As we’ve reported, “The Bible” series on the History Channel has been monumentally successful. And now, just one day after the second episode aired, a new Facebook game has been launched to accompany the epic, five-part series. Lightside Games, a leader in Christian gaming, has developed ”Light the Way: The Bible,” a hidden-object adventure that coincides with the show — and Blaze readers are invited to be among the first in the world to play.
“Light the Way: The Bible” encourages players to seek out hidden objects, solve puzzles and find differences in side-by-side scene comparisons (click here to play the game right now on Facebook). In addition to encountering images and music from the History Channel program, players will have the opportunity to experience stunning Biblical illustrations.
Following today’s Facebook launch, developers plan to make the game available on iPads and the iPhone — developments that will emerge in the coming weeks.
Photo Credit: Lightside Games
Reality television show producer Mark Burnett created “The Bible” with his wife, actress Roma Downey. In a press release provided to TheBlaze over the weekend, he praised the new game as well as the show’s partnership with the gaming company.
“Lightside Games clearly shares our passion for telling the timeless stories of the Bible in new, engaging yet accurate ways,” said Burnett. “Lightside Games is the perfect partner to create a family-friendly tablet game based on our series ‘The Bible.’”
TheBlaze also connected with Lightside Games CEO Brent Dusing via e-mail on Sunday to speak further about the new “Light the Way: The Bible” Facebook game. When asked what users can expect, he painted an exciting picture.
“‘Light the Way: The Bible’ brings players into the events of the Bible in a fun way, and immerses them into the story,” he said. “Some people learn by hearing, some by reading, and others by doing. Playing is doing. We find so many people learn the stories of Bible through playing the game.”
A scene from “Light the Way: The Bible” (Photo Credit: Lightside Games)
Dusing called the effort “fun and engaging,” regardless of one’s age or background. While it’s perfectly appropriate for teenagers, he also noted that adults will enjoy the game as well. In addition to entertainment value, it’s also connective, providing the opportunity to not only bring families together, but also to unite people from diverse cultural backgrounds around the world.
The CEO noted the personal rewards he’s seen in partnering with Burnett and Downey’s “The Bible.” Highlighting his passion for high-quality Christian gaming, Dusing said that one of the most fulfilling elements of the experience has been working with people who share the same affinity for Christ-centered entertainment.
Photo Credit: Lightside Games
“‘The Bible’ Series is already reaching people in massive numbers,” he said. “The ability to reach millions upon millions of people around the world with God’s Truth in a fun, engaging way is my life’s calling. Its incredibly rewarding to hear testimonies from our players about how their lives have changed.”
Considering the popularity of Facebook gaming and “The Bible” series (it premiered on March 3 with 27 million total viewers — the highest rated show ever on History and the biggest cable event of the year thus far), it will be fascinating to see how the game is received.
Previously, Lightside Games created two additional Bible-themed games — “Journey of Moses” and “Journey of Jesus: The Calling.”
Play the new “Bible” game here.
–
Related Stories About “The Bible”:
- ‘The Bible’ Trounces Perennial Sunday Ratings King ’60 Minutes’ (and Everything Else)
- 10 Surprising Celebrity Endorsements for ‘The Bible’ — The Epic TV Series Premiering Tonight
- Which Hollywood Power Couple Penned This Surprising Op-Ed: ‘Why Public Schools Should Teach the Bible’?
- See the Dramatic Reenactment of Jesus’ Birth in Mark Burnett’s Epic ‘The Bible’ History Channel Series
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Bikkiboo
Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:33pmA game sounds like a good idea – if it’s accurate & isn’t a “murder simulator”. I wish it would be more like OREGON TRAIL than just a hunt objects type game. Players could make decisions & encounter consequences that way.
I wish they would come out with a game that would teach the Constitution and how it works. Or a simpler version of Capitalism. Kids today need to learn both, since they’re not getting it in any other way.
Report this comment
G-WHIZ
Mar. 12, 2013 at 2:35pmAnd you-too can WALK ON WATER!!
Report this comment
Southernsoul
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:45pmHere’s a fun Bible game; Go through the Bible and pick out any story that is scientifically possible then write that story down on a postage stamp.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:33pmIf that were true it would still be infinitely greater than your knowledge of the Bible.
check out icr.org
Report this comment
tzion
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:11pmIs it scientifically possible for locusts to attack Egypt? How about frogs? There’s even a scientific phenomenon that could explain burning hail. And if we’re being entirely honest, according to quantum physics anything is possible just most things are so improbable that they never occur.
Report this comment
txgrrl
Mar. 11, 2013 at 4:02pmI watched the first episode in the series. Recorded the second. Why did they leave Joseph out? That’s an important story.
Report this comment
Chuck T
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:01pmAgreed. But there is a lot they had to leave out, unfortunately. Frankly, I would have liked to see a 66-episode series. The hope of the Burnetts, as they stated on Glenn Beck’s show, was to appeal to a younger audience that has no idea of what the Bible actually says., but may have their curiosity peaked enough to open one for themselves. That, of course, depends on people diseducated in the public school system of today actually being able to read anything other than a (ugh) txt msg.
Report this comment
tzion
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:14pmHere’s another question: why did they perpetuate the falsehood that the Israelites crossed the Red Sea? The Hebrew name for the place is Yam Suf, which means Reed Sea. And as anyone can tell you, there are no reeds in the Red Sea.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:25pmT your argument is a slippery slope.
Report this comment
Lara
Mar. 11, 2013 at 2:58pmThis is the WORST BIBLE production since Jesus Christ SUPERSTAR (which all those actors died tragically in a bus accident)
WHY cant they just go exactly by the King James Bible.. How easy is it to do that?? Noah’s ark did not leak, I assure you.. God shut the door himself, he intended for them to survive! They skip over Joseph’s coat of many colors and the salvation of forgiveness with it.. They are teaching that the spys going into Jerico killed an fought when spying it… totally WRONG.. The conversation with Rahab and the way they grabbed her threatening her was WRONG.. She let them down out a window by a scarlet chord, and hung it there in the WINDOW for Israel to know to protect her family. Samson was not a black man… His eye were not thumbed out, they were Burnt out with a poker.. They left out the riddles that he had used as well in the story, which had the lessons from God in them. I am sure the angels of the Lord were no race at all, and they didnt walk around in RED cloaks..They got David’s story all missed up.. He took 5 pebbles out of a stream, when it hit, it sank deep into Goliath’s forehead. They made him out to be an awful whoremonger immediately upon entering the kingship and taking Jerusalem.. They left out Saul’s congering up the dead to know the battle outcome and how God was angry for doing that. ECT ECT.. I am not going to watch this anymore. Its SACRILEGIOUS!
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:35pmWell, this is the product of Catholic, Hollywood, New Agers, heretics and humanists. You get what you pay for.
Report this comment
Jezreel
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:05pmThis Bible series is equal to vomit and human crap that stinks to hell. The way that they did not represent any truth puzzles me why they even wasted the money on such garbage. Abraham’s son Isaac would have been in his 30′s when God tested Abraham to sacrifice him. I am sure Isaac even carried the wood to the spot that God choose for the sacrifice and if you look carefully, you will find out that it is the exact place Christ was crucified nearly 2,000 years later. “God will provide himself a sacrifice” NOT God will provide a sacrifice. That changes the entire meaning when you leave out very import details that point to the prophesy of Christ. Also, Ishmael had to be around 17 years old when Abraham sent them both away. Hagar, “the flesh”, well, we can surely see these series are “the flesh” and not of the spirit of Christ. No wonder Glen Beck loves it. Lies like mormonism. Will Glen ever embrace truth or will he choose hell with his eye wide open?
