Ok, I just got done with Malachi and will be starting the New testament next year. For the mean time I will just be reading historical Christian literature and texts from the early church fathers. I've read it for a long time and have kinda gotten the beat of the drum that is the OT. I wonder what my impression of the NT will be since I've spent so much time reading the OT. And I wonder if I'll get more OT references in the NT and know what Christ is talking about.
Anyway, you don't have to reply to this, just wanted to state this.
Wish I could be this dedicated, good job user! Mind sharing your personal experience with us, any questions maybe?
Also it's a bit of a mainstream recommendation but, I can only recommend Augustine's City of God if you're looking for top tier writing of the early church fathers.
Jeremiah Turner
How long did it take you to read the OT?
Camden Perry
If you're going by the order "whole OT -> whole NT" I recommend taking a break in-between to read the deuterocanonical/"apocryphal" books. Whether you consider them inspired or not, they'll give you a good idea of how Jewish theology progressed up to the incarnation of God the Son, and as such may make more clear where some of the authors of the NT are coming from. And some of them, like Sirach and Wisdom, were very popular in the early Church at least.
Elijah Rivera
I could have done it in 4 months (I'm reading 10 chapters per day) but I'm a huge procrastinator and it took me 3 years. But this year I read more than any other year.
Owen Ross
From my experience, once thing you realise is that the whole Bible is kind of a story of a family that, to borrow a NT analogy, starts off as small as a mustard seed but grows into something insanely huge and influential on the world. A couple huge things stick out that kinda go over your head but once you notice it you end up being angry that you didn't notice but it's that all of the OT gifts are earthly. Instead of God giving the Jews the incentive of living in His presence for all eternity, instead He says He will take them to a land that is filled with milk and honey. He promises to make them win wars and win against their enemies. I think this is why some Jews became nihilists, like the Sadducees, or believed in reincarnation, like the Pharisees.
Evan Cox
Also, I've seen how big city of God is. Freaking huge m8!
Jacob Allen
I wasn't planning to read it but you convinced me to read it for educational purposes.
Christian Nguyen
Forgot to add, the OT does get a but repetitive and makes you think thank there's no hope for Israel. Like seriously!!!! The damn people can't go a half page without making God angry or something and this goes on from exodus to Malachi. They never learn! And God is angry for a large part of the OT at the different nations. He talks about the curses and blessings that will fall upon specific people and God isn't just focused on isreal. He also blessed other nations too and talks about how they too are holy. One interesting thing I found out is that the OT is just as focused on internal attitude as much as the NT is. For example after reading the gospels it can feel like Judaism is all about works but this isn't the case. When Paul talk's about circumcision of the heart, that's actually from Moses. As well as the commandment to love God with all your strength and being.
Grayson Wright
This table shows which books are deuterocanonical according to various traditions: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon#Canons_of_various_Christian_traditions It's actually pretty accurate, except it should be added that, concerning the Old Testament: - The books of 1, 2, 3 Meqabyan are difficult to find in proper English (or rather, one must buy a book to get them). Everything else can be found online however - the NRSV has all the Eastern Orthodox canon (which includes the Catholic canon) and books unique to other traditions such as 1 Enoch can be found online. - It's a lot of texts to read. Some of them, like Jubilees, are pretty long too. Don't feel too pressured to read all of them if you don't want to - at least read the Catholic deuterocanon, I would say.
concerning the New Testament: - Revelation's canonical status is "secondary" in everything but Western and Oriental Orthodox tradition. It wasn't recognized as canonical by the Byzantine churches until the 6th century, after the lectionary was put together, so it's not read liturgically except on Patmos and in a few monasteries; and in some tradition (the Armenian one I believe?) it wasn't even received as a Biblical text until the 12th century. - In the case of the Syriac/Assyrian tradition, the canonical status of 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation is pretty close to what one would call a Protestant approach to the deuterocanon. The texts were not received into the Bible until recently and are not read liturgically or used as sources of doctrine (however they are usually recognized as inspired if only because tradition makes it clear that the other churches have seen them as such, even the other churches within the Oriental Orthodox communion). - Texts that were once considered canonical by some councils but ended up not making it into the Bible or the present liturgy are: 1 and 2 Clement, the Apostolic Constitutions, the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas. It might be a good idea to read those immediately after the NT to see what the early Christians came up with, although some of those texts seem to be corrupted by heretical stuff so beware (but at least 1 Clement and the Didache seem to be uncorrupt).
