Kitsu has decided that she’s going to spend a year reading the bible, little by little, using a schedule devised by Bible Study Tools Online. Her husband is going to do it, too. And they’re going to discuss it each night once they’ve both done the reading. It should be interesting…
- Luke 5:27-39
- Genesis 1:1-2:25
- Psalms 1:1-6
Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners – Luke 5:30
New wine must be poured into new wineskins! – Luke 5:38
The sun to rule over the day and the moon to rule over the night – Genesis 1:16
Woman is her name becuase she was taken out of man – Genesis 2:23
[Happy People] succeed in everything they do – Psalms 1:3
(Happy people read “they” in the text, but do to context, this appears to be the meaning of “They” as far as Kitsu can tell…)
A Chat with the Husband Later…
The chatting part of this adventure is going to be the part that is the most fun. The Nut (He’s specifically Valk’s Nut, which you’ll understand once his Blog is up and running and I link it in one of these posts. The short version is that this is what I’m calling the Husband in these posts) and I started talking about the Psalm, and the interesting twist of meaning. I also told him about the fact that some variations of translation do imply that the “happy” might be translated as “devote” or “religious”.
From there we got into Luke, which was a story that the Nut loved, and I hadn’t encountered directly. I did encounter it in today’s sermon, though, so it was a nice stroke of luck that let me understand the sermon a bit better. The bit I quoted above from 5:30 is actually the piece of it that was also directly quoted in the Sermon.
Then we moved on to talking about Genesis, which is always interesting. The Nut contends that it’s two variations on the creation story (citing the differences of ordering as his primary evidence). I’m leaning towards it being one story, first the reader’s digest version followed by an up close and more detailed version in full text. I attribute the differences of order to that the texts are so old, and traveled by word of mouth for so long before they were written down. In all honesty, I suspect either interpretation has some validity. Some of the difference could even be chalked up to targeting different groups and needing different variations to appeal to them.
Then we moved onto Genesis, where we quickly became fixated on the fact that the word “Man” is taken from “Woman” in english, and thus the language change seems to have stripped a certain amount from the text here. Man is “Aish” in transliterated hebrew, while Woman is “Ashe”. So we still don’t see it, but I suspect there might be something in the characters that we’re missing simply because we don’t know how to read hebrew script. Given a chance, I think we might have to ask Pastor (who’s also the Nut’s Father).