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 2:49pmBrother_Ed: Sir, I have no quarrel with you because you make it clear yours is a belief based on your faith. I cannot judge anyone’s faith because that is a very personal affair. Faith does not make any historical, scientific or other empirical claims. Christians reject the faiths of other religions precisely because they are faith-based. They do not understand that their own religion or sect within it shares that same foundation. David Eller states, “This, probably more than anyone else, explains what religious believers do and why skeptics reject faith of any kind as fundamentally incompatible with scientifically based reasoning. Eller claims that if believers “can drag down real knowledge to their level and erase any distinctions between the true and the false, the known and the merely felt or believed or guessed, they can rest comfortably in their own undeserved self-certainty.”” (Natural Atheism, p. 132). So while I won’t question faith it is our civic duty as Americans to subject empirical claims to real-world evaluation and critique. When extraordinary claims are made, i.e. Aliens have abducted a person, Bigfoot runs in the woods of the Northwest, the Tooth Fairy left me money for a molar, someone claims to have invented cold fusion, people claim that a deity or deities exist, or that a historical figure was resurrected from the dead, we must insist on extraordinary evidence to back up those claims or they can be dismissed from consideration. That is all for to
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 3:36pm@HISTORYPHDGUY
Fair enough…we are agreed we disagree.
I would have preferred a little less ‘scholarly superiority’ and a little more recognition that the door is open to the possibility that the story is true. With new arceological discoveries, today’s theories may not accurately explain tomorrow’s facts (ie, Dead Sea Scrolls), but I hold no grudge.
I believe we find traces of similarities in many religions because we all come from a single source (Adam) and as the family split the knowledge that was corrupted and many false explanations were introduced and perpetuated.
Again, the sources you quote are no- (I would say anti)-religious and I could give some references of religious scholars that would refute them. That would only lead to an argument that I care not to get into.
In America, I believe, it is not adherence to a certain religion, rather adherence to the Constitution that is paramount. As long as we are free to believe as we see fit, allow others the same privilege, and ensure the right of voicing that opinion, then knowledge can advance and truth be known.
I appreciate your patience and kindness.
Report this comment
mcsledge
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:55pmIf it is in line with the present mini-series, there are a lot of inaccuracies that will be encountered. The Bible is the inspired word of God. The Bible movie is Hollywood doing their best to skip over/misrepresent politically charged issues (i.e., marriage between and man and a woman, procreation in the family unit, Sodom & Gomorrah’s real reason for distruction, the destruction of God’s first set of Laws for Israel due to idol worship, etc.)
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:34pmThe entire Bible is simply a testament of Christ.
Christ means the anointed (Greek) or Messiah (Hebrew). Jesus, who is called Christ, is the firstborn of the Father in the spirit and the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. He is Jehovah and was foreordained to His great calling in the Grand Councils before the world was. He was born of Mary at Bethlehem, lived a sinless life, and wrought out a perfect atonement for all mankind by the shedding of His blood and His death on the cross. He rose from the grave and brought to pass the bodily resurrection of every living thing and the salvation and exaltation of the faithful.
He is the greatest Being to be born on this earth—the perfect example—and all religious things should be done in His name. He is Lord of lords, King of kings, the Creator, the Savior, the God of the whole earth, the Captain of our salvation, the Bright and Morning Star. He is in all things, above all things, through all things, and round about all things; He is Alpha and Omega, the first and the last; His name is above every name and is the only name under heaven by which we can be saved.
He will come again in power and glory to dwell on the earth and will stand as Judge of all mankind at the last day.
This I know from personal study and prayer. This TV show is neat, but does not affect my testimony of Christ. May we all come closer to Christ.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:40pm@PP8RIOT
Amen, brother!
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:50pmThere is a “Fake Jesus” and a Real Jesus
Fake Jesus
Did not pre-exist as eternal God but rather became a god.: “He is the Firstborn of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state.” (Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966, p. 129).
Real Jesus
Has always existed from all eternity as eternal God (John 1:1, 8:58).
Fake Jesus
Jesus is called Jehovah while the Father is called Elohim: “Among the spirit children of Elohim, the first-born was and is Jehovah, or Jesus Christ, to whom all others are juniors.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 70.).
Real Jesus
Jehovah ‘is’ Elohim – the one God (hundreds of times the titles Jehovah and Elohim are used together to demonstrate that Jehovah ‘is’ Elohim (e.g.. Gen 2:4-22; Deut. 4:1; Judges 5:3; 1 Sam. 2:30).
Fake Jesus
Spirit brother of Lucifer: “Long before you were born a program was developed by your creators…The principal personalities in this great drama were Elohim, perfect in wisdom, judgement, and person, and two sons, Lucifer and Jehovah.” (Spencer W. Kimball, Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, pp. 32-33).
Real Jesus
Creator of all things, including Lucifer, so cannot be his brother (Col. 1:15-20, John 1:3).
Fake Jesus
Begotten sexually by a man – God the Father: “These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the
Report this comment
WhiteFang
Mar. 11, 2013 at 3:46pmI am not going to give a long list of scripture’s here about the NAME of GOD because even if I did, you will just ignore them in favor of your preferred misunderstandings.
So I will just make the statement; Jehovah (YHWH) is God almighty, the creator of heaven and earth just as the Holy Scriptures indicate.
And Jesus is the Christ (anointed) who Jehovah God sent to earth to be a propitiatory sacrifice for all who wants to have life, just as the scripture’s indicate. Jesus is Jehovah’s only begotten Son.
No where in the scriptures do we find evidence that Jesus is Jehovah.
John 3:16-17
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 3:48pm@a_small_voice_in_the_wilderness
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on your theological interpretation :)
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:08pmStating that: “Jesus, who is called Christ, is the firstborn of the Father in the spirit” is blasphemy. Jesus Christ came as GOD in the Flesh. The fact that Jesus Christ is Yahweh can be determined by comparing the following Old Testament verses with the corresponding New Testament verses.
Isaiah 40:3 speaks about preparing the way for the LORD (Yahweh). When we compare this verse with Mark 1:3 we readily see that Jesus is the LORD who had the way prepared for him by John the Baptist.
In Joel 2:32a it says that whoever calls upon the Name of the LORD (Yahweh) will be saved. This verse is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:21, and by Paul in Romans 10:13. Both apostles are clearly referring to Jesus as the LORD.
In Isaiah 6:1-10 we read about the marvelous vision that Isaiah had revealing the glory of the LORD (Yahweh). John tells us, in John 12:40-41, that this vision revealed the glory of Jesus.
In Isaiah 44:6, Yahweh refers to himself as “the First and the Last”. In Revelation 1:8 and 17, Jesus similarly refers to himself as “the Alpha and the Omega” and “the First and the Last”.
In Zechariah 12:10 the LORD (Yahweh) is speaking and says that, “they will look on Me whom they have pierced.”[4] This is obviously Jesus speaking (Psalm 22:16; John 19:34). This passage from Zechariah appears again in Revelation 1:7b and is clearly about Jesus Christ.
