MennoNet.com

Valerie wrote:

MaxPC wrote:Everyone to whom I've recommended Luke were very happy with that as a starter.
YMMV

I was really torn between Matthew & Luke- I love Luke- I think it also would be a good place to start- it just made more sense to me though to start with Matthew & read on through-

I didn't answer the poll. I think it would depend on how much they knew, if they were Jew or Gentile, and how interested they were. Mark is shorter, so if someone is only mildly interested, that's what I would suggest. Matthew for Jews, and Luke for most everyone else. But over all, Luke. It is by far the longest, so it has the fullest explanation for who Jesus is in terms of a historical character. Also, it was written by a non-Jew for a non-Jew. I translated Luke first for the Indian language, in fact, that is the only Gospel we were able to give them. (Most translators choose Mark, simply because it is shortest, and so more manageable as a first book.) But ultimately, Luke was the 'providential' choice, because later the Luke film was created, so we were able to dub that into the native language. (The Luke film is basically a much longer form of the Jesus film, in English containing every word of the entire book. We had to leave out some parts because it takes longer to say the same thing in that language.) John is more theological, and has more difficult concepts. I think that the story line of the Scripture is most helpful for first time readers.

The Sermon on the Mount is so key to understanding the New Testament. And yet the New Tribes Mission say you can't teach by jumping in at the middle - they teach chronologically through the Old Testament before getting to the birth, life, teachings, and death of Jesus. They maintain that you need to start at the beginning so that everything makes sense. That method would have to be a guided process.

The Sermon on the Mount makes more sense if you have a basic understanding of what came before. Jesus' teaching "It has been said .. but I say unto you .." only makes sense if you have an idea of what He is referring to.

This is not exactly on topic, but the thread reminded me of an odd encounter yesterday morning in a parking lot. A black man in his fifties hailed me and headed toward me with his arms open. As we hugged, I asked if I knew him. He said yes, and I asked if he used to come to our Bible clubs. Yes, he said, and proceeded to tell me of an incident many years ago. He said my brother had given him counsel on some subject, and showed him in the Bible where the truth was. "But", he said, "There was nothing in the pages." I suggested the more we read Scripture, the more we will will understand it.""NO, you don't understand," he protested. "The pages were blank!" I urged him, as his buddy yelled at him to get in the car, to go back to Scripture, and if necessary, have someone read the Bible to him.

I can't verify the authenticity of his story, but it sure reminded me of the verse from II Cor.4, (and also the preceding chapter)
2Co 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
2Co 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Nobody picked Mark (including me).

Why?

The Gospel of John. I believe John emphasizes the love of God through Jesus Christ. My second choice would be Mark, then Romans. One can get little booklets of the Gospel of John through the Pocket Testament League. Years ago I gave them out to the guys I would golf with at the end of the golf round. I made a little personal invite I glued in to the front cover offering to talk further whenever and wherever they may chose to and left my phone number.

Aside from Genesis, I would not recommend the OT or the Book of the Revelation for beginning readers.

Bootstrap wrote:Nobody picked Mark (including me).

Why?

I did, sorta'. (If the person was only mildly interested.) It moves, constant action, with the key word 'immediately'. Some Hippie's I did Bible study with back in those days thought that Jesus ascended up out of the water after his baptism, because the KJV says 'straightway'. (THEY insisted on using the KJV, not me.)

Bootstrap wrote:Nobody picked Mark (including me).

Why?

It's not a Pentecost forum:

Mark 16:17-18King James Version (KJV)

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Valerie wrote:

Bootstrap wrote:Nobody picked Mark (including me).

Why?

It's not a Pentecost forum:

Mark 16:17-18King James Version (KJV)

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Do Pentecostals still believe in snake-handling, or have they cut back to just speaking in tongues?

Josh wrote:Do Pentecostals still believe in snake-handling, or have they cut back to just speaking in tongues?

It was always a small number of Pentecostals who did this, but it's alive and well in the hills of Kentucky, where I am right now visiting my mother (who just had surgery). Not in this county, I don't think, but I think there are a couple of churches that do this in the next county over.

Bootstrap wrote:

Josh wrote:Do Pentecostals still believe in snake-handling, or have they cut back to just speaking in tongues?

It was always a small number of Pentecostals who did this, but it's alive and well in the hills of Kentucky, where I am right now visiting my mother (who just had surgery). Not in this county, I don't think, but I think there are a couple of churches that do this in the next county over.

That certainly sounds more exciting than the Pentecostal services I visit.

Regardless, I don't think we said "no" to Mark because we are "afraid" of tongues, anymore than we are "afraid" of drinking poison or handling live snakes in our church services. We just all happened to like another book better.