• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Abrahamics Only - Which is the Most Difficult Book?

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Same faith debates.

For Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is and other believers in Abrahamic scripture, which book do you struggle most with? I'm thinking mostly in terms of the individual books in the biblical canon (whichever books yours includes), but also including Islamic and Baha'i scripture. Is there any book that is particularly hard for you to grasp, study or otherwise read, like, or accept?

I've mentioned to others that I have issues with Esther. I struggle with its historicity.

How about you?
 
Qur'an is for me the best and easiest of all the scriptures, and no particular writing or surah (division / chapter) in it seems to be difficult, it also may count as "One Book" just like a single book of the Bible, rather than the whole Bible which is thought to be a compilation of Books from different authors and times.

The most difficult book for me in the Bible is Leviticus. It is pretty straightforward and clear though, which I approve of tremendously, but the justifications or understanding for why it is asking for this or that, that is where it becomes a little harder for me and confusing or disturbing. If one doesn't try to read into it much and just accepts that God is seemingly asking for all these very specific weird things without thinking about it or trying to make sense of it, then it might not be such an issue.

The other one I might have trouble with is Judges and maybe Ezekiel. Again for the reasons of justifications or understanding what is meant by the imagery or whatever or how the things are being presented or how and if they are being interpreted as good somehow or noble or whatever.

Job is great for a study of archaic Semitic language and thought I think, and Genesis is more enjoyable in its Septuagint Greek reading perhaps as a kind of alternative mythological account of things, I think the Hebrew of it might seem awkward or confusing due to it potentially being quite ancient and with certain references to very old concepts and terminology that might not translate quite as well with newer meanings and applications that were used in later times as those words continued to be used and take on different meanings.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
The so called apocalyptic scriptures in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament exemplified by the book of Revelation and Daniel.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
The most difficult book for me in the Bible is Leviticus. It is pretty straightforward and clear though, which I approve of tremendously, but the justifications or understanding for why it is asking for this or that, that is where it becomes a little harder for me and confusing or disturbing. If one doesn't try to read into it much and just accepts that God is seemingly asking for all these very specific weird things without thinking about it or trying to make sense of it, then it might not be such an issue.

True, Leviticus (Wayiqra) is really a technical manual, and it's no wonder kids start with that in Judaism, because it takes so long to really grasp is. By comparison the other four "books of Moses" are far more easier to read and understand, although the average person may not grasp all the inter-textual details going on.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Qur'an is for me the best and easiest of all the scriptures, and no particular writing or surah (division / chapter) in it seems to be difficult, it also may count as "One Book" just like a single book of the Bible, rather than the whole Bible which is thought to be a compilation of Books from different authors and times.

With the Qur'an, well on a general level all of it's central themes are easy to grasp I guess, but penetrating into it's very vast meanings and intricacies is something that takes a lot of hard studying etc.

One of the best descriptions of the Qur'an I heard once was as follows (paraphrasing): "The Qur'an is a book for all people, from the scientist and philosopher, to the mystic, to the mother and her child, to the father and the layman, it is a book which operates within all those areas (and more)"
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Same faith debates.

For Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is and other believers in Abrahamic scripture, which book do you struggle most with? I'm thinking mostly in terms of the individual books in the biblical canon (whichever books yours includes), but also including Islamic and Baha'i scripture. Is there any book that is particularly hard for you to grasp, study or otherwise read, like, or accept?

I've mentioned to others that I have issues with Esther. I struggle with its historicity.

How about you?
Revelation. It seems nuts.
 
Much to my shame the entire Hebrew Bible :(
I think people who have praised the Bible are generally biased towards it, I think that its literary quality is not that great overall, that it isn't apparently a collection of great Genius or anything, but people have (mainly thanks to Christianity) made a huge fuss over it due to it being part of their religion. It wasn't great, I don't even think its purpose was to be great even, but people just said its great over and over until the next bunch kept up the tradition of saying how great it is.

I think the reason you might have trouble with it is that it is of a poor literary quality, it is a hodge podge, slap dash, unrefined collection of writings that have gone through a lot. Other very old Semitic writings and stuff are also very messed up and confusing and weird, and compared to those the Bible actually might be better, but that isn't saying much overall.

My point is, the reason it is bad, is people exaggerated when they said it was good, I don't even think it was meant to be "The Words of God" when it was written or collected, it doesn't appear to be that really, but now for a long time people have treated it that way and as if it is. Its like if someone took some ancient scraps of different writings, cobbled them together, and then in the future people started to revolve around it and go Aummm look at these Holy Words from On High, or if someone started deifying and glorifying some comic book pages or something.

