Favourite book in the Bible

[ed miliband]

I went to Catholic school and for the first few years we had to carry around a Bible to study in R.E. lessons (omg some of you, don't burst a blood vessel...). I'd flick through it a bit when I was bored in other classes and one day I stumbled upon Ecclesiastes - that shit is awesome, like some early form of existentialism. I forgot about it until I got given a copy of the King James Bible the other day (kinda goes against the lapsed Catholic side of me, but it interests me for historical reasons), anyway, it's as awesome as I remembered:

"What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun? One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth forever. The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down and hasteth to his place where he arose. The wind goeth towards the south, and turneth about unto the north it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again to his circuits..."

Can't be bothered to type out any more. Everyone should experience it for themselves.

I've always liked this little passage as well, from Matthew:

"Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin."

Think it's 'cos Current 93 had a lyric based on it, and I also read it quoted in some anti-work thing.

[Ocean Seal]

I particularly like the Book of Mathew, in part because it completely marginalizes those without sin. Now why is this a good thing? Because I find that generally people who call others out on being sinners too often generally promote a reactionary concept whether it is anti-feminism or making workers feel guilty for going against the power structure. And thankfully the Book of Mathew is so hard lining that I would argue that 99.99% of the people in the world severely violate the ideal good in that book.

[hatzel]

You know before I'd even opened the thread I was thinking Ecclesiastes. So glad we're on the same wave-length there...

[Zealot]

Maybe the Book of Esther. Not only is the hero of the story a woman, but there isn't a single mention of god in there, lol.

And the Songs of Solomon are pretty juicy, at times they make Playboy look like a joke.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Book of Job was pretty brutal

[Zostrianos]

For me it depends. I enjoy mystic symbolism, so the visions of Ezekiel, parts of Isaiah, the Gospel of John (the least reliable historically but the most beautiful in my view) and Revelation are at the top of my list. From a more philosophical angle, Ecclesiastes would definitely be up there.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Once I accepted that I was an atheist my favorite books were all the ones with the action in it. Was it King David who had to chop off a few thousand foreskins from his defeated enemies and give it to the person he was marrying as part of the wedding ceremony? Yeah that shit was dope. I also remember a story where some guy was raping his sister and the whole time I was thinking "OMGZ Don't do it, run, run away" but she didn't, she just protested and he raped her. If you read it like a fictional story book like I did it's actually a pretty good book imo.

[Zostrianos]

And the Songs of Solomon are pretty juicy, at times they make Playboy look like a joke.

Yeah, I like those as well. They're essentially an erotic poem. I still have no idea how such a text could have been included as part of holy scripture (let alone written) in such a conservative, patriarchal culture as ancient Israel....

A bundle of myrrh is my well beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts....

My beloved is mine, and I am his: he feedeth among the lilies. ...
Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.

How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than wine! and the smell of thine ointments than all spices! Thy lips, O my spouse, drop as the honeycomb: honey and milk are under thy tongue; and the smell of thy garments is like the smell of Lebanon. A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed...

Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.


My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.

Thy navel is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy belly is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies.
Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins.

I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof: now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples...

I am a wall, and my breasts like towers: then was I in his eyes as one that found favour.

[RedGrunt]

Esther was really a great story, and Job was pretty alright. I actually have read that Job has been considered one of the older books by some, though I'm not to sure how proven this is. It's depiction of Satan was much more original in it though, compared to it being juxtaposed to God(as Good solely).

I thought the prophets were the most interesting to read besides stories like Esther. I never actually took time to read any of the NT though.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Job was like a neat story book.

[Zealot]

The interesting thing I find with the Book of Job is that Satan and God appear to be on good terms. He seems not to be God's archenemy but rather his tool for testing people's faith.

[RGacky3]

Not really, obviously Satan was in heaven, but the whole episode of Job was Satan accusing God of pampering Job so that Job would worship him, and that the only reason Job was worshiping God was the benefits he was getting, and the rest of the book of Job is answering that challenge by allowing Satan to take away Jobs stuff and health and so on.

The only thing that might show they were on good terms would be the fact that Satan was in his presance.

