on and so forth.

So, while something like Harry Potter or The Hunger Games is, mostly, amusement...

Real, good, true literature, in mos cases, is not (that being said, something like "The Comedy of Errors" is little more than some bad jokes and a ripped off plot, but hey, even Shakespeare had his share of bad plays, and it was popular and made him cash, which the guy needed from his first play to make other productions.)

2. What was #2 again...I forget...something about how I recognize not all books have to be fiction and that's why I like and praise non-fiction authors and philosophers as well and to suggest I'm only interested in cheap amusement in what I read shortchanges me and, well, I'm an atheist in practice but a Shylock, er, Jew at heart, and no one shortchanges a Jew.

"The Bible is *very* interesting if studied because you are interested in it, and not read for the purposes of criticizing, as you admit that is your purpose. When you have resources to aide you in your study, when you know enough to cross reference passages and divulge deeper meaning...it is quite fascinating."

1. Well, seems only fair to read something before dissecting it, doesn't it? And in any case, what if you wanted to be a scholar but weren't religious--what then? YOU NEED to read the Bible to be a scholar, you simply must, it's too foundational for the West, it'd be like not reading Homer or Plato or Darwin or Shakespeare...and even then, the Greeks had some unified ideas and ethical and philosophic ideas that have laid the groundwork for Western civilization, but other than that, it's fragmentary and building in different ways, aside from Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian, it's all building in different directions and different ways, so as much as I don't care for the faiths, not reading the Bible means I miss half of that foundation...authors derivative of it, like Dante and Milton, help, as does the knowledge of famous books like Genesis and Exodus and such, but even still...to be a true Shakespeare scholar and get a PhD, you'd have to be able to not only analyze the different aspects of "Hamlet," but explore the history behind it's authorship, how the Ur-Hamlet and The Spanish Tragedy influenced it's authorship, the death of Shakespeare's son Hamnet around the supposed time of the play's penning, and the differences between Q1 (The First or "Bad" Quarto) Q2 (Second Quarto) and F1 (The First Folio) as all have structural and textual differences and all are missing portions the others might have and vice versa, or have words differently (a famous example--is "that this too too solid flesh should melt" or "too too sullied flesh," as one version has one and another has another, and those two can translate out to very different thematic and poetic meanings)...even if I didn't LIKE Shakespeare, if I were going to try to be a person of Letters at all, I'd have to look into it; even Tolstoy (the famous one, not our local friend) who found Shakespeare's works utter garbage, read them over, the complete works, several times, to see what he could find or else just for grounding...the same with me and the Bible--Dawkins has read it, Darwin read it, Hitchens and Nietzsche read it...Eliot and Milton sure as hell read it...however much I think it's garbage, to better form and articulate an opinion, I need to read it, I don't have to believe in it at all.

2. As far as "cross-referencing" passages and a "deeper meaning"...to take the first, as the Bible is, again, and edited book...well, I've heard countless Christians tell me one part of the Bible is prophecy or predicts another, or something of that nature, or something derivative of that idea...certainly Milton thought the OT goings-on in Genesis gave some symbolic signs for supposed divinity of Jesus in the NT, as he repeatedly states (and even opens up with in the very first few lines of "Paradise Lost")...even still, it's edited, so I really don't buy that they divinely reflect one another, for that and other reasons, and as far as influencing or leading into one another in a literary sense...I dunno, it feels too much like saying Homer predicted Virgil and "The Aeneid" when he wrote his works, it just doesn't click for me, OT to NT...within the Testaments themselves...I'd have to be more familiar with some of the supposed ages of the texts and how close they are, as some OT texts are dated later than others, and some have different versions that have different dates, and so on...it's possible that the OT writers influenced one another in a literary sense to some degree, I dunno, I guess I'll see as I read and research the OT, and ditto for the NT. But for divine cross-referencing, or divine deeper meaning...I don't buy the religion, so...

"When you study the culture and history of the period in which a given book is written, and therefore have that insight to the writing, it is very interesting. If you are just reading it to justify being a dick to Christians trying to discuss their faith, then I suppose it ins't very interesting..."

