Why do some religious people not read the religious text/texts in full?

[oatmilkcoffee]

I’m going to preface this by saying I have ASD so my way of viewing things may very well be rigid. I am not religious but am not looking to bash religion nor people for being religious. I want to understand and can’t ask my family as it is a very contentious issue to bring up with them now that I am adult who has left the faith.

I grew up in a very religious family. Very few of my family, including extended family, have read the Bible in full. As for how I know this, because they have said things here and there over the years that they haven’t. They go to church, and they rely on the sermons to teach them the Bible. However church sermons only teach certain passages, and reading the Bible in its entirety is a completely different experience. I have read the Bible as I am a very literal thinker and needed to understand what it was I was being told was the truth. As a teenager I read it cover to cover (in this case, the New International Version). As the Bible was taught to me as the literal Word of God, and therefore infallible, it was very eye-opening.

With Christianity for example, I understand that back in the day, people were largely illiterate and relied upon the church to tell them what the scriptures said. These days that isn’t the case. As for lack of time, I understand that life can be very hectic, but I would think to someone who is religious, that this would be important and therefore a priority to understand the Word of God?

If you are a Christian but haven’t read the Bible in full, why not? I know that the only thing that makes a person a Christian is their belief in Jesus as their Saviour, but isn’t it important to have first-hand knowledge of the Bible as a Christian?

This can also apply to other religions but I’m not familiar with them to speak about, which is why I’m using Christianity for my examples, but the question also applies to other religious faiths as well.

I hope this hasn’t been offensive, and I’m not trying to be at all goady. From my perspective I can’t understand it so other people’s perspectives would be helpful.

it IS a bit mad😆

Apocrypals is an enjoyable podcast by two American blokes who discuss the books of the bible and biblical apocrypha - their other passion is comic books and the extended universes of various sci-fi worlds. Long winded but fun, also serious and respectful. As with every biblical commentator, and with some bits of the bible, I don't always agree!.

apocrypals.libsyn.com/website

@invisiblecat I don't believe Creation was six literal 24-hour days either (I'm a scientist), although since God can do anything he could do it in that time if He so wanted to. I believe the six days are more akin to six eras of time.

You might enjoy this - I came across a stunning presentation of the evolution of the Universe as it relates to Christianity and God yesterday, by a Canadian astrophysicist. He shows that the Universe and humanity aren't just random things. It's all very carefully designed for very many reasons he explains.

For me, the Creation isn't a hill to die on, it's not a salvific issue, i.e. belief in it exactly as written isn't essential for salvation. However it's a really interesting topic. Personally I am intrigued by the dinosaurs!

I've read the gospels, the acts of the apostles and the revelation. I don't particularly feel the need to read the old testament beyond the book of exodus, and I read that largely because it's a bloody good yarn...

The various bits of bible have different purposes. The earliest Christians will have been both Jewish converts who understood the OT thoroughly and Greek converts who knew only the stories of Jesus and the disciples- Luke and Acts- and the letters of Paul.

In the Old Testament there are books of Jewish law which aren’t relevant to being a Christian today, books of history which are of limited relevance (the story of God’s plan for the world, rather than individually relevant), books of poetry and song…

For me the New Testaments- the life of Jesus, the writings of his friends and followers across the next 100 years- are more relevant.
Writings of mystics and early theologians are also probably more relevant than the Old Testament, I think.

And I’m also inclined to trust my own sense of God’s direction, given that the books of the bible were heavily curated by a bunch of powerful men. I don’t assume they are the whole story- in fact I assume they are limited.

In my case I wasn’t at all hung up on chronology, I just chose that version for whatever reason at the time. I have no idea how certain the publishers are that it’s truly chronological. In answer to one of your questions though, yes it was repetitive at times. It would have the corresponding accounts all next to each other, eg for Jesus walking on water.. it has Matthew 14 version, followed by Mark 6 version, followed by John 6 version.

Isaiah and some other prophets are interspersed with Kings and Chronicles, the Psalms are interspersed throughout several books too, and yes the NT has John 1 1-5 as pretty much the starting point. Hope that helps!

Thanks - it sounds interesting.