As Yahweh, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, Jesus is eternal, having all the qualities a
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:31pmJesus Christ came to earth as “God in the Flesh”. Jesus Christ was the GOD of the OLD Testament. The WORD that created the world. 1 Corinthians 10:1-4
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.
Exodus 3:13-14
Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”
And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’”
John 8:58-59
Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. If Jesus Christ is not the creator GOD, the GOD of Abraham, the GOD of Moses, then Jesus Christ lied, and your faith is in vain. Study your King James Bible with a Strong’s Concordance. Don’t listen to church traditions. Be wise. Learn who Jesus Christ really is. Jesus Christ is Emanuel, GOD WITH US!
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:52pmIn common with the rest of Christianity, we believe in a Godhead of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. However, we testify that these three members of the Godhead are three separate and distinct beings. We also testify that God the Father is not just a spirit but is a glorified person with a tangible body, as is his resurrected Son, Jesus Christ. Even in the transmitted and translated version we have today, the Bible language confirms that God the Father and his resurrected Son, Jesus Christ, are tangible, separate beings. To cite only two of many such teachings, the Bible declares that man was created in the image of God, and it describes three separate members of the Godhead manifested at the baptism of Jesus (see Gen. 1:27; Matt. 3:13–17).
Many believe that God is a spirit and that the Godhead is only one God. In our view, these concepts are evidence of the falling away we call the Great Apostasy. This amended view of the Godhead was first initiated by Emperor Constantine when he convened the first churchwide council in A.D. 325. The consequences persist in the various creeds of Christianity, which declare a Godhead of only one being and which describe that single being or God as “incomprehensible” and “without body, parts, or passions.” One of the distinguishing features of the doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is its rejection of all of these postbiblical creeds.
We invite all men to come to know our God and his only begotten Son, Jesu
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:55pmA_SMALL_VOICE_IN_THE_WILDRRNESS
I read your rebuttal and it appears that you believe the same thing as P8RIOT.
We claims Jesus was known, in His pre-mortal existence, as Jehovah. He is the same one who gave the created the Earth, gave the commandments to Moses, etc.
This was all done under the direction of the Father, who is known as Elohim.
We can each cite verses that prove our side.
Every 6 months, LDS scholars and Baptist(?) scholars get together and try to convince each other as to the validity of their interpretation.
Neither side convinces the other, and they agree to meet again in 6 months.
If scholars can’t convince each other, I have no hope of convincing anyone with my limited skills and knowledge.
The best we can do is to agree to disagree. I recognize that I may be wrong, but my understanding of scripture makes more sense if I look at it my way. You also recognize that I might be wrong (humor).
Rest assured, however, that many of Christ’s teachings do not require us to have a correct understanding of who He was (or may have been) in the Old Testament. It requires only that we believe His teachings to be true and that we try our best to emulate His example.
In that regard, we Latter Day Saints try just as hard as any other Christian denomination.
You are free to disagree (of course), but let’s keep it respectful with an understanding that we each may be wrong.
Report this comment
WhiteFang
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:59pma small voice,
This is what Jesus himself said:
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his only‐begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.17For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him.18He that exercises faith in him is not to be judged. He that does not exercise faith has been judged already, because he has not exercised faith in the name of the only‐begotten Son of God.19Now this is the basis for judgment, that the light has come into the world but men have loved the darkness rather than the light, for their works were wicked.20For he that practices vile things hates the light and does not come to the light, in order that his works may not be reproved.21But he that does what is true comes to the light, in order that his works may be made manifest as having been worked in harmony with God.” (John 3:16-21)
I think Jesus’ words are very clear and understandable. Jesus is God’s only-begotten Son.
And God’s Name, The Father, is Jehovah.
Exodus 6:3, Isaiah 12:2, 26:4, 42:8, Psalms 83:18 (KJV)
Report this comment
WhiteFang
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:29pmIf Jesus is God the Father (Jehovah) then how is it Jesus has an authoritative head over him? – 1 Corinthians 11:3
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:29pmYou guys will use any excuse to spread the lies and heresies taught by your false prophets – Joseph Smith and C.T. Russell.
Please consult Deut 13 and 18 for instruction on false prophets.
Report this comment
TheCalmOne
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:30pmI love it when the religious kooks argue with each other!
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:41pmI encourage everyone to question their church’s beliefs. Regardless of the denomination. Any true follower of Jesus Christ (Christian) will get their beliefs and theology directly from Jesus Christ via the Holly Spirit. Why do yo believe what you believe? Have you researched it? Tested it by scripture? Do you believe the Bible, or accept others writings? Why? I only encourage people to study, pray, and think for themselves. That’s why I encourage everyone to obtain a King James Bible and a Strong’s Concordance. Learn THE TRUTH for yourself. If your church or organization discourages you from such a self study, then question your church’s motives. Get your Truth from GOD, not from traditions of men. There are many false Christs in this world. False teachings are leading people into the arms of the Anti-Christ. Why are so many of you afraid to search the scriptures? Afraid to ask your Church’s and Church leaders tough questions? All you need is a King James Bible, a Strong’s Concordance, and a quiet time with GOD. What are you afraid of? What are you afraid of finding out about your Church’s teachings? You have a choice to make. Almighty God, The Truth, The Deity of Jesus Christ, or your Church traditions, which can evolve and change over time?
Report this comment
AvengerK
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:42pmHISTORYPHDGUY….absolutely…the new testament is technically anonymous. So if you can offer a credible competitor for the writers of the gospels I’m all ears. Good luck with that.
The texts were written within the lifetimes of many of the people described in them.
Tacitus…explicitly names Pontius Pilate as the Roman governor of Judea that sentenced Christ to death. Only a Roman had the authority to order executions in Judea. So why would a historian as noteworthy and accurate as Tacitus merely take the word of a jewish sect suspected of causing trouble in Rome? Furthermore, Iesus is not how Jesus was referred to in Rome. He was known as Cristus. For instance, it’s like calling Gene Simmons of Kiss “Chaim Klein” a bass player for a successful American rock act…no one would know who you’re talking about unless you referred to him by the name he’s best known by. Jesus was referred to as Cristus by the believers in Rome so that’s the term by which Tacitus names him also. Context is vital to understanding the sources. You seem to have no understanding of the sources whatsoever.
To demonstrate how ineffective your argument is HISTORYPHDGUY..until recently we had no physical evidence that Pilate was Judea’s governor until a stone was discovered Saying:
TIBERIUM (Tiberius was emperor at the time of Christ)
PONTIUS (Pilate’s family name)
PRAEFECTUM IUDA (Prefect of Judea).
The historicity of the texts is excellent by the way.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:48pmTHECALMONE actually you’re jealous that you don’t have the intelligence necessary to understand what so many of us find quite obvious.
P8RIOT LDS Apostle B. H. Roberts wrote, “Saddening as the thought may seem, the Church founded by the labors of Jesus and His Apostles was destroyed from the earth; the Gospel was perverted; its ordinances were changed; its laws were transgressed; its covenant was, on the part of man, broken; and the world was left to flounder in the darkness of a long period of apostasy from God… a universal apostasy from the Christian doctrine and the Christian Church took place” (D.H.C., Vol. I, Introduction, pp. 39 and 41).