[Zostrianos]

The Book of Job proves that the Christian concept of Satan didn't really exist until New Testament times. In the Book of Job, Satan is a nebulous figure, and appears to be an emissary of God, not his evil nemesis. And Job is one of the very few instances where Satan is even mentioned in the Old Testament; whenever you read of evil and tragedy in the Old Testament, it's always God who's responsible. The Satan we know today first appeared in New Testament times, and was later heavily sculpted by Church fathers into a force responsible for all evil, ever tempting man away from God. Satan is a pastiche, a composite figure moulded over the centuries and used by the Church to retain power by fear (and to ensure loyalty by attributing all non Christian religions, secularism, and a million other things to Satan)

[RedGrunt]

"I create light and darkness, good and evil; I am "the LORD" who does all this." Para-phrasal. As Poimandres said, Satan wasn't really a player in his(?) own right at all, and perhaps not even a personal individual.

Poimandres, would you happen to know if Job is considered one of the older texts in the OT?

[Zostrianos]

If I remember, Job was dated to around 500BC, so it's nearly halfway between the oldest writings (Torah, Samuel, Judges, Kings, early Prophets), and more recent post-exilic ones such as Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Maccabees, etc.
It's interesting to note as well that in early Jewish mysticism (q.v. 3 Enoch), the archangel Samael (who would later be equated with Lucifer and Satan) was a servant of God, one of the more cruel and fierce angels, but still a servant of God. In other early qabalistic texts (e.g. Maaseh Bereshith), the various Hells where souls are tormented are not peopled by demons but by fiery archangels who torture souls in order to purify them of their earthly faults and eventually return them to God.

[Zealot]

Not really, obviously Satan was in heaven, but the whole episode of Job was Satan accusing God of pampering Job so that Job would worship him, and that the only reason Job was worshiping God was the benefits he was getting, and the rest of the book of Job is answering that challenge by allowing Satan to take away Jobs stuff and health and so on.

The only thing that might show they were on good terms would be the fact that Satan was in his presance.

Satan accusing God of pampering Job? Actually if you read the Book of Job, God is the one who suggests the whole plot:
One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them. The LORD said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the LORD, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”

Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”

“Does Job fear God for nothing?” Satan replied. “Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.”



The LORD said to Satan, “Very well, then, everything he has is in your power, but on the man himself do not lay a finger.” Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD. - Job 1:6-12

Notice that Satan presented himself before God and, it could be argued, had been roaming around earth with the angels! Also interesting to note is that Satan appears virtually powerless without permission from God to do anything evil and says to God "stretch out your hand and strike everything he has" to which God gives full permission. Not only that but Satan actually adhered to God's condition that Job himself isn't killed. He also recognizes God's power, going so far as to say "You have blessed the work of his (Job's) hands".

[RGacky3]

Sure, God points out that Job is righteous, as a boast in a way, Satan Challenges that righteousness as being based on material protection and wealth, God then accepts the challange and allows Satan to attack Job. So your right, God started it.

[eyeheartlenin]

Psalms is my favorite book. Someone wrote a book about the Psalms, called No one ever says "Please" in the Psalms, meaning, I am guessing, that no one is overly polite or stands on ceremony in the Psalms, many of which appear to have been written by people who were unjustly accused and are crying to the Deity for help against their enemies, who are about to overwhelm them. Nearly every human emotion can be found in the 150 different Psalms that comprise that book.

The literary scholar Robert Alter has published his own translation, entitled, The Book of Psalms, which includes an informative commentary. The text of the Psalms is apparently very old and therefore has a long line of transmission, one scribe after another copying out the text of the book by hand, from older manuscripts, over centuries. The great age of the text means that there are many places in the Psalms where the wording is uncertain. One of strengths of Alter's book is that he explains what is going on in the Hebrew original, when there is an uncertainty in the text of an individual Psalm. With the conflict and desperation one finds in the Psalms, they are very human texts.

