Should I take up Bible study again, I'm a bit rusty. Where do I start?

I think it would be beneficial and I would start with the gospels.

Should I take up Bible study again, I'm a bit rusty. Where do I start?
I would suggest sitting down and taking an inventory of your life. Whatever things you have a desire to change, topics you have always been curious about, etc. Go on line to one of the bible websites (Bible.com is my favourite) and search for info. You will be more eager to read if you are reading something that interests you. There are often daily devotionals or reading plans already set up. You can see what works for you or take one of the suggested methods and modify it to suit your life. Lastly, but most importantly, pray and ask God to direct you to the scriptures most needed. I've done that and actually opened the bible and had my eyes fall on the exact scripture I needed at the time.
Reply:Start with "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Friedman.
Reply:O yes never stop


mattew
Reply:Start with the four gospels and then Psalms and then you will be prepared to read the rest of the Bible.
Reply:The best place to start is with John's Gospel and then the letter to the Romans.
Reply:Genesis 1:1
Reply:with the gospels, pray into them
Reply:Wherever takes your fancy! You might like to start at genesis and work your way through, or you might like to go and find some of the old stories you remember, like Joseph, King Solomon, David and Goliath, Samson and Delilah, Jesus' life - whatever you want! Or you could find things that will help you with whats going on in your life right now, I have a bible that has a list of problems you could be having, like divorce or lack of faith and that, and then tells you where you might find encouragement.


I'm glad you'd like to study the bible again, I do it every night with a pencil and loads of post-its, I have 'neat bibles' and then my one study bible with loads of underlining and scribbles and things sticking out! I find it a lot of fun - but some of the books are hard, like Leviticus and Deutronomy, but then you're so chuffed when you got through them and you can start on the stories! And there are things that I don't remember ever reading before - like when the Lord made Balaams donkey talk? And when there are stories about how women got inheritance and they were encouraged to own land and have their own businesses, and there were even female prophets, and we seem to have forgotten that and seem to think it's only men that were favoured! And how Gods name is YHVH, or Yahweh in Hebrew, the bible really is a fascinating collection of books!


edit - while King James bibles are more accurate (bear in mind the number of times the bible has been translated and changed) it would be easiest to start with a nice modern one just to get your head around it, but have an old one to compare any verses that interest you.
Reply:Yes, start with Proverbs for wisdom and then John for the Gospel.
Reply:Genesis 1:1
Reply:once apon a time,,,,,,,,
Reply:yeah, you should start from the beginning.
Reply:Excellent idea, off with the old and on with the new.
Reply:Yes you should ASAP and let me know how you get on. I am giving you a star for your very good question.
Reply:The canon of the Old Testament that Catholics use is based on the text used by Alexandrian Jews, a version known as the "Septuagint" and which came into being around 280 B.C. as a translation of then existing texts from Hebrew into Greek by 72 Jewish scribes (the Torah was translated first, around 300 B.C., and the rest of Tanach was translated afterward).





The Septuagint is the Old Testament referred to in the Didache or "Doctrine of the Apostles" (first century Christian writings) and by Origen, Irenaeus of Lyons, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian of Carthage, Justin Martyr, St. Augustine and the vast majority of early Christians who referenced Scripture in their writings. The Epistle of Pope Clement, written in the first century, refers to the Books Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, analyzed the book of Judith, and quotes sections of the book of Esther that were removed from Protestant Bibles.








In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision (see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide), and, frankly, to his own inner demons, removed those books from the canon that lent support to orthodox doctrine, relegating them to an appendix. Removed in this way were books that supported such things as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45), Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14), and intercession of angels as intermediaries (Tobit 12:12-15). Ultimately, the "Reformers" decided to ignore the canon determined by the Christian Councils of Hippo and Carthage.





The Latin Church in no way ignored the post-Temple rabbincal texts. Some Old Testament translations of the canon used by the Latin Church were also based in part on rabbinical translations, for example St. Jerome's 5th c. Latin translation of the Bible called the Vulgate.





The "Masoretic texts" refers to translations of the Old Testament made by rabbis between the 6th and 10th centuries; the phrase doesn't refer to ancient texts in the Hebrew language. Some people think that the Masoretic texts are the "original texts" and that, simply because they are in Hebrew, they are superior.





Some Protestants claim that the "Apocrypha" are not quoted in the New Testament so, therefore, they are not canonical.


Going by that standard of proof, we'd have to throw out Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Lamentations, Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah because none of these Old Testament Books are quoted in the New Testament.








But there is a bigger lesson in all this confusion over not only the canon but proper translation of the canon , especially considering that even within the Catholic Church there have been differing opinions by individual theologians about the proper place of the deuterocanonicals (not that an individual theologian's opinions count for Magisterial teaching!).


The lesson, though, is this: relying on the "Bible alone" is a bad idea; we are not to rely solely on Sacred Scripture to understand Christ's message. While Scripture is "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16-17), it is not sufficient for reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness.


It is the Church that is the "pillar and ground of Truth" (1 Timothy 3:15)!


Jesus did not come to write a book; He came to redeem us, and He founded a Sacramental Church through His apostles to show us the way.


It is to them, to the Church Fathers, to the Sacred Deposit of Faith, to the living Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit, and to Scripture that we must prayerfully look.
Reply:Start with prayer!!! Ask God to give you wisdom as you read. Then turn to John 1:1 and read through Acts and finish with Romans. Then go back to Genesis and read through. Read the Proverb chapter that corresponds with the day every morning. Remember, prayer in the most important part of process. :)
Reply:yes it's never too late to learn the truth
Reply:Start at the end, as Christ will do the same to the earth.





http://kingjbible.com/revelation/1.htm
Reply:With a can of WD40 perhaps?
Reply:You will not understand Revelation if you do not start at the beginning. Get a Strong's Concordance. I would read from a King James version. Good for you!