I’ll agree that Christian denominations are based on dogmatic arguments concerning what the Scriptures teach on certain issues, but can you point me to any evidence whatsoever that the Christian Church was actually DESTROYED?
Especially since 1. the Bible teaches that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church Christ founded with His own Blood, and 2. the MSS we have prove that the Bible we have today is the very same one given to us 2000 years ago.
Will you explain what reason you have to believe it was DESTROYED, please, other than someone told you to believe that?
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:53pmSMALL_VOICE, I’m rather partial to the Farstad/Hodges NKJV Interlinear. I prefer the Majority Text to the Textus Rectptus.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:38pm@THEOTHERBEREAN
What is meant by ‘the church’ was the priesthood authority that Jesus Himself conferred upon the apostles and seventy. Without this authority, the necessary ordinances could not be performed – baptism, for example.
As with any covenant, if any party does not live up to their end of the bargain, the contract is void. Since God is incapable of this, it must have been man who strayed – which they did.
Because of this, the priesthood (the authority) was taken from the Earth.
I know you know that ‘the church’ is not a building, but an organization.
The Apostolic church was under fire from the beginning. The ‘false prophets’ you often mention were changing correct doctrine even in Paul’s day.
Interstingly enough, Paul warned of ‘false prophets’ not ‘all prophets’, implying that there would indeed be ‘true prophets’.
Paul also warned that there would be a ‘falling away’ (apostasy).
The Temple Christ loved so much was destroyed.
Of course, we claim these things were restored by Joseph Smith, Jr. and that this ‘restoration’ was prophesied.
We believe the Temple and the priesthood necessary to perform ordinances and run ‘the church’ are on the Earth once again!
I am not patronizing you when I say that -in things other than religion – we see eye to eye and I appreciate your comments.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:41pm@THEOTHERBEREAN –
Hello old friend! I was actually excited as I scrolled down and saw that you had joined the conversation because I know that you truly believe what you preach (and I mean that as a compliment).
Now to answer your question as to why I believe that there was an apostasy in the early Christian Church. I guess its fair to say that I believe that an apostasy occurred because someone told me that… his name was Paul and he was an Apostle. In 2nd Thessalonians Paul recorded that many people were of the belief that Christ would soon make his Second Coming. However, he corrected them that an apostasy would precede the Second Coming. (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
Paul was not alone in his teachings that a falling away, or in other words, an apostasy would beseech the early Christian church. If fact, the Bible is filled with references to this apostasy and how it would occur. Please see my next post for just a few examples (since I’m already running out of characters)
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:46pm@THEOTHERBEREAN
Here are just a few of the references you requested:
changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant: Isa. 24:5;
this people draw near me with their mouth: Isa. 29:13;
darkness shall cover the earth: Isa. 60:2;
a famine … of hearing the words of the Lord: Amos 8:11;
his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat: Matt. 13:25;
saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many: Matt. 24:5;
shall grievous wolves enter in among you: Acts 20:29;
there be divisions among you: 1 Cor. 11:18;
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him: Gal. 1:6;
who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey: Gal. 3:1;
shall not come, except there come a falling away first: 2 Thes. 2:3;
some having swerved have turned aside: 1 Tim. 1:6;
giving heed to seducing spirits: 1 Tim. 4:1;
all they which are in Asia be turned away from me: 2 Tim. 1:15;
Who concerning the truth have erred: 2 Tim. 2:18;
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power: 2 Tim. 3:5;
turn away their ears from the truth … unto fables: 2 Tim. 4:4;
From whence come wars and fightings among you: James 4:1;
being led away with the error of the wicked: 2 Pet. 3:17;
certain men crept in … denying the only Lord God: Jude 1:4;
which say they are apostles, and are not: Rev. 2:2;
thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot: Rev. 3:16;
to make war with the saints: Rev. 13:7.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:57pmWow! this thread sounds like the start of a good joke –
“So a Mormon, a Jehovah’s Witness, a Baptist, and an Atheist walk into a discussion thread…”
:))
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:10pmED and P8TRIOT, I agree that the Bible speaks of error and apostasy in the church, and even a great “falling away.” But “destroyed from the earth?” That’s a claim that is just not supported by historical fact.
There is just no evidence that “the Gospel was perverted; its ordinances were changed; its laws were transgressed; its covenant was, on the part of man, broken; and the world was left to flounder in the darkness of a long period of apostasy from God… a universal apostasy from the Christian doctrine and the Christian Church took place.”
The thousands of MSS and fragments we have prove that is simply not true.
LDS doctrines teach that “Christianity” was hatched in hell and is perverted and apostate. My Church is the Church of the Devil, is wrong, is the anti-Christ, is evil and is the Whore of Babylon is leading me to hell and will be hewn down and cast into the fire of no return. My Heavenly Father is imaginary and invented. My Jesus is mythical and the Trinity is a monster.My creeds are an abomination. My justification is pernicious. My grace is a fallacious doctrine originated by Satan. My pastor is presumptuous and blasphemous for performing marriages and offering communion and my Bible is untrustworthy. I am a fool for believing in the Bible alone. I am a child of the devil, I am damned and know nothing of God. http://tinyurl.com/cq68jjd
Actually, I believe the opposite is true.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:45pmED, if the “priesthood authority” as Mormons call it exists today, where are the miracles, signs and wonders which should accompany it? Those whom Jesus awarded this “Authority” to in Apostolic times, had the ability to perform miracles, signs and wonders in His Name. LDS theology teaches that Smith did not have this authority, and therefore was not a “miracle worker.”
Also, in LDS theology, the Holy Spirit comes only through the “laying on of hands” by those with priesthood authority (Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, 1966., p. 438).
LDS scripture says that John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1829 and laid his hands upon them and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on them just “before” they were baptized (P. of G.P. J.S. History 1:68-73).
This is problematic. Since LDS teach that baptism “must” precede receiving the priesthood, being yet unbaptized, Joseph was ineligible to receive the priesthood or baptize Oliver. Therefore both Oliver’s and Joseph’s baptisms and priesthoods are invalid.
This also means that every LDS male who has been baptized and received his “priesthood” from someone who ultimately got it from Joseph Smith or Oliver Cowdery, received that priesthood in vain.
I hate to break this to you but this means not only are you not Christians, you are not LDS either!
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:52pm@THEOTHERBEREAN
Good question, I’ll defer to P8RIOT…
If I HAD to answer, I would suggest that that is a ‘the chicken or the egg?’ question. Perhaps it falls into the ‘how can I get credit if you need credit experience first? category.
If you can’t be baptized without priesthood authority, yet you need to be baptized in order to receive the priesthood, what then?
To be honest, I never thought of it…yet it poses no problem with me. You have to start somehow, and as far as I’m concerned, in this case it seems more important to have the authority to baptize. It may be of interest to more that the higher priesthood – the Melchezidic – priesthood was not conferred until after they baptized each other.
Anyways, good question…I’ll ask next Sunday.
Meanwhile, I’ll be interested in what P8RIOT says.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 12, 2013 at 3:25am@theotherberean
First, your challenge to the legitimacy of the restored Priesthood is based on a false premise. The website you are quoting attempts to provide authority for some of your averments. However, no citation is given for your statement that baptism “must” precede receiving the priesthood. Of course, this is the order of things now that the Church is established. But there is no doctrine of the Church that mandates an order of these ordinances. Thus your challenge is faulty (and quite frankly, a bit deceitful) from its premise.