Not to be a dick so much as be informed in my views when I debate them with those who wish to have a debate (or, you know, when the next inevitable WebDip Holy War breaks out.)

@abgemacht:

"Honestly, I fell asleep more times reading A Tale of Two Cities than I did reading Introduction to Semiconductor Physics. : )"

Yeah, ATOTC is his most overrated work, in my opinion, just used it as an example.

(Though it at least seems more interesting than your book...Physics--marvelous mystery to me that I doubt I'll ever understand beyond the Star Trek "We're making 4/5 of this up!" level of sci-fi fun...rocks DO still fall to the ground if I drop them, right? ...Oh no, there's probably some scientific explanation about how they're not really falling to the ground but rather are acted upon by gravitational forces and...and here's the part where my brain seems to hit the eject button no matter what.) :)

@Tru Ninja:

"Ive read tue Bible through quite a lot of times and I still read it. I found that when you treat it like any other book, its dry and boring. However, if you know that this is work is a very intricate historical work, and you read each book and compare it with what you read in other books of the Bible, take notes, make references, and work to learn the meanings behind the words as well as try to understand it from the point of view of the writers knowing about daily life of the human race at that time, the Bible comes alive. It gives you a deep appreciation for it and opens you up to many other things and you begin to desire to read it.

Compare it loosely to someone who tries wine, someone who drinks wine and someone who is a wine taster. Clearly, the wine taster--who has mulled over the flavor and takes time to appreciate a wine for the subtle details and flavors--has a deeper appreciation than the others."

I suppose that's another of the points raised, when you talk about the learning the meanings of the words...

WHICH words? After all, there are a lot of Bible translations--sort of like saying Hurricane Katrina was a bit of a drizzle--and as I showed with just Shakespeare, in his OWN language (not even translating Hebrew/Greek to Latin to French to English and so on) you can have a textual dispute that changes the potential meaning for the passage or play...

So, what translations do people here read, out of curiosity?

Also, an interesting wine/wine taster analogy, I'll keep that in mind.

Also, YouTube is taunting me:

Type in "bible audiobook playlist," and what do I get?

"Paradise Lost!"

Damn it, stop tempting me, YouTube, I can't get sucked into to listening to that masterpiece...I have to listen to the Bible! ;)

There are many segments that aren't as vital to read, unless you are determined to "read the whole thing." The legislative parts of the Pentateuch, the minor prophets, the genealogical lists, some of the lesser letters of Paul--all of these can be difficult and not accessible to a casual reader.

But there's some great stuff too! The poetry of the Psalms and Isaiah! The archetypal stories from Genesis and from Samuel and the Gospels. The epic of Exodus. The rich short story of Jonah, and the pathos of Job. The Bible is the most important book in Western Civilization, and a well-rounded education requires some familiarity with it. You might want to consider a book like Timothy Beal's Biblical Literacy, if you just want to be familiar with the best segments and the ones that are most important to our culture.

If you want to see behind the curtain, and get a peak at the richness that is there, I highly recommend The Beginning of Wisdom, by Leon Kass. He focuses only on the book of Genesis, with a philosophical reading to see what the book has to say about human nature. It's absolutely marvelous to see how much is going on in that book, that one sometimes doesn't see on a first reading.

And for fun I highly recommend Good Book by David Plotz, the Year of Living Biblically by A.J. Jacobs, and Lamb by Christopher Moore.

There is speculation that a time period of 40 days is significant because that is how long a Venus retrograde cycle lasts. It's all Masonic and Astrology and Kabbalah related.

Alrighty, found one, it's a recording of the King James Version...

And I've heard of that one, at least, and know some it's history from English lectures, so unless someone here shouts out "NO! obi, that's not at all the right version, the correct version, of course, is ___" I'll give it a whirl...

Starting from Gen 23, as that's the last bit I recall reading way back when I was trying to slog through Genesis the first time.

So, that's about 2 hours or so left over for the rest of Genesis, and we'll move on from there...

KJV is the most literarily beautiful, but substantially less accurate than most modern translations. It's also harder to follow, though that may be less of an issue for a Shakespeare fiend. ; )