[hatzel]

I've said it before (about a bazillion times, actually) and I'll say it again: the Satan was not, is not and never will be some nemesis of heaven. The Satan is an agent of G-d, one of the many in the house of angels - for you Christians, the Satan and the archangel Gabriel are in the same category. Entities that do G-d's work. Nor is the Satan evil; the Satan has a specific task, to challenge people, to test people, yet still hopes that they will resist. This is clear throughout the Bible, and the writings of the rabbis, many of which are very sympathetic to the Satan's dilemma, in tempting people whilst hoping the temptation will be rebuked. If we're going to use a Hebrew word, haSatan, to refer to a being, we're going to use it properly, to refer to the being as understood by the Hebrews. If you want to talk about whatever the hell the Christians did with this concept...I dunno, use a Greek word or some shit like that...or 'the Devil,' maybe...


I still have no idea how such a text could have been included as part of holy scripture (let alone written) in such a conservative, patriarchal culture as ancient Israel....

I find this quite a strange thing to say. It's like saying "I don't understand how there were so many saucy burlesque shows during the Victorian era, when this was such a prissy and uptight time," rather than the perhaps more fitting "there were lots of saucy burlesque shows during the Victorian era, so perhaps this wasn't such a prissy and uptight time." I use this example because the Victorian era is often assumed to be considerably more sexually repressive than the evidence actually suggests (though it was admittedly more prudish than both preceding and subsequent eras). And, given how many people I have known to express shock and just how bawdy and sexual Medieval literature very often is - "wait what? Weren't these people all religious puritans or something? Why are they writing loads of American Pie humour?" - I don't think such a misconception can be limited only to the Victorian period. As such, it seems strange to say "this is how this period was, but for some reason the evidence contradicts this," rather than using the evidence to reassess one's assumptions of the prevailing culture of the period.

[Zealot]

Sure, God points out that Job is righteous, as a boast in a way, Satan Challenges that righteousness as being based on material protection and wealth, God then accepts the challange and allows Satan to attack Job. So your right, God started it.

To me it looks more like God is actually prodding Satan into doing something about Job, which would make God look like the challenger and not Satan. We can see this in the sentence "Have you considered Job..." or, as in the footnote of some translations, it says that it literally means "set your heart to". But regardless of that, I think you've agreed to every other point I made.

[RGacky3]

Basically, but I think God was using Job as an example and Satan was claiming that Job does'nt count as one because of the protection he has.

With La Sombra, it depends if you equate "the serpant" in genesis with Satan, Satan is an Angel of God, but many theologies would claim he's a rebeller against God, so an accusor of God and his people. The Devil of Christian Dogma being an evil being ruling over hell is not in the bible unless you take a very loose interpretation, (which would be wierd since Jesus went to hell.)

[Pretty Flaco]

"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied." Matthew 5:6

I always thought there was something powerful about that verse. That's the king james translation of it. I like it's wording best, even though when i was religious i wasn't protestant.

[Invader Zim]

Mark, because it is the book with what I think are the most interesting historical questions surrounding it.

[RedGrunt]

Satan /=/ serpent. This was later referred to and interpreted by Christianity. Satan means the accuser/opposer, think of satan as the prosecutor. It doesn't have any power to actually condemn, he just puts forward the case. He is the tester of God, his hand.

Furthermore, angel=messenger, so even in certain contexts with angels doesn't necessarily refer to mystical beings, this is all due to translations. It's like the fucking cherubim being baby angels or some other crap. They were like sphinxes and had flaming swords to guard Eden. wtf Christianity. wtf.

Or when they interpret gods message to the PRINCE OF TYRE, equating him to the "morning star"(which they translate as "Lucifer"), as Lucifer/satan, when it was distinctly relating a prince to his cultures god - one whom tried to set his throne above his father. You'll find the OT and the Israelites borrows alot of surrounding mythology to speak to the other peoples or applying the mythologies to their god, YHWH, such as "Leviathan" which can be shown to correspond with Ugaritic mythology.

You'll also find there isn't exactly a "hell" in the christian sense in the OT, as the OT was infact very material - hence the purpose of the resurrection in the end of days.

[Red Noob]

I haven't read much of it, but Proverbs is my favorite.

[Zostrianos]

You'll find the OT and the Israelites borrows alot of surrounding mythology to speak to the other peoples or applying the mythologies to their god, YHWH, such as "Leviathan" which can be shown to correspond with Ugaritic mythology.