I’ll give you a few examples of when those called to establish these ordinances did not follow the normal pattern of receiving them. First, John the Baptist was “ordained” when he was only 8 days old, and then later baptized during his childhood. D&C 84:28. John was, the same as Joseph Smith, ordained by an angel. Id. Second, Christ held the Melchizedek Priesthood. Hebrews 6:20. He restored the Melchizedek Priesthood during his earthly ministry, but sadly, during the apostasy, that priesthood was once again taken from the earth after the apostles died in whom he gave this same “authority”. Luke 9:1.
Finally, Joseph Smith was chosen to be the Prophet to restore this priesthood on May 15, 1829. This is the day John the Baptist appeared as an angel and conferred the priesthood on Joseph and Oliver Cowdry. Joseph Smith History 1:68-72. He then commanded Joseph to “go and be baptized.” Id.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 12, 2013 at 3:39am@theotherberean
Sorry, but I ran out of room on the last one; so I’ll sum this up. I can trace my priesthood authority directly back to Jesus Christ. The priesthood and its authority is real. You later make another challange with a false premise… the primise that miracles don’t happen in our Church based upon the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthoods is completely false. Miracles happen every day. However, faith preceeds the miracle! Your challenge to show you examples of miracles in order for you to believe smells of one seeking signs. I won’t insult your intelligence by citing the many scriptures warning against seeking signs to believe. I hope you wouldn’t doubt John the Baptist himself simply because it was said that he “did no miracle”. John 10:41.
Anyhow, its clear that you are not looking to learn, but rather to demean. Thus, I’ll leave it at that. But I leave you with my testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is quite literally The Church OF Jesus Christ. That he leads it today to establish His Kingdom here on earth. That He leads it today through a living Prophet. I tell you that I know with assurity that Joseph Smith is a true prophet and translated the Book of Mormon by the power of God. I know without a doubt that the Book of Mormon is true and another testament of Jesus Christ. I know that the only way to return to our Father in Heaven is through saving Grace of Jesus Christ. I know all this throught the power of the Holy Ghos
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 14, 2013 at 9:04pmBesides the fact that there is no Biblical basis for the Mormon priesthood, Joseph was clearly not baptized allegedly prior to receiving the priesthood. Can someone who is not baptized pass the priesthood on to someone else? Or receive it to begin with? You admit there is an order of events that must be followed, and Smith did not follow that order of events. That’s my argument. They realized that and that’s why Cowdery and Smith baptized each other and then laid hands on each other again to confer the priesthood. It was all a bit confusing. But that’s only one of the problems. Where in the Bible does it mention that Jesus was “ordained” to the priesthood? Jesus claims to have all authority in heaven and on earth, He is our High Priest who died once for all, therefore fulfilling the priesthood eternally. Heb 7:24. There is no “evidence” of any authority in the Mormon priesthood. Nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus laid His hands on the disciples and ordained them to the priesthood, but D. & C. 89:14 says, “all grain is ordained for the use of man and of beast.” Did someone lay hands on the grain and give it the Priesthood? D. & C. 89 also mentions that herbs and flesh of beasts and fowls are “ordained for the use of man.” Even LDS scripture shows that “ordained” means “appointed.”
Your “miracles and faith” argument is circular reasoning. You insinuate that I lack the “faith” for miracles to be evident, when it is the evidence of miracles that should e
Report this comment
TBone64
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:50pmReally calling these story’s myths. If you know anything about actual history. These Stories and many more were recorded not only in the individual bible books but in many history books as well. Just as the stories mention in the series many of the Cities I had already heard of God and his miracles and controlling the wind. Many cities wrote of this in their history books as well. Through out the entire region there are many accounts of Gods work and miracles just as there were with Jesus, They were not just posted in the books of the Bible.. Science trys to explain things rather believing in Miracles. If you really want to go after a fake and false religion it is the Koran and Muslim religion, Why would God have another profit come and not have any historical records of Muhammad or of any Miracles he performed. In MY OPINION and studies if anything the False Prohet Jesus speaks of is Mohammad and is a direct response to Christianity! It is the Devils work….
Report this comment
encinom
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:11pm“Why would God have another profit come and not have any historical records of Muhammad or of any Miracles he performed.”
Jews say the same thing about Christ.
The bulk of hte Koran is a retelling of tales from the bible (Old and New testaments).
Report this comment
God_Is_Not
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:45pmThis has to be someone trolling.
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 2:17pmWe have no primary sources for the Christ myth even the NT books are pseudepigraphic written by unknown authors decades after the events described. Christians claim that the Jewish historian Josephus recorded information about Jesus in his book Jewish Antiquities (published c. 93 – 94 C.E.) The three “messiahs” mentioned, Yehuda of Galilee, Theudas and Benjamin the Egyptian,where the character of Jesus appears to be based on all of them in part, but none of them can be regarded as the historical Jesus. Moreover, in the book of Acts, these people are mentioned as being different people to Jesus and so modern Christianity actually rejects any connection between them and Jesus. In the Christian edited versions of the Jewish Antiquities there are two passages dealing with Jesus as portrayed in Christian religious works. Neither of these passages are found in the original version of the Jewish Antiquities which was preserved by the Jews. The first passage (XVII, 3, 3) was quoted by Eusebius writing in c. 320 C.E. and so we can conclude that it was added in some time between the time Christians got hold of the Jewish Antiquities and c. 320 C.E. It is not known when the other passage (XX, 9, 1) was added in. Neither passage is based on any reliable sources. It is fraudulent to claim that these passages were written by Josephus and that they provide evidence for Jesus. They were written by Christian redactors and were based purely on Christian belief.
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 2:20pmNext are the Annals by Tacitus. In the Annals XV,44, Tacitus describes how Nero blamed the Christians for the fire of Rome in 64 C.E. He mentions that the name “Christians” originated from a person named Christus who had been executed by Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberias. It is certainly true that the name “Christians” is derived from Christ or Christus (Messiah), but Tacitus’ claim that he was executed by Pilate during the reign of Tiberias is based purely on the claims being made by the Christians themselves. They appeared in the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, which had already been widely circulated when the Annals were being written. (The Annals were published after 115 C.E. and were certainly not written before 110 C.E.) Thus, although the Annals contains a sentence in which “Christus” is spoken of as a real person, this sentence was based purely on Christian claims and beliefs which are of no historical value. It is quite ironic that modern Christians use Tacitus to back up their beliefs since he was the least accurate of all Roman historians. He justifies hatred of Christians by saying that they committed abominations. Besides “Christus” he also speaks of various pagan gods as if they really exist. His summary of Middle East history in his book the Histories is so distorted as to be laughable. We may conclude that his single mention of Christus cannot be taken as reliable evidence of an historical Jesus.