Compare it to the Qur'an and see if you have as much trouble, and anyone in their right mind (in my opinion) will see that one book is far more easy and clear than the other, and one book presents itself as if it is God or something bigger than Muhammed speaking to Muhammed, whereas the other books are not seemingly doing that at all mainly. Even if the Qur'an is a big fraud, it seems to be better as writing, as poetry, as musical, as informative, as clear, etc. People hate it just because its new and different by their standards, they aren't looking at it in a serious comparison, they've deemed it a fraud from a perverse false Prophet and that is the end of that, not even caring how much it is better than the Bible and better for children to read than the Bible and sterilized in such a way that there is no really easy mistake to make concerning God as there might be in the very up and down and left and right confusing Bible complication or patchwork.

Though, the Bible isn't THAT hard. It is Hard if it is taken as a true book of guidance, because it is so much more and so little of that, it wasn't made apparently as a book of guidance, and it scarcely seems useful as a clear guide that if followed would be beneficial truly (it doesn't appear to actually be very Universal or Beneficial overall, or even pragmatic or sensible in many people, and carries a whole range of notions and ideas and opinions which seem to differ somewhat at least).

What isn't hard really, is just taking it at face value, or even as some of the literalists might, that "it is what it is, it says what it says" and not really questioning it beyond that, and taking whatever it says and going with it as much as one can. It feels weird or doesn't make sense (in my opinion) because its bad, badly written, and someone might be expecting more or something different or something better, since they heard all the fuss and praise and "this is it? what the heck is this anyway?".

So, I think what may have caused you difficulty in your reading of the Bible is that you thought it should be better really, or at least give some clear steps and guidance, but its just not giving you a point for point clear message with clear points, so it is not meeting your expectations, and so all you're left doing is resisting throwing it in the bin, since its still one of the most fussed over books in all human history at this point, even though it could be like a collection of TV commercials from the 60s and 80s taped together and on top of each other.
 
With the Qur'an, well on a general level all of it's central themes are easy to grasp I guess, but penetrating into it's very vast meanings and intricacies is something that takes a lot of hard studying etc.

One of the best descriptions of the Qur'an I heard once was as follows (paraphrasing): "The Qur'an is a book for all people, from the scientist and philosopher, to the mystic, to the mother and her child, to the father and the layman, it is a book which operates within all those areas (and more)"

That is true, I'm sure a lot of people miss out on the potential depth in the Qur'an by just glossing over things really quickly instead of investigating the words and choices of words and their particular placements as events in the structure and writing, and whoever looks into that, generally derives a huge amount more, which makes the Qur'an all the more impressive and fascinating and seem much more alien than anything any human has ever mustered so far among famously known writings.

Quite frankly, the Bible seems like it was written by cave-men and lunatics, the Hadiths seem like they were written by people who didn't know the Qur'an too deeply or well a lot of the time, and the Qur'an seems like it was written by honest to goodness freaking sci-fi aliens for real.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
That is true, I'm sure a lot of people miss out on the potential depth in the Qur'an by just glossing over things really quickly instead of investigating the words and choices of words and their particular placements as events in the structure and writing, and whoever looks into that, generally derives a huge amount more, which makes the Qur'an all the more impressive and fascinating and seem much more alien than anything any human has ever mustered so far among famously known writings.

Quite frankly, the Bible seems like it was written by cave-men and lunatics, the Hadiths seem like they were written by people who didn't know the Qur'an too deeply or well a lot of the time, and the Qur'an seems like it was written by honest to goodness freaking sci-fi aliens for real.

Yes, I fully agree
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Revelation. It seems nuts.

Maybe it is?

Well taken from the Protestant view, the Apocalypse of St John is a book written on acid meant to turn people into insane, militant zombies. THE END IS HERE THE END IS HERE REPENT VOTE TRUMP THE END IS HERE JESUS IS COMING BACK!!!!

Taken from the Catholic and Orthodox view, it's more Preterist and symbolic view, mainly just a book about doctrine told from a transhistorical POV wherein both the book of Genesis and common views of eschatology are evoked to make certain doctrinal points.
 
True, Leviticus (Wayiqra) is really a technical manual, and it's no wonder kids start with that in Judaism, because it takes so long to really grasp is. By comparison the other four "books of Moses" are far more easier to read and understand, although the average person may not grasp all the inter-textual details going on.

The Tripitaka seems to start with the Vinaya Pitaka or rules for monks, which may be sort of reminiscent of Leviticus due to being rules, but the rules seem to at least somewhat make more sense maybe.

