Is there any book you could not live without?
If war broke out tomorrow and you were drafted; what one book would you take?
>>7837323
Mein Kampf. To redpill as many to my side as possible
>>7837323
The Bible.
>>7837371
Good answer
The Master and Margarita
>>7837323
>Is there any book you could not live without?
No, I've worked on cultivating non-attachment towards my possessions and I think I've mostly succeeded.
>If war broke out tomorrow and you were drafted; what one book would you take?
Probably Laozi or Zhuangzi.
>>7837484
waiting for that centennial edition nigga
Leaves of Grass
The Art of The Deal
Confessions
Grendel
>>7837323
Mason and Dixon or The Essays of Montaigne
>>7837507
you probably fucking suck to be around, man
>>7837323
>If war broke out tomorrow and you were drafted; what one book would you take?
tolstoy's gospel innit
>>7837331
do you actually believe this?
>>7837673
I don't generally talk about these things except when directly asked to be honest.
>>7837371
Me too, man.
But Douay-Rheims edition, the only correct english translation.
>>7837323
>Imitation of Christ
>taking that with you to war
>Is there any book you could not live without?
But seriously there are no book(s) which I could not live without. Outside of people who have a faith based on a certain text only the most severe autist would have a book like that.
>If war broke out tomorrow and you were drafted; what one book would you take?
Guilivers Travels, something that is an easy read whilst also rereadable and with enough depth to deal with the down time. + it would be easier to trade should it come to that.
>>7837323
Life of Samuel Johnson.
Probably The Tunnel by William Gass.
Is size a consideration? For one book I'd pick complete Shakespeare but for something to carry with me I'd probably go with Dubliners desu.
>>7837708
>But Douay-Rheims edition, the only correct english translation.
>Holding your translation above the one recommended by the Church
I bet you are either an american or ex protestant
>>7838578
And which Church is that, you rabid prot?
My Twisted World by Elliot Rodgers
>>7838625
This tbqhwy famalam
>>7838621
The Catholic Church
>>7837323
Haha this book was written during the times of Protesntant Reformation
Luther was correct about the corruption but he didn't see that the Church still had amazing people
tl:dr; Protestantism was a mistake
>>7838784
>Luther was correct about the corruption but he didn't see that the Church still had amazing people
Yeah he did which is why he first tried to reform and then came out against anabaptists and their ilk
>>7838784
Luther was one of the corrupted church clerics basically. Everything wrong with the Church at the time was wrong with him.
>>7837323
Not sure if it counts for OP's purposes but I have always treasured the short stories of W. Somerset Maugham. I have all four collected volumes at home and I've read and re-read them I don't know how many times.
If I was drafted I would probably take volume one with me because that has "The Fall of Edward Barnard" in it.
>>7837331
Nah man got to be twilight.
>>7838805
Exacto, failed as monk, but had some animal like power to him
>>7838699
Catholic Church recommends Douay-Reims though
>>7838815
Most likely played the role of a useful idiot to German princes who wanted more control over the populace
>>7838818
The official Study Bible by Ignatius Press is based on NIV though. Catholics are way more tolerant of Protestants than Ps are of Catholics. Luther died thinking Pope was the anti Christ which a lot of Protestants still believe
>>7838818
>Catholic Church recommends Douay-Reims though
No it doesnt, it recommends the Catholic edition of the RSV. Indeed they actually have articles warning against DR fetishism that stems from a bad reaction to the King James only crowd.
>>7838818
>As amusing as King James-onlyism may sound, some people take it very seriously. There is even a Catholic equivalent, which we might call "Douay-Rheims-onlyism." The Douay-Rheims version, which predates the King James by a few years, (the complete KJV was published in 1611, but the complete Douay-Rheims in 1609) was the standard Bible for English-speaking Catholics until the twentieth century.
>What many advocates of both King James-onlyism and Douay-Rheims-onlyism do not know is that neither Bible is the original issued in the 1600s. Over the last three centuries, numerous minor changes (for example, of spelling and grammar) have been made in the King James, with the result that most versions of the KJV currently on the market are significantly different from the original. This has led one publisher to recently re-issue the 1611 King James Version Bible.
>The Douay-Rheims currently on the market is also not the original, 1609 version. It is technically called the "Douay-Challoner" version because it is a revision of the Douay-Rheims done in the mid-eighteenth century by Bishop Richard Challoner. He also consulted early Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, meaning that the Douay Bible currently on the market is not simply a translation of the Vulgate (which many of its advocates do not realize).