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 2:24pmOnce Tacitus is dismissed, the next claim is that one of the younger Pliny’s letters to the emperor Trajan provides evidence of an historical Jesus. (Letters X, 96.) This is nonsense. The letter in question simply mentions that certain Christians had cursed “Christ” to avoid being punished. It does not claim that this Christ really existed. The letter in question was written before Pliny’s death in c. 114 C.E. but after he was sent to Bithynia in 111 C.E., probably in the year 112 C.E. Thus it provides nothing more than a confirmation of the trivial fact that around the beginning of the twelfth decade C.E. Christians did not normally curse something called “Christ” although some had done it to avoid punishment. It provides no evidence of an historical Jesus. All other writers who mention Jesus, from Justin Martyr in the second century C.E. to the latest expounders of Christian myth in the twentieth century, have all based their references to Jesus on these discredited sources. Consequently their claims are worthless as historical evidence. We are thus left with the conclusion that there is absolutely no reliable and acceptable historical evidence of Jesus. All references to Jesus are derived from the superstitious beliefs and myths of the early Christian community. The majority of these beliefs only came into existence after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE.
Report this comment
TBone64
Mar. 11, 2013 at 5:07pmThere are some independent, non-biblical books that mention the historical Jesus. Historian Edwin Yamauchi calls attention to the most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament. This proof comes from Tacitus, a Roman, who wrote that the Christians were responsible for the fire that destroyed Rome in A.D. 64. He believed that Christ had died under extreme execution during the reign of Pontius Pilatus. Yet, he stated that Christ’s death briefly checked “a most mischievous superstition,” which arose, not only in Judea, but also in Rome. He is bearing indirect testimony to the conviction of the early church that Christ who had been crucified had risen from the grave. This would explain the bizarre occurrence of a rapidly growing religion based on the worship of a man who had been crucified as a criminal. How do you explain that?
Another source of evidence about Jesus is found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. He asks Emperor Trajan about various ways to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. He did some research regarding these Christians and this is what he came up with: They met on a certain fixed day before it was light and sang hymns to Christ, as to a god. Unlike other gods who were worshipped, Christ was a person who had lived on earth. They bound themselves by a solemn oath to not participate in any wicked deeds, and never to commit fraud, theft, a
Report this comment
AvengerK
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:01pmHISTORYPHDGUY….you don’t seem to understand Tacitus’ writing at all.
He chronicled the histories of Roman Emperors. If his writing on emperors as early as Augustus is accepted by today’s historians as credible..then why do you believe his writings on Nero and Tiberius are not to be taken as credible? The crucifixion of a troublemaker in Judea during the reign of Tiberius under the governor Pilate (who had a spotted career during his political life) would not even rate a mention unless it had some bearing on the reign of an emperor. As it happened, Nero scapegoated the Christians for events in Rome and so their connection to an executed criminal under a former Emperor (and given context by mentioning the governor) was important enough to Tacitus to mention. He doesn’t mention Cristus on the assertions of the Christians, he mentions Cristus as the impetus for the trouble taking place under Nero making sure to mention he was crucified. This is important because in Rome crucifixion was the most humiliating way to execute a criminal and so by inference placing Christ among the most lowly and detestable of criminals.
To further demonstrate how pathetic your cut paste is HISTORYPHDGY….Josephus (a Jewish historian) is actually the best source we have on Pilate rather than the Roman sources.
You demonstrate a dreadful grasp of how historians” wrote in antiquity.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:12pmThere is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history, and I reject discounting the Bible as historical. From early non-Christian sources we can almost reconstruct the entire gospel – Josephus, the Babylonian Talmud, Tacitus, Julius Africanus, Lucian of Samosata, Eliezar, Mara Bar-Serapion, Pliny the Younger, the Apocryphon of John, The Gospel of Thomas, The Treatise on Resurrection, etc.
Report this comment
AvengerK
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:12pmHISTORYPHDGUY…Let me put this succinctly. No credible historian will deny the existence of a historical Jesus. Understanding how historians wrote in antiquity, the secular sources,Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the Younger are more than acceptable in verifying the historical Jesus. That a man called Cristus by the Romans was crucified during the reign of Tiberius under the order of Pilate is not even in question at this point. Jesus lived and was executed.
What you’re asserting are the fringey “internet” musings of atheist sources that feel the need to not only deny religion but they also have to remove the existence of an historical Jesus in order to make the beliefs of Christians that much more deniable. “Your” assertions here are the assertions of a very small and nasty little minority not the majority of the historical community.
Report this comment
toody1969
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:47pmSince when is the Bible a game piece? Since when is your salvation a game? The point of the Bible is being missed. This watered down version is not worth the air time it uses up. Go to Church! Read YOUR Bible! God Bless!!!
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:15pmAmen
Report this comment
semihardrock
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:30amThere is a REASON why the Jews take the Torah seriously, having ONLY a certain selected few transcribe in specific detail NOT TO ALTER in any way, shape or form.
It appears they are using this TV Series as a mockery and……now a game. ANOTHER reason why the US will not allow in ANY “public” building…… So the Pharaoh can CONTROL the masses…..and steal your money!
QUESTION: Why is it considered OK to air “The Bible” mini series on “National public TV” but not allow a book displayed in a school? I thought the FCC are also a “Government Agency”……….UNLESS it was specifically designed to make into a flamboyant ruse.
Report this comment
encinom
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:59amThe History Channel is a cable network, not “Public TV.” Also the TV Networks are free to air the Bible series if they choose, there is no FCC rule probhibitng such an airing and in the past many would air religious programing on Sunday mornings.
Report this comment
checkingbothsides
Mar. 11, 2013 at 4:30pmUmm, since when is The History Channel public television? Are you really that far out of touch?
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:09amAs a Historian I have found the History Channel’s The Bible episodes to be pretty sanitized. Obviously Burnett was aiming to make the Sunday School version of these myth stories. An actual historical look at the Bible would have focused on the biblical scholarship showing how these individual myth books were created and edited over the centuries. The NT didn’t become canon until the 4th Century and we have no original copies of the individual books that were written down from the oral stories after the problem of the delayed Parousia became clear. This series is not History but pure Christian propaganda presenting these myths like they are based on real-world events. All of the supernatural claims of the Bible have no basis in fact and are ahistorical. Faith-based beliefs should be examined by a history series using critical analysis of the evidence. Burnett and the History Channel just made a soap opera masquerading as “history” knowing the true believers do not question the propaganda they are being fed. It is a shame because the more you learn about the history of Judeo-Christianity, the more you understand how it evolved out of a small desert cult and morphed into a Jewish splinter group that joined forces with the Roman Authority to become the religion we know today. I shouldn’t be surprised given how the History Channel also has ghost chasers and ancient aliens also presented as legitimate pursuits. What a missed opportunity.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:25amLike it or not, most of your PHD knowledge of history has its roots in the Bible. I would think you would show a little more respect for such a book, even if you choose not to believe it’s message.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:27am@HISTORYPHDGUY
You may be right, or you may be an exams of too much ‘critical thinking’.
There are many scholars of ancient history that have the knowledge of facts that you have, but give a completely different theory than the one you have proposed.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:31am*religious scholars, that should be ;)
Report this comment
encinom
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:32amThe bible is a collection of myths and legend, not that different from the Ilyad or The Epic of Gilgamesh. The way Christians today use the bible, the bible doesn’t deserve respect, its used as a justification for hate and bigorty. The stories itself show God demanding genocide and wagering with the lives of his believers, a diety no that different from Zeus.
Report this comment
coachsmac
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:35amSo I guess you don’t believe in Jesus and you are one of those taking the chance of, Well I’ll live my life like there is no God, and when I die, if there is I’ll deal with it then! Well my friend it will be to late!! God is real, so therefore Jesus is real and he is coming back for his people, sooner than you think!!!
