|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Which 5 books to omit?
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
TheAlethiophile started a thread in Keryg asking, if you could only keep 5 books of the Bible, which 5 would they be?
As a tangent HCH asked, which 5 would you delete? I think this deserves a thread of its own, so here it is:
If (for some bizarre reason) you had to choose to leave 5 books out of the Bible, which 5 would you omit? Whether it's because you don't like them, or you find them redundant, or don't add to our understanding of God or of our salvation, or whatever.
It would also be interesting to say why you're willing to omit each of your 5.
If you can't think of 5 put as many (<=5) as you like.
My 5, in the order in which I'd delete them:
1. Sirach
2. Proverbs
3. Numbers
4. Lamentations
5. Jeremiah
1 & 2 because they're dreary and tell a lot of untruths. 3 because it's pointless and stupid. 4 and 5 because they're so depressing and go on and on and on and on...
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Francophile
Shipmate
# 17838
|
Posted
Sirach's not in my Bible anyway, I think it was taken out at the Reformation.
Posts: 243 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Francophile:
Sirach's not in my Bible anyway, I think it was taken out at the Reformation.
Please let's not argue about the Apocrypha! That's a whole 'nother thread in itself.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matthaios
Apprentice
# 17828
|
Posted
I'll avoid the easy omissions of things like Obadiah, Nahum, Jude, 2&3 John, etc.
Probably:
Joshua and Judges, because they are somehow both dull and bloody at the same time.
Proverbs, because it is too much of a general mish-mash when compared to the maturity of Job and Ecclesiastes.
Ezekiel, because it is tediously and impenetrably baffling.
1 Timothy, because there is no way to rescue Paul's (or whoever's) comments about women from insanity.
[ 24. September 2013, 21:23: Message edited by: Matthaios ]
--------------------
In this desert of language we find ourselves in,
with the sign-post with the word 'God' worn away
and the distance?
(R.S. Thomas)
Posts: 7 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Afghan
Shipmate
# 10478
|
Posted
Only five? That's miserly.
I think I would have to dispense with the three Pastorals. Their authorship is... well... questionable implies a degree of uncertainty, and their theology isn't deep or lyrical enough to redeem them.
In the interests of balance between Old and New I'd probably have to use my remaining two wishes to dispense with the two Books of Chronicles - clearly the Diatessaron of the Tanakh.
--------------------
Credibile quia ineptum
Posts: 438 | From: Essex | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
This is rather too easy:
1) 2 Peter — for being a crap edit of Jude, removing the most stylistically good bits, but adding in shovelfuls of the most ludicrous pseudepigraphic claims
2) 2 Thessalonians — for being a crap edit of 1 Thessalonians
3-5) The Pastoral Epistles, because if they weren't there, they wouldn't be missed.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Oh I disagree about Ezekiel! Granted it's kind of the Revolution #9 of the Old Testament, but it's so wonderful in its bizzarity.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Oh I disagree about Ezekiel! Granted it's kind of the Revolution #9 of the Old Testament, but it's so wonderful in its bizzarity.
But I can see how someone could find his going on and on and on about dimensions (etc) of his ideal temple for several chapters as the epitome of dullness.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bran Stark
Shipmate
# 15252
|
Posted
I would remove I and II Chronicles, since they're mostly repetitions of I and II Kings. The rest would be obscure minor prophets like Obediah. If someone from the NT has to go, it would be Philemon.
--------------------
IN SOVIET ЯUSSIA, SIGNATUЯE ЯEAD YOU!
Posts: 304 | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Oh I disagree about Ezekiel! Granted it's kind of the Revolution #9 of the Old Testament, but it's so wonderful in its bizzarity.
But I can see how someone could find his going on and on and on about dimensions (etc) of his ideal temple for several chapters as the epitome of dullness.
Perhaps we could have an "Ezekiel's Greatest Hits" and squeeze out the boring stuff.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
1. Leviticus
Should need no explanation!
2. Proverbs
Dreary, tedious and banal.
3. Revelation
The cause of far too many wacky ideas.
4. 2 Peter
Let's face it, Jude wasn't much of a letter in the first place. So a poor rewrite really isn't needed.
5. Joshua
A book entirely built upon the doctrine that God advocates genocide...
