WIBSBOT said:Which Bible did you read ? There are loads of different versions - all with different endings![]()

WIBSBOT said:Which Bible did you read ? There are loads of different versions - all with different endings![]()

cleanbluesky said:You realise that's idolatry.
Cut back on the chocolate before bedtime Spawn...
. I dont make it a habit to idolise people especially pompous ones at that. 
Virii said:Not very christian of you.
ive been caught...masquerading as a muslim when in reality im christian...a brown skinned christian
.Amleto said:

Balddog said:hmm...
Spawn said:Damnive been caught...masquerading as a muslim when in reality im christian...a brown skinned christian
![]()

WIBSBOT said:There are literal translations of the Hebrew 'original', King James bible is one of the later versions which has some glaring errors in it. There are quite a few others but as I'm not a Christian and don't study it couldn't tell you all the others. Most of the different bibles also have different numbers of books in them, having been compiled by many different people over the years. Hence, the 'Word of God' tm has been a tad corrupted over the centuries.
Different sects use different versions.....
Amleto said:There are a couple of translation errors in KJ. It is not the most popular version though.
As far as I am aware, the catholic version has a few extra books in, but all other modern christian bibles have the same number of books in.
If by sects you mean denominations, and by versions you mean translations, then maybe. However, the differences are negligible in wording, and not in the number of books.
Except by those christians who think its the perfect bible: King James Only MovementAmleto said:There are a couple of translation errors in KJ. It is not the most popular version though.
Actually, the terrorists would say they were the faithful and the rest of the muslims were taking the be happy bits out of context.Spawn said:As for treating the crusades as a perversion??..why should they be treated as a perversion??. They were sanctioned by the Church/Pope so were christian acts...
Actually you have given me an idea, i can now easily dismiss these terrorist acts are a perversion of the Islamic faith, which in reality are. Perverting the real interpretation of islam or taking certain passages out of context.
Sleepy said:Except by those christians who think its the perfect bible: King James Only Movement
O rly?WIBSBOT said:There are numerous different translations some with errors as simple as Adam and the apple which should have been orange, or the three wise men when there wasn't a mention of the number three.
You have an opinion on something that you have no evidence for, and admit to knowing nothing about. Right-ho. Not much point in discussing it then since you can't back up anything, or logically argue against anything that some says counter to your opinionWIBSBOT said:I also think that there are large differences between some versions/translations - couldn't tell you what they were though as I don't study theology and Christianity.
Allllllll-righty then.WIBSBOT said:One interesting 'fact' I 'picked' up was that in original scriptures there wasn't any mention of Satan as such. Don't ask me for a source because I couldn't give you one.....
G-MAN2004 said:Big bang -> life
Amleto said:You have an opinion on something that you have no evidence for, and admit to knowing nothing about. Right-ho. Not much point in discussing it then since you can't back up anything, or logically argue against anything that some says counter to your opinion
Allllllll-righty then.
Just thought that someone else might be interested enough to find out about it, maybe even the OP as he had expressed an opinion on joining a religion. If you want I can quote loads of Wikipedia articles at you

Find me a bible that says 'three wise men', or an apple in the garden, or an orange. You were just spouting out your own misconceptions, and now you say youWIBSBOT said:
thought that someone else might be interested enough to find out about it,...

Amleto said:You have an opinion on something that you have no evidence for, and admit to knowing nothing about. Right-ho. Not much point in discussing it then since you can't back up anything, or logically argue against anything that some says counter to your opinion
Dolph said:We could start here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Christianity#Mistranslation_and_textual_corruption
One of my favourites is still the idea of the Virgin mary...
This one also provides some good starting points...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Bible
WIBSBOT said:Which Bible did you read ? There are loads of different versions - all with different endings![]()
UMB:and BLIND is worse than stupidity"iCraig said:Zia meet grammar, grammar meet Zia.