Bhikkhu Pāṭimokkha (rules for male monks)
Bhikkhunī Pāṭimokkha (rules for female monks)

Here is Leviticus
part 1 :1-17:10
Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 1:1-17:10 - King James Version
part 2 17:10-27:34
Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 17:10-27:34 - King James Version

I'll throw in this
The Complete Hadith - All 9 Volumes in one PDF

and more relevantly perhaps:
The 613 Commandments (Mitzvot)

being what some writers determined were what they considered the 613 commandments derived from the scriptures for the Jewish people

Those 4 sets of rules being extremely influential, and these also:
Zoroastrian dietary laws, animal friendship and stewardship

The Zoroastrians may have influenced the seemingly OCD traditions and ritualism of the Jewish people.

Zoroastrian Daily Life – PRACTICES and CUSTOMS

Even though I'm against suicide, some of these nutcase levels of rule-making and prohibitions make suicide seem like it might not be as bad in comparison to living like a person with severely inhibiting mental health issues. Yeah, I said it, Obsessive Compulsive Religion SUCKS. It will make a person go mad and make them despise God as well, unwarranted, since God at best only imposed such as a punishment or a mockery of whoever would follow such pedantic, insipid, and tedious rules and regulations. I freaking already hate all the rules they have made about which trash bins to throw what in and that it should be this way or that way and blah blah blah, FREAKING HECK!

"The duty list of a Zoroastrian is given in two texts Faraziyāt Nāmeh by Dastur Darab Pahlan of Navsari and Benedictions for Iranian Marriages."

ZOROASTRIAN RITUALS – Encyclopaedia Iranica

Jain Monks - Rules of Conduct | Rules Conduct | Technology Trends

https://www.religioustolerance.org/...ikh,symbol The Khanda is the main Sikh symbol.

Even when it comes to the relaxation of rules but keeping important or useful restrictions, I think Islam or more specifically the Qur'an is the best (and not the Hadith) for sensible and easy to follow, helpful rules that also seem to fulfil the basic requirements of many others.

Menstruation and ritual purity
Greek religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions
https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2011/2011.01.07

This might be useful:
https://www3.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/purity.html

MORE IMPORTANT?:
http://kemetictemple.org/taboo.html...wiw-dog. 3) Its bwt is the menstruating woman.
 
Esther - Wikipedia

"Because the text lacks any references to known events, some historians believe that the narrative of Esther is fictional, and the name Ahasuerus is used to refer to a fictionalized Xerxes I, in order to provide an aetiology for Purim.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther#cite_note-24[j][k] Some historians additionally argue that, because the Persian kings did not marry outside of seven Persian noble families, it is unlikely that there was a Jewish queen Esther and that in any case the historical Xerxes's queen was Amestris.[16][17][l] However, Amestris herself did not descend from these families, and Darius I is also said to have married a woman who did not belong to them.[18] That being said, many Jews and Christians believe the story to be a true historical event, especially Persian Jews who have a close relationship to Esther.[19]"

"Xerxes could not have wed a Jewess because this was contrary to the practices of Persian monarchs who married only into one of the seven leading Persian families. History records that Xerxes was married to Amestris, not Vashti or Esther. There is no historical record of a personage known as Esther, or a queen called Vashti or a vizier Haman, or a high placed courtier Mordecai. Mordecai was said to have been among the exiles deported from Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, but that deportation occurred 112 years before Xerxes became king." (Littman 1975a:146)"

The Qur'an mentions a Haman as the Architect or someone asked by the Pharaoh to build a very big structure for the Pharoah to be able to communicate with God. People insult the Qur'an for this, saying "Ha! Haman was in the Bible as a Persian, and the stupid, dumb, Qur'an makes a Haman out to be someone working for Pharaoh who Pharaoh asks to build some huge structure!?

Hemiunu - Wikipedia

WOOT WOOT!

Yet, people think Moses was at a totally different time in History and that History has no record of him other than the Biblical scriptures and time frames people have made for them.

If one links Haman and the structure Pharaoh asked for as the world famous pyramid, that puts Moses way back, right at the time that a certain someone with the story of Moses may have popped up in stories. Nahhh, why should anyone try to figure out who that might be?!
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Same faith debates.

For Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is and other believers in Abrahamic scripture, which book do you struggle most with? I'm thinking mostly in terms of the individual books in the biblical canon (whichever books yours includes), but also including Islamic and Baha'i scripture. Is there any book that is particularly hard for you to grasp, study or otherwise read, like, or accept?

I've mentioned to others that I have issues with Esther. I struggle with its historicity.

How about you?
Book of Revelation.

Can you imagine how you would explain and describe 2020 with the mentality and world view of 2000 years ago? How would you explain an atomic bomb? Or a jet shooting a missile?
 
Top