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
If only Leviticus did give some explanation of why sacrifices are necessary and what they mean, it would save a lot of Christian wrangling.
There are good bits in Revelation, but interestingly the Orthodox church never uses it in its public worship, AFAIU. The liturgical bits are the best bits.
I was wading through Judges in the lectionary recently, and I thought it was even less edifying than Joshua.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
1. Numbers
The core history of the Israelites has already been covered in Genesis-Leviticus and gets a recapitulation in Deuteronomy.
2. Song of Solomon
OK, it's a nice poem, but we've got 150 of them in the book of Psalms. Not really much theology there, apart from 'God loves you a lot'.
3. Lamentations.
Even more depressing than Ecclesiastes.
4. Malachi
Does anyone really refer to this regularly for key points of historical understanding or doctrine? Don't think so.
5. 3 John
Not exactly substantial.
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
You can't get rid of Numbers! It's got the story of Balaam, and God talking through his ass (or something like that).
I think I'd go with
1. Leviticus. I like mixed fibres.
2. The Song of Solomon. How many euphemisms for "nice tits" can you pack into one short book?
3. Obadiah. I mean, why?
4. 3John. I think it was only included because the John Fan Club were out in force, and they'd have included his laundry list if it had been available.
5. Revelation. See 4.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
I was wading through Judges in the lectionary recently, and I thought it was even less edifying than Joshua.
But Judges has the comedy value - the tent peg through the temple and so on. It's got the Samson story as well. Hugely entertaining.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
I am surprised that no-one (not even me!!) has nominated 1 & 2 Chronicles. Do we REALLY need another version of 1 & 2 Kings? Totally superfluous.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
2. The Song of Solomon. How many euphemisms for "nice tits" can you pack into one short book?
I giggled out loud.
Mind you, reading the Song of Songs, I the bit that turns me on is the description of the boyfriend in Chapter 5. "His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven."
I'll go and have a shower now.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
(Sorry for the triple post!)
Just noticed that Bran Stark nominated 1 & 2 Chronicles. Sorry - missed that post. Good reasoning, though.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I am surprised that no-one (not even me!!) has nominated 1 & 2 Chronicles. Do we REALLY need another version of 1 & 2 Kings? Totally superfluous.
See Bran Stark above.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
I'm surprised to see so much of a downer on Revelation. To me, a book that calls the Christian to a life of witness through suffering, rather than to acts of violence, is something worth keeping. (See Richard Hays's new edited volume on Revelation to see this worked out in more detail).
What would I lose?
1) 1/2 Chronicles. It's just a bit of Samuel and then Kings made less interesting.
2) Habakkuk. Yeah, I get it: you don't like the Assyrians. We've moved on. It's one advantage is that some of us get to feel superior by pronouncing it with stress on the second syllable, which is probably another reason to get rid of it as an occasion of pride.
3) 2 Pet. Agree with what others have said.
4) 3 John. Again, I think that case has already been made by others.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
All I know from Habakkuk is the canticle at Lauds on Good Friday, and it's worth it for that. But no great loss otherwise.
[ 25. September 2013, 14:28: Message edited by: venbede ]
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chamois
Shipmate
# 16204
|
Posted
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
quote:
4. Malachi
Does anyone really refer to this regularly for key points of historical understanding or doctrine? Don't think so.
But Malachi is great! You can't get rid of Malachi! What other nation or religion has ever pictured their relationship with their God as a no-holds-barred matrimonial row?
"I've HAD IT with you!"
"What did I do?"
"You know d*** well it's your job to..."
"and ANOTHER THING...!"
Reading it, I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the first lot of crockery to hit the kitchen wall. Wonderful stuff!
And you can't get rid of Jeremiah - some fantastic poetry and inspiration for keeping faith when absolutely everything is going wrong.
Ezekiel just needed a good editor. About one third shorter and it would be a very fine book.
Even Proverbs has its moments.......especially at the beginning and the end.
What would I omit?
1. Ezra/Nehemiah. Most unpleasant: racist and sexist and just about everything else -ist.
2. 1 and 2 Chronicles. As other people have said, redundant.
3. Daniel. The only use made of Daniel is by dubious sects trying to promulgate their own view of the end of the age. We'd all be better off without THAT.
