Reddit mentions: The best christian bible handbooks

> It's also bizarre that Matthew would rely so heavily on a non-eyewitness account (moreso than Luke!) when he himself was an eyewitness (according to tradition

Yes, but Mark got his information from Peter. Its a secondhand account, yes, but Matthew would have no reason to doubt the veracity of it.

>Mark 5:1

Yes, you are correct, but we do not know what the original manuscript said. The early manuscripts we have use Gerasenes, but later manuscripts may have been using even earlier manuscripts, which may have the Gadarenes term. Additionally, 2,000 years ago, there may have been a small lake near Gerasenes. I admit, though, the reasons I have provided for this particular case are weak (I am no scholar), but still plausible.

> Mark 6

A tetrarch is a king of the fourth sector of a region, but he is nonetheless a king. Its not an error, he's just cutting right to the point.

>prophecies

A more natural reading would be "as the prophets said", but, from the many manuscripts we have, most (not all) only mention Isaiah. Again, though, Malachi and Isaiah prophesized the same event, carrying the same meanings. The oracles of Malachi really appear in Isaiah, just in greater detail.

It should be noted that we are applying 21st century stylistic approaches in writing to 1st century ancient Greek, and certain conventions that are expected in modern dialogue are sometimes completely absent altogether in Greco-Roman biographies (the accepted genre of the gospels).
> Moses and Joseph

I hold that there is no error with the "For Moses said. . .". Yes, they were the words of the Lord, not Moses, but Moses still said them when he told the people of Israel. Additionally, though Matthew does not mention the Joseph purchase on the Sabbath, that doesn't discredit anything. "Curiously. . .", as you said, yes, but does not have to mean an error or contradiction.

I personally think the thing we need to keep in mind when we critically analyze the texts, (which I think is a good thing), is the genre the writers wrote in (1st century Greco-Roman biographies), and I think many apparent contradictions or errors are found in all Greco-Roman biographies (specifically Plutarch, but others as well) when we apply certain conventions from modern day, and, in reality, they are not errors at all as they were read in their time.

Additionally, I don't know what sources you use, but if you would like to see some better response than mine on apparent contradictions, I would recommend This book. It is certainly told from theologians, yes, but they provide multiple explanations and weakness of their explanations on most all alleged contradictions. They are pretty conservative when it comes to the divine inspiration of the scriptures, but I do feel they do a good job providing academic responses, and it very convincing to me, who has read some of Bart Erhmans stuff (but not all). I would like to tell you that I am a Christian, who has doubts about his faith before, but have done a lot of personal research on both sides of the argument. In my opinion, I do believe that the message of the bible is divinely inspired. So that's my bias and personal horizon in this conversation. Thanks for talking with me, it motivated me to look deeper into things ;)

Congratulations! That's fantastic.

I've not been to seminary myself (although maybe in a few years . . . . ), but I did major in Biblical languages as an undergrad, teach in a joint program with my local seminary and have a number of freinds who are seminary faculty. My recommendations based on that:

• Academically, I think the best thing you can do is learn the Greek alphabet before you start Greek I. Both writing and pronunciation.
  That alone will give you a big head start. I'd also encourage you to get started on the languages right away.
  
• My college roommate now teaches theology at one of the RTS campuses. When my brother-in-law started seminary, I asked him for a recommendation for a gift. He recommended Kelly Kapic's A Little Book for New Theologians: Why and How to Study Theology
  
• From what I gather, many seminarians struggle with maintaining personaly devotion/piety in seminary. A book about spiritual discipline, such as Kent Hugh's Disciplines of a Godly Man could be beneficial.

Yes, the Good News Bible is a good beginner's translation. You should also check out the Contemporary English Version (CEV) which is even simpler than the Good News Bible. I think either one of these will help you.

A good beginner's introduction to the Bible is this one from Stephen Miller.

I think the '600+ page book' answering bible contradictions and Bible difficulties he mentions is 'The Big Book of Bible Difficulties' by Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe. It's literally sitting on my bookshelf a meter behind me. I had more or less the same feeling reading it at the time of my faith - it's well down the list of quality apologetics books I've ever read, even though it is one of the few that attempts to address specific textual and exegetical issues head on.

Glancing through it now, it seems to miss the point. There are foundational issues with the text that are mostly glossed over (although it does acknowledge some of the blazingly obvious copying errors in the Masoretic Text that lead to contradictions between e.g Samuel and Chronicles, it mostly ignores not only the implications of that but also how that creates issues with the Chronicler's reliance on the older sources like, probably, Samuel and proto-texts), it doesn't even discuss slavery stuff, skirts over Mosaic authorship with arguments from within the text itself (i.e. the text says it was by Moses, and then a priori excludes the possibility of pseudepigraphs or just people lying), and, of course, nowhere gets to the point of dealing with the central issue "So, EVEN IF we admitted all these contradictions were reconcilable, how does that demonstrate God wrote it?" And that's just the OT!

As a Christian, I never read Geisler's book much, because it didn't seem to answer the most important questions, and most of the time all it ever did for the rest was admit the possibility of a solution, without actually making it likely. When a true-believing Christian, that's enough. When you're doubting, it's really not.

And some of the difficulties are just dumb. Like, referring to Ecclesiastes: is laughter good or bad? Is that really the battlefield of Bible contradictions? These sorts of things barely scratch the surface of the unease many of us, and many Christians, have when trying to justify belief in this as an inerrant, harmonious text of divine writ.

> I guess I'm just looking for an accompanying book that can help guide me through?

"What The Bible Is All About" by Henrietta Mears is quite popular

This book covers the major world religions, without bias.
World Religions Book

Also, here’s some historical reading on the Bible, if you want a good companion to understanding it, apart from any misconceptions your family may have.
The Complete Guide to the Bible

I honestly think the your husband needs to read more books, on theology, church administration, history, everything.

He is stuck at that Dunning-Kruger sweetspot where he thinks he knows everything and that he is literally the first person in history to have thought what he thought. Well, he's not.

Make him read a basic theology textbook and do not let him touch his bank account until he has literally read it cover to cover.

New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties

The Big Book of Bible Difficulties: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation

My two go to books are my Bible college textbooks. Moody Handbook of theology
and Basic Theology by Charles Riley. both available on Kindle.

Dumb chart is dumb (though it is visually appealing).

http://www.amazon.com/Big-Book-Bible-Difficulties-Revelation/dp/0801071585/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289580537&sr=1-2

Seriously though, do you honestly believe that in 2000 years of the Church being around, no one has bothered to answer these? Are you just like the supah-enlightened one bringing da troof to the idiotic, slobbering masses? Or just someone who hasn't bothered to do his homework?

I'm actually surprised that you think we'll take anything Sam Harris has written on religion seriously. The man's profoundly out of his depth on the matter, and wouldn't be able to differentiate an exegesis from the Exodus.