i would like to start with genesis, naturally, but i have no clue how to begin. should i read a commentary on genesis? an introduction on the old testament as such? i want something that relays the christian, jewish, and contemporary scholarly interpretations of the text so that i can compare all three. what's the best way to go about doing this?
>>24971166If you haven't read the Bible yet I would rawdog it twice through before delving into commentary and comparative theology. If you prefer you can start with the beginning of the new testament or the beginning of the old testament.
I started on the New Testament, which I feel helped me finish the book since I was immersed and it was much quicker to get through. The Old Testament can get very slow especially in the first five books. I would hold off on listening to any commentary unless you're absolutley stumped. Merry Christmas anon.
why are jews so evil? even god thought so
>>24971166>i want something that relays the christian, jewish, and contemporary scholarly interpretations >what's the best way to go about doing this?Becoming Christian, then Jewish, then lobotomized. There is an incredible wealth of symbolism in the Bible that is closed to us because our worldview is so incredibly distant from ancient people, not to mention the difference between our daily experiences altogether. To get started I recommend 'The Language of Creation' by M.Pageau. It's a relatively easy-reading digest of basic symbolic approaches (Christian and Jewish), though at some points it reads just as someone trying to systematize poetry. Then, for the Christian understanding, read the Gospels and then Genesis, paying attention to the narrative similarities. Also pay attention to the problems that Genesis establishes - death, sin and spiritual confusion / demons. 'Religion of the Apostles' by S. De Young nicely expands on the OT problem statement as well as on some brief demonology and the role of the Church as the new Israel. For Jewish interpretations it really depends on what Jewish sect you want to understand. As the saying goes - two Jews, three opinions. I cannot help you there.As for contemporary scholarly interpretations, I wouldn't really waste a lot of time on that. Modern methods worry more about appearing objective than about understanding the text and there are cases where a scholar will outright tell you that Jews and Christians misinterpret and mistranslate a verse because secular archeological methods couldn't reach the same understanding. As though the writers apriori counted on secular philology. Use lexicons where they seem useful, but be aware that you're switching from a magnifying glass to a microscope and only one of those is useful when reading books.
>>24971238read Paul you philistine
>>24971244>scholarly interpretation is lobotomyGo back to >>>/his/
>Asimov's Guide to the Bible, vols I and II (1968 and 1969, one-volume ed. 1981)