4. Romans. Can't understand a word of it. (Paul could have done with a good editor as well - could he have been related to Ezekiel?)
5. 1, 2 and 3 John (or any one of these if I'm not allowed to consider them as one book). Boring and pointless.
Posts: 978 | From: Hill of roses | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
My mother recommended that I treat with suspicion any group which over-emphasised Revelation, Daniel, or Matthew 24, so the first two, anyway.
I don't agree about Chronicles - I had an amusing time arguing with some literalists about conflicting versions of events. Didn't win, though.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Chronicles (can I count it as two books please?)
Esther
Danial
Habakkuk
Philemon
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bran Stark:
I would remove I and II Chronicles, since they're mostly repetitions of I and II Kings. The rest would be obscure minor prophets like Obediah. If someone from the NT has to go, it would be Philemon.
Chronicles is interesting precisely where it diverges from Samuel-Kings (except when it's a genealogy!). There are some good expansive bits on Solomon and on Hezekiah. Somervell and Driver's parallel edition of the two is particularly neat.
As for Philemon, it's the most real of any of the Epistles. It's the only one that's from a named individual to a named individual, and for all the sender's notorious verbosity actually is approximately the length of a normal letter. It's a fascinating little book too.
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
4. Malachi
Does anyone really refer to this regularly for key points of historical understanding or doctrine? Don't think so.
Malachi contributes a lot to the eschatological background of the Gospels. And I'd argue that the Twelve Minor Prophets function as a collection — there are fairly obvious literary ties between Malachi and the second half of Zechariah, for instance. (So I wouldn't support eliminating Obadiah either, even though it has a lot of duplication of Jeremiah going on.)
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chamois:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
5. 1, 2 and 3 John (or any one of these if I'm not allowed to consider them as one book). Boring and pointless.
I would have violently disagreed with this until I sat down a few years ago to read a several hundred page commentary on the Johannine Epistles. My word, was it boring! I'd be OK with just having the one paragraph summary of 1 Jn, which really then gets repeated a bunch of times (with bad grammar to boot).
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Esther
Sure, take out one of only two books with a female lead ... the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is, and it's even worse without Esther.
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
I can't agree about Revelation, it brings comfort to Christians who are being persecuted. Some who have never known persecution get some funny ideas from it, but so what?
My list:
- Galatians - It's basically an early draft of Romans
- Nahum - the teaching is covered in the other prophets
- 3 John - Just because
- Esther - Where is God in this?
- Either Colossians or 1 John - both are a reply to early Gnosticism, we don't ned both. I'd give 1 John the benefit of the doubt and ditch Colossians.
Leviticus only just survived, once you get past the ickyness of all that blood and the repetitions there are some good bits.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
I'm not surprised that a number of posters have put 3 John on their list. But I would be saddened to see it go. It's a tiny slice of life from the small Christian world of the 1st century -- the sort of letter one might come upon in a dusty attic, lodged and partly hidden at the back of an old desk drawer.
"John" is very human in this little bit of text. He encourages his friend and kvetches about an apparent trouble-maker. He thinks out loud about how he will handle the situation. It could be one of us, which is its special value.
quote:
I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will not welcome us. So when I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, spreading malicious nonsense about us. Not satisfied with that, he even refuses to welcome other believers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is
I had to google what that was, but oh yes it does.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
My mother recommended that I treat with suspicion any group which over-emphasised Revelation, Daniel, or Matthew 24, so the first two, anyway.
I don't agree about Chronicles - I had an amusing time arguing with some literalists about conflicting versions of events. Didn't win, though.
Oh, you probably won, but such folks will never admit it.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is
I had to google what that was, but oh yes it does.
4 books out of 73 (Catholic canon) or 3 books out of 66 (Protestant canon). Not a great showing.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is
I had to google what that was, but oh yes it does.
The conversation between Naomi and Ruth sprung to my mind immediately. But I wonder what the relevant passages in Mark and Luke are? (I'm not very familiar with Tobith.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is
I had to google what that was, but oh yes it does.
The conversation between Naomi and Ruth sprung to my mind immediately.
