Faith

Jewish Scholars Seek Out Errors in Centuries-Long Evolution of the Hebrew Bible

Bible Project in Jerusalem Tracks the Evolution of the Hebrew BibleJERUSALEM (The Blaze/AP) — Is it possible that there are errors and man-made blips in the Hebrew Bible? This is a question that a research team in Jerusalem has been grappling with — for decades.

A dull-looking chart projected on the wall of a university office in Jerusalem displayed a revelation that would startle many readers of the Old Testament: the sacred text that people revered in the past was not the same one we study today.

An ancient version of one book has an extra phrase. Another appears to have been revised to retroactively insert a prophecy after the events happened.

Scholars in this out-of-the-way corner of the Hebrew University campus have been quietly at work for 53 years on one of the most ambitious projects attempted in biblical studies – publishing the authoritative edition of the Old Testament, also known as the Hebrew Bible, and tracking every single evolution of the text over centuries and millennia.

And it has evolved, despite deeply held beliefs to the contrary.

For many Jews and Christians, religion dictates that the words of the Bible in the original Hebrew are divine, unaltered and unalterable. For Orthodox Jews, the accuracy is considered so inviolable that if a synagogue’s Torah scroll is found to have a minute error in a single letter, the entire scroll is unusable.

But the ongoing work of the academic detectives of the Bible Project, as their undertaking is known, shows that this text at the root of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was somewhat fluid for long periods of its history, and that its transmission through the ages was messier and more human than most of us imagine.

The project’s scholars have been at work on their critical edition of the Hebrew Bible, a version intended mainly for the use of other scholars, since 1958.

“What we’re doing here must be of interest for anyone interested in the Bible,” said Michael Segal, the scholar who heads the project.

The sheer volume of information makes the Bible Project’s version “the most comprehensive critical edition of the Hebrew Bible in existence at the present time,” said David Marcus, a Bible scholar at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York, who is not involved with the project.

But Segal and his colleagues toil in relative anonymity. Their undertaking is nearly unknown outside a circle of Bible experts numbering several hundred people at most, and a visitor asking directions to the Bible Project‘s office on the university campus will find that many members of the university’s own staff have never heard of it.

This is an endeavor so meticulous, its pace so disconnected from that of the world outside, that in more than five decades of work the scholars have published a grand total of three of the Hebrew Bible’s 24 books. (Christians count the same books differently, for a total of 39.) A fourth is due out during the upcoming academic year.

If the pace is maintained, the final product will be complete a little over 200 years from now. This is both a point of pride and a matter of some mild self-deprecation around the office.

Bible Project in Jerusalem Tracks the Evolution of the Hebrew BibleBible Project scholars have spent years combing through manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, Greek translations on papyrus from Egypt, a printed Bible from 1525 Venice, parchment books in handwritten Hebrew, the Samaritan Torah, and scrolls in Aramaic and Latin. The last member of the original team died last year at age 90.

The scholars note where the text we have now differs from older versions – differences that are evidence of the inevitable textual hiccups, scribal errors and other human fingerprints that became part of the Bible as it was passed on, orally and in writing.

A Microsoft Excel chart projected on one wall on a recent Sunday showed variations in a single phrase from the Book of Malachi, a prophet.

The verse in question, from the text we know today, makes reference to “those who swear falsely.” The scholars have found that in quotes from rabbinic writings around the 5th century A.D., the phrase was longer: “those who swear falsely in my name.”

In another example, this one from the Book of Deuteronomy, a passage referring to commandments given by God “to you” once read “to us,” a significant change in meaning.

Other differences are more striking.

The Book of Jeremiah is now one-seventh longer than the one that appears in some of the 2,000-year-old manuscripts known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some verses, including ones containing a prophecy about the seizure and return of Temple implements by Babylonian soldiers, appear to have been added after the events happened.

The year the Bible Project began, 1958, was the year a priceless Hebrew Bible manuscript arrived in Jerusalem after it was smuggled out of Aleppo, Syria, by a Jewish cheese merchant who hid it in his washing machine. This was the 1,100-year-old Aleppo Codex, considered the oldest and most accurate version of the complete biblical text in Hebrew.

The Bible Project’s version of the core text – the one to which the others are compared – is based on this manuscript. Other critical editions of the Bible, such as one currently being prepared in Stuttgart, Germany, are based on a slightly newer manuscript held in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Considering that the nature of their work would be considered controversial, if not offensive, by many religious people, it is perhaps surprising that most of the project’s scholars are themselves Orthodox Jews.