A lot of what was adopted by the OT was derived from Ugaritic mythology. Like you mentioned, Leviathan (Liwiyatân in Hebrew) was originally Lotân, a being in Ugaritic mythology, with 7 heads; he was a servant of Yamm the evil sea God. There is also another 7 headed serpent mentioned in the Baal Epic (the main Ugaritic religious narrative) called Shilyat. Even in the NT Book of Revelation, the beast of 7 heads seems to have had its origins in these Canaanite\Ugaritic myths. Many OT songs and prayers were originally Pagan canaanite hymns (like the Song of the Sea in Exodus), and Psalm 29 was originally a hymn to Baal that was edited by the Israelites for the cult of YHWH. The very story of Exodus has direct parallels in the myth of Baal who battles Yam the sea God. I highly recommend reading FM Cross's "Canaanite hymn and Hebrew Epic" which explores the Canaanite origins of Judaism. Here's some interesting quote:

Alongside these Canaanite traditions of the stormgod may be put the Canaanite hymn preserved in the Psalter, namely Psalm 29. H. L. Ginsberg in 1936 drew up conclusive evidence that Psalm 29 is an ancient Ba’l hymn, only slightly modified for use in the early cultus of Yahweh. Further study has steadily added confirmatory detail. In its Israelite form it is no later than tenth century B.C. and probably was borrowed in Solomonic times. The hymn is introduced by a classic “Address to the Divine Council” in repetitive, imperative plurals (verses If.); the theophany of the storm god follows (verse 9), and with it the convulsions and travail of sea and mountain, forest and creature (verses 3-9b), and finally the appearance of the god as victor and king enthroned in his temple (verses 9c f.). (152)

On Baal and YHWH:

Yahwism also owes a debt to the myths of Ba’l. In the earliest poetic sources the language depicting Yahweh as divine warrior manifest is borrowed almost directly from Canaanite descriptions of the theophany of Ba’l as storm god. As a matter of fact, any discussion of the language of theophany in early Israel must begin with an examination of the Canaanite lore.’

[Tovarisch]

I love Ezekiel. More specifically, Ezekiel 23:19

[Zostrianos]

I love Ezekiel. More specifically, Ezekiel 23:19

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[The Young Pioneer]

Everyone beat me to it, but definitely Job.


Though the unpopular bits of Ezekiel (a tale of a horny prostitute lusting after men with dicks like stallions) and Judges (how to stab yourself in the stomach and dig out your own feces), are also quite good.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Job and Ecclesiastes are the big ones on secular philosophy.

Jonah is good for pulling tricks on spiteful prophets, but also for what can happen if popular attitudes change.

Ezekiel is the most riveting of the prophetic books, though, not least because of the probable UFOs and the Valley of the Dry Bones.


The interesting thing I find with the Book of Job is that Satan and God appear to be on good terms. He seems not to be God's archenemy but rather his tool for testing people's faith.

That's because the Jewish view of "Satan" was and is different. Without personal motivations to rebel against one's own creator, the rather robotic "adversary" has a sort of cold logic with regards to tempting mere fleshlings. That's why the "adversary" can come and go before the maker so easily.


It's interesting to note as well that in early Jewish mysticism (q.v. 3 Enoch), the archangel Samael (who would later be equated with Lucifer and Satan) was a servant of God, one of the more cruel and fierce angels, but still a servant of God. In other early qabalistic texts (e.g. Maaseh Bereshith), the various Hells where souls are tormented are not peopled by demons but by fiery archangels who torture souls in order to purify them of their earthly faults and eventually return them to God.

The Jewish view of the afterlife today is very similar to this. According to this view, the purification/purgatory process lasts for at most a year. Only the most morally depraved (like Hitler) don't return and are extinguished.

[RGacky3]

Satan /=/ serpent. This was later referred to and interpreted by Christianity. Satan means the accuser/opposer, think of satan as the prosecutor. It doesn't have any power to actually condemn, he just puts forward the case. He is the tester of God, his hand.


I think the serpent being satan is the best interpretation, it being a metaphor for sexual desire like some rabbis interprate it does'nt jive with Gods command to "be fruitful."

But look, it could go either way.