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:40amThe Bible (original Hebrew and Greek texts) is the Word of GOD. It is 100% accurate. However, the newer Bibles being produced in the last century, do have a few omissions, and a few errors. But those changes can be identified by studying the original texts. Organized Churches and Ministers have also tried to change The Word of GOD, to promote their false teachings.
People, obtain a King James Bible and a Strong’s Concordance. Study the Holy Scriptures yourself. Rightly divide the Word of Truth. Then ask yourself if you are receiving that truth from your church? Don’t be deceived.
For you skeptics and unbelievers. Your time is short. very short.
Report this comment
ModerationIsBest
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:52am@A_SMALL_VOICE_IN_THE_WILDERNESS
Ah the threat again.
“You better do it now or else!”
Let me ask you. Would you be worried if a Muslim came up to you and said, “Accept Muhammed and Allah now, because when you die it will be too late?”
I suspect you wouldn’t care what they said about their religious belief. Well I feel the same way towards all religious claims.
Report this comment
frgough
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:59amWe don’t have original manuscripts for a lot of historical writings you happily assume are nonetheless authentic. The reason you don’t like the Bible is because of what it implies if true; it’s no more complicated than that.
Report this comment
Locked
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:02pm@A_Small_Voice
“The Bible (original Hebrew and Greek texts) is the Word of GOD. It is 100% accurate.”
If you had read the run-on paragraph that was historyphdguy’s original post, you would note that we do not have any complete original copies of the Bible. We have some partial manuscripts dated earlier, but if I recall correctly the oldest complete Bible is Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century.
Report this comment
historyphdguy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:11pmI will defend the right of every American to follow the dictates of his or her own conscience but it doesn’t mean I won’t criticize religious beliefs in the marketplace of ideas. Brother_Ed: I agree that Christian apologists do have a different take on biblical scholarship. I am talking about actual mainstream critical historical scholarship found in both religious and secular institutions of higher learning. We are all in agreement that the supernatural claims made by the Bible have no basis in reality. The Bible wasn’t put together as a history book but rather as a myth book by believers to convince others of their faith. There is value to this knowledge when it is understood in the proper historical context. Coachsmac: You are making Pascal’s Wager. The problem of this assertion can be found at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal's_wager. Wilderness: There are no extant Bible texts just some scraps from the 2nd Century. The NT was cobbled together by committee in the late 3rd and early 4th Centuries. You can thank Constantine for bringing the bishops together to lay down the dogmatic law. I suggest Burton Mack’s excellent, “Who Wrote the New Testament?: The Making of the Christian Myth,” Gamble’s “The New Testament Canon: It’s Making and Meaning,” Friedman’s “Who Wrote the Bible” Pelikan’s “Whose Bible Is It?” and Ehrman’s “Forged: Writing in the Name of God” as a starting place to understand the historical basis of the scriptures.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:49pm@HISTORYPHDGUY
Really?
There are ” historical scholars…in…religious…institutions of higher learning… that agree…that the supernatural claims made by the Bible have no basis in reality.”
Interesting claim.
Not very ‘religious’, apparently.
I am not trying to convert you, but as a scholar, I would hope you recognize the possibility that you may be wrong.
I thank you for allowing me to believe as I do, and I allow you the same – I am not here to claim you will ‘burn for all eternity’ for not believing the same as I do.
The apologists you speak of (at least the ancient ones) had the opportunity to study the original manuscripts you rightly claim we lack, have come to a different conclusion.
Perhaps that is why Paul said that the things of God are ‘foolishness’ to the ‘natural man’…’neither can they know them, because they are spiritually discerned’.
It does take faith to believe – this faith comes from a desire to know – and at times this is a ‘blind faith’, accepting as fact things we don’t understand until with time and experience they become clear.
That is my experience, anyways.
I don’t know all things, and their is much I don’t understand, but by faith teaches me to be patient and to act on the things I do know and I am promised all will be revealed eventually.
Again, I am not trying to convert you, nor am I upset with your point of view; I am simply giving an alternate theory.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:26pm@MODERATIONISBEST
I always giggle at your no-nonsense responses to overly enthusiastic adherents.
Though I may believe that we must all come unto Christ, I leave the fire and brimstone talk at church.
I have always said, “If all I knew about Christianity was gleaned from some of the comments here, I would want no part of it!”
I am no judge, nor do I care to be. I am, however, called to be an example…and that I do the best of my ability.
To all those who would condemn MODERATIONISBEST, I can only say that as far as I have seen, he is a good man.
Report this comment
P8riot
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:37pmI second brother_ed!
Report this comment
checkingbothsides
Mar. 11, 2013 at 4:32pmI happen to agree with you that this isn’t a scholarly interpretation of the events IN the bible. I don’t think that was the intention. This is a dramatization of the book The Bible itself. I don’t think there’s any attempt to place these events in a larger historical context, because of course it would all fall apart.
Report this comment
TheCalmOne
Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:36pm@COACHSMAC – Pascal’s Wager? Really? Is that the best you have?
Report this comment
jman-6
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:48amI’m horrified at some professing “Christians” posts! GOD could have had called them to make this to reach a select number of his wayward sheep, and yet you criticize! The production may have been done that way because it’s the only way the wayward could understand it. Remember your are to keep a childlike heart, ready and able to receive instruction and correction. I suggest you pray and ask the LORD to forgive you, and then take away your bitterness! GOD SPEED!
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:10am@JMAN-6
I have not watched the show, so I cannot judge others opinions on the matter…but I believe your observation to be correct.
Christianity, like any other religion, is more of a process than a state of being. In other words: conversion is an ongoing thing.
We learn line upon line, and precept upon precept – first milk, then meat.
If this series does nothing else other than to create a desire to learn more about the Bible, then mission accomplished.
There is such a thing as ‘good,better, best’ – all things that lead a person to God are at least good.
We are all aware that there are many interpretations of the Bible…and many feel their interpretation is correct (myself included). But that does not mean that all other interpretations are necessarily bad.
As long as you have an understanding that Jesus is the Christ, that He died so that all may live, that only through His grace you are saved, then you are on the right track – and that is a good thing.
Report this comment
HOOT_OWL
Mar. 11, 2013 at 11:36amWOW, So you welcome every DOCTRINE into your home with-out first ‘testing ‘ ‘reproving’ , ‘rebuking’ to make sure it’s ‘sound doctrine’..?
You see this the problem I have your thought on this .
If someone comes to Christ with a water down message ,then when they find out they have been mislead ,they turn from Christ with a vengeance.
Or even worse they continue this perversion of the word of God.
We are to be Child-like in our TRUST in God and our FAITH in God .
This does not mean we are to be FOOLS . And except every MAN that comes along with his own version of the word of God.
The word of God is to be SOUND .Not SOFTENED so it is easier to digest .
You plant the seed and move on .The message always stays the same .Then the holy spirit takes over from their.
2 Timothy 4:2-4
2 Preach the word; be diligent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they draw to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto myths.
Report this comment
Locked
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:04pmWell said, Ed!
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 12:59pm@HOOT_OWL
How can I know it is ‘sound doctrine’ until I prove it?
What does ‘watered down’ mean?
We must understand basic arithmetic before we move on to Algebra; the same is true for religion.