“A believing Jew claims that the source of the Bible is prophecy,” said the project’s bearded academic secretary, Rafael Zer. “But as soon as the words are given to human beings – with God’s agreement, and at his initiative – the holiness of the biblical text remains, even if mistakes are made when the text is passed on.”

Comments (416)

1 2 3 4
  • beckwasfox
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:56am

    The design of the Bible is proven within the Bible. Here is a fulfilled prophecy of Christ from the geneology in Genesis 5:Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow; the Blessed God shall come down teaching (that) His death shall bring (the) despairing rest.
    Adam Man
    Seth Appointed
    Enosh Mortal
    Kenan Sorrow;
    Mahalalel The Blessed God
    Jared Shall come down
    Enoch Teaching
    Methuselah His death shall bring
    Lamech The Despairing
    Noah Rest, or comfort
    Isn’t the Word of God awesome? Amen!

    Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 1:13pm

      If you read the geneology of Adam through Noah and translate the Hebrew names to English you find a prophecy of the Messiah. The Bible is a perfectly integrated message. Hope this clarifies. Thanks to Chuck Missler.
      Hebrew English
      Adam -Man
      Seth -Appointed
      Enosh -Mortal
      Kenan -Sorrow;
      Mahalalel-The Blessed God
      Jared -Shall come down
      Enoch -Teaching
      Methuselah-His death shall bring
      Lamech -The Despairing
      Noah -Rest, or comfort

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • Doc_Slammin
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:20pm

      In 90/100 AD at the Jewish Council of Jamnia the Jews established a canon of Old Testament writings. The did this because 1) the center of Jewish teaching, the Temple, had been destroyed in 70AD; 2) the rise of Christianity and its writings were perceived as a threat; 3) they were trying to protect themselves against the threats to Judaism by the pagan world. This is known as the Hebrew canon. This canon did NOT include those books of the Old Testament which had originally been written in Greek – Tobit, Judith, parts of Esther, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, parts of Daniel, and Maccabees 1 & 2. This version of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) was the one that was used in the days of Jesus Christ. Other writings such as the book of Enoch, the dead sea scrolls, and etc… were discovered long after the Hebrew and Septuagint versions of the OT were standardized.

      The overall teaching of the Bible is to, first, show love and respect to God. Out of love and respect of God comes a love and respect for life. The love and respect for life allows a person to see and deal with their own failings and shortfalls as well as those of their society. It is only by perseverance and prayer that we can overcome our own shortfalls, thereby witnessing to others that they, too, can overcome.

      Fear of the LORD is truly the beginning of wisdom.

      Report Post » Doc_Slammin  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:43pm

      Here’s the Gospel hidden within a genealogy in Genesis!
      (You will never convince me that a group of Jewish rabbis conspired to hide the Christian Gospel right here in a genealogy within their venerated Torah!)
      Evidence of Design
      The implications of this discovery are more wide spread than is evident at first glance.
      It demonstrates that in the earliest chapters of the Book of Genesis, God had already laid out His plan of redemption for the predicament of mankind. It is a love story, written in blood on a wooden cross which was erected in Judea almost 2,000 years ago.
      The Bible is an integrated message system, the product of supernatural engineering. Every number, every place name, every detail every jot and tittle is there for our learning, our discovery, and our amazement. Truly, our God is an awesome God.
      It is astonishing to discover how many Biblical controversies seem to evaporate if one simply recognized the unity the integrity of these 66 books, penned by 40 authors over thousands of years.
      It is remarkable how many subtle discoveries lie behind the little details of the text. Some of these become immediately obvious with a little study; some are more technical and require special helps.-Dr. Chuck Missler
      For more check out khouse.org

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:31pm

      @Doc_Slammin

      The Old Testament is essentially the Tanakh (the Miqra). The Tanakh was written in Hebrew, not Greek and it was written and finalized hundreds of years before Christ.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • Nightjar
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:37pm

      BeckWasFox, that’s a big Amen.

      God is spirit.
      Eternal mind.
      All things were formed by Him.