Satan means opposer, in christian theology he is the opposer of God and his servants and will, which matches the scriptural record, unless he is doing it FOR God, which would'nt be clear in the Hebrew scriptures, but the New testiment would make it seam like he is not.


Furthermore, angel=messenger, so even in certain contexts with angels doesn't necessarily refer to mystical beings, this is all due to translations. It's like the fucking cherubim being baby angels or some other crap. They were like sphinxes and had flaming swords to guard Eden. wtf Christianity. wtf.


Sure, I agree with everything you say there, theres no conflict with Christian theology there, unless your taking an ultra orthadox dogma.


Or when they interpret gods message to the PRINCE OF TYRE, equating him to the "morning star"(which they translate as "Lucifer"), as Lucifer/satan, when it was distinctly relating a prince to his cultures god - one whom tried to set his throne above his father. You'll find the OT and the Israelites borrows alot of surrounding mythology to speak to the other peoples or applying the mythologies to their god, YHWH, such as "Leviathan" which can be shown to correspond with Ugaritic mythology.


Sure, equating Lucifer with Satan is conjecture. But again, this does'nt necessarily conflict with christian theology.


You'll also find there isn't exactly a "hell" in the christian sense in the OT, as the OT was infact very material - hence the purpose of the resurrection in the end of days.

You actually won't find a "hell" in the christian sense in the new testiment either.

[hatzel]

The most valuable passages for an anti-statist can be found in the book of Samuel. Just thought I'd drop that one in there:


1. And it was, when Samuel had grown old, that he appointed his sons judges for Israel.
2. And the name of his first born was Joel, and the name of the second, Abijah; they were judges in Beer-sheba.
3. And his sons did not walk in his ways, and they turned after gain, and they took bribes and perverted justice.
4. And all the elders of Israel gathered, and came to Samuel, to Ramah.
5. And they said to him, "Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now, set up for us a king to judge us like all the nations."
6. And the thing was displeasing in the eyes of Samuel, when they said, "Give us a king to judge us," and Samuel prayed to the Lord.
7. And the Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people, according to all that they will say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from reigning over them.
8. Like all the deeds which they have done from the day I brought them up from Egypt, and until this day, and they forsook Me and served other gods; so are they doing to you.
9. And now, listen to their voice; except that you shall warn them, and tell them the manner of the king who will reign over them.
10. And Samuel related all the words of the Lord to the people who asked of him a king.
11. And he said, "This will be the manner of the king who will reign over you; he will take your sons, and appoint them to him for his chariots and for his horsemen, and they will run before his chariots.
12. And he will appoint them to him commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and to plow his plowing and to reap his harvest, and to make his weapons and the equipment for his chariots.
13. And he will take your daughters for his perfumers, for cooks, and for bakers.
14. And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive trees, and will give them to his slaves.
15. And he will tithe your grain crops and your vineyards, and he will give them to his officers and his slaves.
16. And he will take your male and female slaves, and your handsomest youths and your asses, and put them to his work.
17. And he will tithe your flocks, and you will be slaves to him.
18. And you will cry out on that day because of your king, whom you will have chosen for yourselves, and the Lord will not answer you on that day.
19. And the people refused to listen to Samuel's voice, and they said, "No, but there shall be a king over us.
20. And also we shall be like all the nations, and our king will judge us, go forth before us and wage our wars."
21. And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he spoke to them in the ears of the Lord.
22. And the Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to their voice, and you shall make them a king." And Samuel said to the men of Israel, "Go, every man to his city."

[NGNM85]

N/A

[Tovarisch]

"19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. 21 So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled."
This is the bible verse I'm talking about

"You also took the fine jewelry I gave you, the jewelry made of my gold and silver, and you made for yourself male idols and engaged in prostitution with them."
Also this. Ezekiel 16-17. Main reason why Ezekiel is my favorite book

[bcbm]

revelation, i like the apocalyptic imagery which sounds almost surrealist if you ignore that its all an allegory or whatever

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ckeD66ju928/R4Zw-RmOriI/AAAAAAAAAFo/b7LxQnigOyw/Revelation_20_by_ArtOfTheMystic.jpg

'revelation 20' otto rapp