Although by word count, I'm willing to bet that most of their dialogue is about Boaz.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mousethief: Although by word count, I'm willing to bet that most of their dialogue is about Boaz.
Granted, but I like Ruth 1:16–17. It's a nice expression of commitment.
BTW Does your earlier calculation show that Protestants are slightly better on this one than Catholics? Hah! ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariston
Insane Unicorn
# 10894
|
Posted
1. Revelation—the most misinterpreted book of the Bible, just going by how many "my interpretation is right, yours is wrong!" interpretations I've heard of it. A great mine for symbolism, a contribution to world literature, perhaps even a nice political polemic, but Scripture? Who knows. Perhaps Luther was right when he saw nothing of the Holy Spirit in it.
2. 2 Corinthians—I can't bring myself to axe all of Paul, much as I sometimes dislike the old sexist bat, but 2 Corinthians just seems to be a rehash of the worst bits of 1 Corinthians, with more frustration added in. All the distasteful bits, none of the great oratory.
3. Proverbs—While it was once a favorite of mine, I think I realized how dreadfully dull it was, even compared to the other wisdom lit books, all of which kinda drone on and on and on.
4. Job—Really never much liked this one, especially the moral of the story: don't ask questions, you stupid human, but I'll give you new shiny stuff because you passed the test. Sorry God, but I think Job would have rather his children not have been killed, unless you're implying human beings are just interchangeable chattel to be killed or given just to prove a point.
5. It's so long, cutting half of it should count, but: Psalms. Seriously, get an editor already. Maybe I just don't like Hebrew poetry, maybe we've heard the Psalms so much that they just sound trite, but enough already. Go find something else, even Proverbs, to chant antiphonally if that's your thing. Sure, there are some good ones, and others that have good bits, but a good content editing could make the whole thing much better.
--------------------
“Therefore, let it be explained that nowhere are the proprieties quite so strictly enforced as in men’s colleges that invite young women guests, especially over-night visitors in the fraternity houses.” Emily Post, 1937.
Posts: 6849 | From: The People's Republic of Balcones | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
mousethief: Although by word count, I'm willing to bet that most of their dialogue is about Boaz.
Granted, but I like Ruth 1:16–17. It's a nice expression of commitment.
BTW Does your earlier calculation show that Protestants are slightly better on this one than Catholics? Hah!
Hehe ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
And I agree completely on the "expression of commitment" -- I'd add "and love." It's one of the most beautiful passages in Scripture regarding (non-sexual) love between two persons.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mousethief: And I agree completely on the "expression of commitment" -- I'd add "and love." It's one of the most beautiful passages in Scripture regarding (non-sexual) love between two persons.
Seconded. I'm still curious what the passages in Mark and Luke are that pass the Bechdel test.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
mousethief: And I agree completely on the "expression of commitment" -- I'd add "and love." It's one of the most beautiful passages in Scripture regarding (non-sexual) love between two persons.
Seconded. I'm still curious what the passages in Mark and Luke are that pass the Bechdel test.
What I found (that others have posted online), and they both seem ridiculous, are:
Luke: Mary and Elizabeth talking about their respective foetuses
Mark: "Who will roll away the stone?"
[ 26. September 2013, 17:04: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mousethief: What I found (that others have posted online), and they both seem ridiculous, are:
Luke: Mary and Elizabeth talking about their respective foetuses
Mark: "Who will roll away the stone?"
I agree, neither are very convincing. Mary and Elizabeth are talking about their respective male foetuses. And the women in Mark are looking for a male body (Also, "Who will roll away the stone for us?" has a rather strong overtone of "Us ladies aren't strong enough" to it.)
I think I'm going to stick with Ruth.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Bible doesn't pass the Bechtel test as it is
I had to google what that was, but oh yes it does.
4 books out of 73 (Catholic canon) or 3 books out of 66 (Protestant canon). Not a great showing.
To be scrupulously fair, that's 4/37 or 3/33 once you discount the non-narrative books. And I'm not sure where one draws the line. Arguably Genesis should be redeemed by that bit where Rachel asks Leah for some mandrakes.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
And there's also the point that the narrative books of the Bible aren't actually all that full of direct speech. Yes, Queen Athaliah only utters two words, and that an exclamation, but that doesn't really set her apart from most of the monarchs of the two kingdoms.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
pererin: Arguably Genesis should be redeemed by that bit where Rachel asks Leah for some mandrakes.