      Report Post »  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 9:43am

      BECKWASFOX–I agree that the geneology of Christ reveals the salvation of mankind. I believe that the fall of mankind into sin by Adam/Eve (since they share identical DNA) was preplanned before they were even created. Revelation 13:8 speaks of the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world. Romans 11:32 states God has “bound” all men over to disobedience so that he may have “mercy” on them all. I believe that Father God wanted mankind to love Him & to show the depths of His love He had His only Son crucified. Father God sacrificed what was dearest to Him (also compared to Abraham almost sacrificing Isaac). I believe that sin entred into the world through one bloodline/race (preplanned) & that salvation of the world comes through the same bloodline/race. I would encourage you (if you haven’t already) to watch the video The Star of Bethlem by Fredrick A Larson. This movie is AWESOME & talks about how the whole savation of the world was intertwined into the solar system.

      Report Post »  
    • Juniemoon
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:03am

      How cool it is to see others are learning the Hebrew names and what they mean. There is so much hidden from our Gentile eyes. If only more would discover their Hebrew Roots and the Hebrew language. To others on her who think the KJV is the only version. No, your wrong. A group of Greeks transcribing missed some very important words and changed the meaning. One thing that bothers me about their translation is their discrimination against Jews. For example the word Assembly is the gathering of people, what the bible translated as Church. Ekklesia is the assembly, but they transferred as church and sometimes as Synagogue. They used it as Synagogue in Synagogue of Satan, where it is the same word assembly. They lied when they used the word Jews to make them the killers of Yeshua, well it took both the Romans (Gentile) and the Jews to kill the lamb. If they knew anything about the Torah, they would have known the sacrifice for sins was an innocent animal where you took it by the horns, leaned upon it, thereby transferring your sins onto it.

      Those of you who think Jesus came and fulfilled the law and took away the Torah have been lied to. He did not come to do away with it, he came to reveal it. He was the Word (Torah) made flesh. The Pharisees and Saducees had made the Torah a burden a yoke upon men. He came to take that man made yoke away and reveal Gods law. The earth has not passed away, neither have the jots and tittles. Study your Torah, keep the Sat. Sabbath.

      Report Post » Juniemoon  
    • ChristianLayman
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:42am

      @ VoteBushin12

      Where did you read that the Tanakh was established before Christ? To my knowledge, there was no standardized biblical canon among the Jews that was deemed authoritative excepting the Torah. I believe that outside of the Pentateuch, the Samaritans may have accepted Joshua, the Palestinian and Alexandrian or Hellenistic Jews accepted the Prophets (Nevi’im) and Psalms and then the Sacred Writings (Kethuvim) were sort of up in the air until Jamnia. The Books of Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, and the Deuterocanonical portions of Esther and Daniel. Some of these books are quoted and referenced by Early Church Fathers, while some claim divine inspiration (Tobit), and others messianic and early church prophecies (Wisdom of Solomon).

      Report Post »  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 3:37pm

      I want to clarify that on my previous post that there is no way that I am discriminating against the Jewish race–quite the opposite, I am pointing out that they are THE CHOSEN RACE OF GOD ( Romans chapter 11). Christians are called the children of God adpoted through the blood of Christ. Adams sons were also called the sons of God as clarified in Genesis 6:2–The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, & the married any of them they chose. Genesis 6:4 States the Nephilim were on the earth in those days & afterwards–when the sons of God went to the daughters of men & had children by them that they were the heroes of old, men of renown. The Nephilim were giants like Goliath that was killed by David. Eve was named by Adam as “the mother of all the living” because through her would come Jesus who is the One that makes eternal life possible for all mankind. I also don‘t understand those who say Jesus can’t be in the bloodline of David (which also traces back to Adam in Luke 3:38) because He wasn’t conceived by Joseph but by God–well, my response is who do you think Adam got his DNA from?.

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 2:38am

      @MYCOMET123………….Genesis 6: 2 then the sons of the true God began to notice the daughters of men, that they were goodlooking, and they went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose.
      These were the spirit sons of God. [demons] who materialized and produced the offspring called the Nephilum.

      Genesis 6: 4 The Nephilum proved to be in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of the true God continued to have relations with the daughters of men and they bore sons to them, they were the mighty ones who were of old, the men of fame.

      This is why God said I will wipe men from the surface of the ground all but Noah and his family

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • mils
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 10:05am

      man has a way of controlling man with words…sacred words that are changed are ..for lack of a better word..a SIN. if you believe it is the word of God, it is perfect and you or anyone else has no right to change one comma, period, tense…None…

      Report Post »  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 11:32am

      GREENWOOD, I have heard this analogy already how the Nephilum were the offspring of “the fallen angels” who “materialized” & conceived with the daughters of men. First off angels/demons are pure spirit–they are not carnal beings. The only way a fallen angel known as a demon could take on a human form is by possessing another human. There is NO WAY I will ever buy into this LIE that demons were producing offspring with humans, it is a LIE from the pit of hell & gives all whole new meaning of the devil being in the details.