To imply that I must keep myself free from exploring different ideas because I might pollute myself is folly. We all have the ‘light of Christ’ to guide us and if we are seeking, we shall be lead to the truth.
As I said, I did not watch the series, so I cannot comment on it. It may be that it falls into the ‘good’ category instead of the ‘better or best’.
I think back to the time before I was converted and the tools that God used to bring me to Him were as simple as a good example, a kind word, or a clean lifestyle. None of these things encapsulated the complete meaning of the Gospel, but they were little strings that pulled me along.
I applaud any effort to try to bring the word of God and the message of His Son to the masses.
Report this comment
brother_ed
Mar. 11, 2013 at 1:15pm@LOCKED
Thanks.
Glad to see you’re doing well.
You carry the torch of Libertarianism with respect and honor – never letting your personal preferences override the Constitutional rights of others – and for that, you deserve my ‘thanks’.
The Blaze is a better place because of you.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:35pmED, the problem is that your conversion to the Mormon gospel has pointed you away from the Gospel of Jesus Christ, with a different “word” of a different “god” and a different “son” than that of the Bible.
There is no reason to believe the MSS we have today are not the same ones produced 2000 yrs ago, and consequently we can plainly see there was no “falling away” in any grave sense that LDS doctrine insists must have happened to Christ’s Church. This “falling away” is necessary to support the very reason for the existence of the Mormon gospel. You can believe anything they tell you but there is absolutely no evidence that this alleged “falling away” ever took place.
Report this comment
HOOT_OWL
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:45amIf His FB games are anything like his skewed version of the ‘the Bible “ that he made into a movie .
I will not be having anything to do with it.
I bet the Number ONE search last night on the internet was …
Is Samson of the Bible ….“Black”..?
I guess that’s one way to get people to break open “The Bible”
Report this comment
checkingbothsides
Mar. 11, 2013 at 4:35pmYou do know that these people lived in the middle east, right? Your pictures of the blue eyed, blonde haired Jesus are 100% off base!
Report this comment
GuruMeditation
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:34amSorry. Don’t do facebook.
Report this comment
YOURSENSEI
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:21amThis is what you must know:
This show was even cheesier in Episode 2. It’s like Sunday school for adults. Got no depth, no drama, no compelling insights. It’s a cartoon.
It is so.
Report this comment
IMCHRISTIAN
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:38amNo one is stopping you from not watching. If you knew anything about the Bible you would know what it is all about.
Report this comment
battles
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:07amI hate to think what kind of interpretation the History Channel would come up with concerning the Bible. Believers beware! And how about the History Channel turning the Bible into a game. Have fun with their secular interpretation.
Report this comment
Dan_o
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:30amI thought the same thing, but after watching the first of 5 episodes, it was far better than I expected. There were a few things that left me scratching my head wondering why they put a spin on it, but in all, it will serve it’s purpose.
Probably the most offensive interpretation I found was when God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and Abraham questioned God. The bible does not indicate any questioning, just faithful obedience. Of course, this is key since Abraham’s faith was counted to him as righteousness and he is the father of both the Jew and Gentile who come to salvation.
There are other “more minor” errors, strife between Lot and Abraham before splitting ways and a warning about Sodom, Sarah running to see where Isaac was when Abraham took him to be sacrificed (3 days journey but it all seemed to happen in an hour), and the mysterious teen-aged girl on the ark with Noah (there should have been 8 people, all married).
Anyway, I’d rather be ready to lead people to the truth and know what they are hearing and seeing than ignore something that 14 million people watched.
Report this comment
jman-6
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:34amThe History Channel didn’t make the series they only aquired the rights to air it.
Report this comment
A_Small_Voice_in_the_Wilderness
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:07amThere is nothing more fun that studying the Word of GOD with a King James Bible and Strong’s Concordance. Learn about the Deity of Jesus Christ. Emmanuel or Imanu’el, Hebrew עִמָּנוּאֵל meaning “God is with us”. Then ask yourself whether your Pastor, Minister, or your Church, has been telling you the truth. Your time is short, very short.
Report this comment
stumpy68
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:17amMany people get so wrapped up in religion
that they forget Christ
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:50pmThe King James Version is NOT the only Bible we should use. To varying degrees, KJV Only advocates argue that God guided Erasmus (the compiler of the Textus Receptus) to come up with a Greek text that is perfectly identical to what was originally written by the biblical authors. However, upon further examination, it can be seen that KJV Only advocates are not loyal to the Textus Receptus, but rather only to the KJV itself. The New Testament of the “New” King James Version is based on the Textus Receptus, just as the KJV is. Yet, KJV Only advocates label the NKJV just as heretical as they do the NIV, NAS, etc.
More: http://www.gotquestions.org/KJV-only.html
Report this comment
TGS
Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:54amI was hoping for an MMORPG, or even better, a “Gauntlet” clone.
Report this comment
Jezreel
Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:52amIf The Blaze thinks that The Bible series are good for people to learn from, I have no interest participating. You will need more than “Christ centered entertainment” to endure the coming days. Knowing the bible will not be enough. The Bible was disgustingly revolting how badly they twisted and distorted the truth of the bible. I found out how awful the part was on Sodom and Gommorah too and how silly they made the angels out to be. Honestly! The angels of God are very very powerful and God sent those two angels to destroy the cities and they were afraid of the crowd!!?? They also resorted to worldy entertainment of martial arts?!! Sick society and sick people that wrote the script for that series. Must have been the same ones that wrote the book of mormon!
Report this comment
stumpy68
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:09amThey were judging the city when the judging was over the destruction began
Report this comment
galicant wiseword
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:29amRight, the fear portrayed would have been for the sake of Lot. Which may be what happened. A test to determine if there was 10 righteous men in the city. I actually appreciated the fact that they didn’t portray angels as fair-haired white robed nice guy’s or even women. Yeah they could have walked through the town like terminators wasting everyone who looked at them, but I thought that part was actually not too bad. Christians will always thirst for more, to see the real story played out (which I for one hope is part of the orientation of the next life). For the non-believer this was at least a step in the right direction as far as TV entertainment. Instead of judging the writers and people that helped make the show how about we pray that our creator will use this to reach out to the hearts of the people of this country?
Report this comment
checkingbothsides
Mar. 11, 2013 at 4:39pmYknow, I’m a non-believer, and those angels from part one were really interesting to me, and made me want to figure out how it worked! I was talking to people online trying to decide if maybe they used human methods of fighting because they were in human form, kind of like the Maiar or Valor do in Lord of the Rings. It had this atheist talking about religion for days, and you want to shut it down because it wasn’t accurate (or boring) enough for you? You’re a fool.
Report this comment
theotherberean
Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:23pmThe world is full of ex (insert religious cult here) who were spiritually abused, and/or lead to a false gospel and a false Christ. These unfortunate ones, many times become disenchanted with anything to do with religion, once they “come out of her.”
So perhaps it’s best that one faces the sometimes harsh realities of the Gospel rather than the watered down musings of secular Hollywood New Agers and heretics.
Report this comment
IndyGuy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:42amYeah….Join facebook and give them what info on you they don’t already have…..Don’t think so…
Report this comment
stumpy68
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:05amThey only know what you tell them
Report this comment
IndyGuy
Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:34amThey mine your account for every bit of info they can find…and then onto your friends….They get zip from me…You go ahead,but be sure to let all your friends know they are now at risk…
Report this comment