Er... the part where Rachel wants the mandrakes of Leah's son and trades a night with her husband for them?
You'd have to stretch it quite a lot to call this 'not talking about a man'.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by roybart:
I'm not surprised that a number of posters have put 3 John on their list. But I would be saddened to see it go. It's a tiny slice of life from the small Christian world of the 1st century -- the sort of letter one might come upon in a dusty attic, lodged and partly hidden at the back of an old desk drawer.
"John" is very human in this little bit of text. He encourages his friend and kvetches about an apparent trouble-maker. He thinks out loud about how he will handle the situation. It could be one of us, which is its special value.
quote:
I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will not welcome us. So when I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, spreading malicious nonsense about us. Not satisfied with that, he even refuses to welcome other believers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.
I love this defense of 3 John and I agree that anything that gives us a little slice of life is valuable for making it all more real.
I agree with Trudy about Esther. Please. Give us two whole books.
All I would ask is that Revelation, and all the fuss, worry, schisms, bad novels and David Koresh types it has caused, was gone.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charles Had a Splurge on
Shipmate
# 14140
|
Posted
Genesis:
If we got rid of this, there would be no YECcies
Jeremiah:
Moan after moan after moan. I’d have left him in prison.
Matthew:
Because the birth story clashes with Luke’s, and I’d rather not have to deal with that in the Nativity play every year. And let’s face it: it’s weird. What about the multiple resuscitations at the time of the resurrection? It disturbs me (although maybe that’s a good reason to keep it).
Romans:
The one of Paul’s writings that has been so twisted over the years. And it would force a lot of preachers to broaden their horizons.
Revelation:
I know it gives hope to the persecuted, but also succour to the wackos. How much time has been wasted trying to set the date of something that isn’t going to happen (certainly, not as in the popular imagination).
--------------------
"But to live outside the law, you must be honest" R.A. Zimmerman
Posts: 224 | From: What used to be Berkshire | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I'd just get rid of Acts - because i dislike it - and we have to sit through seemingly endless readings from it during Eastertide every year.
Why do you dislike it? Is it because of the portrayal of "the Jews"?
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I'd just get rid of Acts - because i dislike it - and we have to sit through seemingly endless readings from it during Eastertide every year.
Why do you dislike it? Is it because of the portrayal of "the Jews"?
I hadn't thought of that, initially, though that is a good reason to add to my dislikes. Plus the fact that the Lectionary kicks out the OT in its favour and, when we get to the end of it, the Daily Office lectionary makes us read it all over again as if once wasn't enough.
My main dislike is that it seems top be about heroics. Brave missionaries converting hundreds in one go. i can't believe it was like that at all.
I would be tempted to say that it idealises the early church except that factions are all too obvious.
On moving to a new teaching post, I inherited four O level RE classes for whom it was a set text so I had to mug up on it in order to get these kids through the exam before I could introduce a more relevant syllabus. The scholarship I found about Acts suggested it was idealised, confirming my hunches. The kids certainly didn't, for the most part, think that they were encountering history.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
VDMA
Apprentice
# 17846
|
Posted
What a blasphemous thread this is... I'm sorry, but this is the Word of God. We're not free to take anything out, so this is just an exercise in hubris. God planned these holy scriptures from beyond Eternity, for our edification. Numbers may be boring and Proverbs may sound like an old grandfather going on and on, but there are no untruths.
Sheesh... one does not just remove books from the eternal word of God. Martin Luther can be excused because technically the Church didn't define the canon until after he died.
If I had to choose, I'd say Paralipomenon/Chronicles would be out, at least. They rehash Kings & Samuel quite a lot.
I wonder who'd have the gusto to remove the Psalms...
Edit: never mind the above comment. If you can take out Matthew (which does not contradict Luke in any way), you can pretty much justify taking out anything.
[ 28. September 2013, 20:36: Message edited by: VDMA ]
--------------------
Des Christen Herz auf Rosen geht, wenn's mitten unterm Kreuze steht.
Feel free to visit the Anglican Forums: http://forums.anglican.net/
Posts: 29 | From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