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 1:16pm

      @MYCOMET123…………They lost that ability after the flood. Read it carefully and what other explanation is there? They continued to have relations with the daughters of men, then who were they if not men ?
      Genesis 19: 1 – 3 Lot was visited by two angels and they came into his house and were eating unfermented cakes. So angels could materialize but the fallen ones could not after the flood.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 1:27pm

      The angels like man have free will. That’s why some chose to follow Satan.
      They lost their position in heaven and are now confined to the earth.
      Revelation 12: 9 So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him…………………………………12. ……..Woe for the earth……………he has a short period of time.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • donaldchar
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 4:25pm

      You mean well, but you‘re copying someone else’s work. Be a Berean and check other reliable sources; some of these definitions are contrived, even though they make a good “sermon illustration.” For example, check J.B.Jackson’s Dictionary of Scripture Proper Names. What does Lamech actually mean? Or Methuselah? Check other sources written by someone with no agenda other than ferreting out truth.
      Another thing: Notice that the current Hebrew text of Genesis text is missing a generation, though Luke includes it. (Uh-oh!) Why? Because Luke was copying from the Tanakh widely used in his day, the Septuagint translation, made 250 BC, before the “sloppy-copy” and Rabbinic alterations changed parts of the Hebrew text. The original Hebrew had that “missing generation” preserved in the LXX. Thank God that the Hebrew is being restored as best they can; it’s a worthy effort.

      Report Post »  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 4:47pm

      To my knowledge it is the work of Dr. Chuck Missler. The names and the meanings are easily checked on the internet which I have done and have no concerns whatsoever. This also passes the Holy Spirit test. I am quite comfortable and confident in my Bible as is.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • cykoaudio
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 12:37am

      there are 3 basic rabbinical sources,or versions,from which they have written the Old Testament but all basically the same-above article points out 3 very vague & contextually unimportant differences,but the Torah was not passed down orally,it was passed down by the best scribes w/the most educated rabbi’s watching over them,proof of its historical accuracy & immaculate copy writing is in dead sea scrolls where found text of Isaiah dated 1k years later than original,& text was copied verbatim word for word,perfect..I’ll bet a years salary that this whole article is overblown in that they find such frivolous differences enough that you can count on two hands,hardly any,& the differences as you can see above contextually mean nothing, except if you studied the Old Testament you would know the 3 rabbinical sources claim to speak from 3 different perspectives,Elohim’s view,the rabbis,& the lay ppl,thats why you would get God speaking to “you” or “us”..so it means nothing believe me..the Old Test. is the most historically accurate book ever written,& if you read Gerald Schoeders work you will see it is dead on accurate as to the creation of the universe,animals, & mankind,e.g. the “made in the image of God” is translated correctly as “made w/God’s spirit/or soul” or spiritual image..just read Gerald Schroeders work and you will see how well Genesis lines up w/the most up to date modern science,from a physicist & professor at MIT,& Hebrew Old Tes. scholar

      Report Post » cykoaudio  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:30am

      GREENWOOD, You have me stumped on this one. I tell you what I don’t understand. First off if you believe that the Nephilim were the offspring of fallen angels & women–how did they survive the flood?. If you say that the fallen angels are called the Nephilim & were still having intercourse with women post flood but not reproducing offspring? Well that doesn’t hold true either because the offspring of the Nephilim were mentioned post flood in Numbers 13:33. My understanding of angels (fallen or not) is that they are pure spirits. Yes that can materilize but they aren’t formed from the earth & they don’t have “matter” like humans do. They are not flesh & blood, they do not reproduce. Jesus states that the angel neither marry or are given in marriage. Demons & devils can possess humans. Several accounts in New testament where the;demons begged Jesus to send them into the pigs & not back to hell. Luke 22:3 states that satan entered Judas & betrayed Jesus. To tell you the truth–I don’t Know?. If you figure it out share with the rest of the class. Just be sure what you are planting, because you open a crack in the demonic realm it eventually bring that doorway wide open! I found rereading Genesis 9 was revealing in that I missed that men & animals didn’t eat anything but veggies & fruits preflood.