Let's just leave it shall we? They were rhetorical questions anyway. 🙂

I genuinely think all that 'begat' stuff in Genesis puts some people off reading the Old Testament, or possibly reading the Bible at all. Genuinely don't see the point I'm afraid.

I did a start to finish exercise of reading the bible out loud this year, and the one bit I just edited out was the allocation of territories to tribes with several generations leaders named in each case. I just noted what they were and left it at that. In future I'll also leave out some of the stuff about the tent and (later) the temple. I can understand why the recital of genealogies was important at the time of writing for the people who were still related to them (in fact or in legend), but now not so much.

I do find the genealogy of Jesus interesting in that the few women listed were all known for what would have been seen as sexually transgressive behavior.

When i used to read the lesson in church, I used to dread getting the lists of tribes. Unpronounceable and hard to make interesting or relevant..

What do you feel is the best response to sexist teaching? Personally I would have left (noisily) and slammed the door as I went out! And I would have either contacted him direct or complained about it higher up in his church. Some churches endorse sexist interpretations of the bible, though. In that case, best to go to a different church - one that as a minimum has women clergy and a better spiritual approach.

I'm a Carholic.

Catholicism is a prima scriptura religion. This means scriptura is the primary source of divine revelation, but not the only source. It is the source against which all other elements are tested and is above all other sources. The other elements of revelation include tradition, human intellect, divine communication, conscience, charismatic gifts, mystical insights (no particular order there and I may have missed some).

The liturgical year features readings from Old and New Testaments and Psalms, plus a Gospel, every day of the year.

In an RC Mass, during the Liturgy of the Word (the first half of the service), there is a first reading from the OT (Genesis, Exodus, prophets, Wisdom, and others that are not springing to mind right now) a psalm, and then a second reading, from the NT letters of Paul or the apostles or sometimes a little from Revelation, followed by a Gospel (NT) or Matthew, Mark, or Luke. The readings from OT and NT are in the Lectionary, not read directly from a Bible. The Lectionary contains a huge amount of the Bible in the form of "pericopes" (from the Greek for "section / cutting"), reflecting pre Reformation and mainstream protestant Christian tradition.

There are three-year cycles during which a huge amount of the OT and NT will be read aloud at Mass. We are currently nearing the end of Year B, reading the Gospel of Mark and some of John.

Cycle C will start up on the first Sunday of Advent this year, and will feature the Gospel of Luke for the most part. Beginning in Advent 2025, we will hear mostly Matthew. The Gospel of John is mainly read around Easter in every cycle.

In the sermon/ homily, the priest usually ties the readings, psalm, and gospel together, elucidating the central theme. Some priests are better homilists than others.

So as a RC, if I pay attention at Mass, I'll hear the entire Lectionary over the course of three years, which contains the essence of the Christian tradition and beliefs. I've personally read the entire Bible through (Douai version) and probably won't read it again.

This gives a summary of how much of which books feature in the Lectionary. Some of the stuff that doesn't feature is the repetitions and recaps that can make reading the whole bible an exercise in patience. Some of it is stuff that the compilers decided to disapprove of for other reasons - they are scared of Judith!

https://catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/Statistics.htm

As I said before, I love the universality of it. Every churchgoing Catholic in the world, whatever their circumstances, will be reading/hearing about fidelity and marriage and the value of children as people and church members this Sunday.

This is one of many online resources for accessing and thinking about the readings (and the bible more generally), with the link set for this Sunday.

www.agapebiblestudy.com/Sunday_Readings/Sunday_Readings.php?Sunday_Doc=Ordinary_Time/Ordinary_Time_27_b

Some Christian denominations are religions of the word. Catholicism is rooted in apostolic tradition handed down from Peter to the Pope today. There is a lot of Catholicism that isn't in the bible.

I have listened the bible through twice and the catechism in full once (now midway on that again then will go back to the bible).

I don't take all of the bible literally but I do think it's divinely inspired and put here to help us.

I think you should take texts in context so don't rely on one bit of the bible if your interpretation goes against what was in the rest of that book. But I do recognise that it's not one coherent whole and was written by many people over a very long time.

I obviously think knowing the bible is a good thing for those of faith and no faith. So much of our language and cultural landscape is based on it.

I seriously considered walking out, I have to say!

It was a few years ago and I doubt it would happen now, the current minister is a woman.