      Report Post »  
    • CaptMickeyd
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 4:27pm

      Let me reply to Mycomet and Greenwood:

      Those were not demons that married the daughters of men. They were the “sons of God.” If you study the term son of God, or sons of God, unless it is the Only Begotten Son of God, it is always used to refer to a created being. Adam, a created being. Those who are born again: created beings, ie, new creatures in Christ. These beings were not fallen angels, they are the angels that Peter referred to as having “left their first estate.” They did not get cast out with Satan and his angels, but left heaven of their own volition to dwell with human women. All angels in the Bible are referred to and described as men, or male in appearance. These angels did procreate with humans and created “men of reknown” before the flood. Some of these genes made it past the flood, but not in as great a concentration as before the flood. “Study to shew thyself approved”

      Report Post » CaptMickeyd  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 6:19pm

      @MYCOMET123 & CAPTMICKEYD………..First the Nephium were destroyed in the flood but the sons of the true God here I called demons because they went against God and later followed Satan when they were cast out as in Revelation 12: 9 After the flood the sons of God here had to leave their bodies and return to the spirit realm.until then. In Numbers 13: the 10 spies gave a bad report because they were in fear of the people there. 13: 31…………”We are not able to go up against the people because they are stronger than we are.” They were not puting their trust in God once again who had delivered them. Moses had to plead God for forgiveness in 14:19 and in 14: 20 He did, but said all the men who did not listen to my voice 14: 22,23 will never see the land about which I swore to their fathers,yes, all those who treated me without respect will not see it. They were trying to make excuses out of fear when they should have trusted God. Their judgment was 40 years in the wilderness.
      Another example is Genesis 19: 3 Lot was visited by two angels who came into his house. Then he baked unfermented cakes, and they went to eating it says.
      Also 3 angels visited Abraham and Sarah in Genesis 18: there they were eating also.
      I could go on but I have to leave now to go pick up my son at his work. Hope some of this makes it clearer. If not let me know your take on it.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 7:06pm

      PS…..The Nephilum were not the sons of God but the offspring [ the mighty ones ] or giants depending on which translation.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 8:22pm

      CAPTMICKEYD & GREENWOOD. First off CAPTMICKEYD, If you get a chance could you please tell me which scripture passage from Peter you’re using. GREENWOOD–Still doesn’t make sense? You’re saying that the nephilum were the offspring of the fallen angels & women –but they didn’t survive the flood. Still doesn’t explain Numbers 13:33–And there we saw the Nephilum (the sons of A’NAK who come from the Nephilim): and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, & so we seemed to them. CAPTMICKEYD–P.S. Your explanation that some of their genes survived the flood doesn’t make sense to me. The Nephilim were GIANTS –if any of Noah’s daughter-in-laws (let’s say) carried this gene–it would be the dominant gene & they would have been giant. Also the fallen angels including satan are also created beings. Then goes the whole problem with Job 2 The sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, & Satan with them.

      Report Post »  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 8:30pm

      CAPTMICKEYD/GREENWOOD–P.S. Please feel free to substitute fallen angel for demon–(I’m not sure I buy into this either) BUT either way it doesn’t explain how the Nephilum survived the flood.

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:59pm

      @MYCOMET123…………..Numbers 13: 32 [ It was a bad report or false ] that’s why they were punished and not allowed to see the promise land. I thought I said that in my answer about the 10 spies. In Numbers 14: 19 Moses had to ask God for forgiveness.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 11:51pm

      @MYCOMET123………….Job 2: 4 Satan said “everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul. Job though kept his integrity and proved Satan a liar. Also Jesus kept his integrity to the end until death and proved Satan a liar. Then he[Jesus] cleansed the heavens as in Revelation 12
      Today all of us can prove Satan a liar by keeping our integrity. Proverbs 27: 11 Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, that I may make a reply to him that is taunting me. It‘s about God’s sovereignty his right to rule. Soon the wicked one will be no more Psalms 37: 10

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • scarebear83
      Posted on August 16, 2011 at 12:01am

      @ JunieMoon- Jesus came to fulfill the law. If He did not fulfill it then He failed at what He came to do! Jesus was making the point in Matthew 5 that the law would stay in place until all was fulfilled, that the earth would not be destroyed. Well, all HAS been fulfilled. Let’s put it this way, say you were in the service and you fulfilled your duties, it doesn‘t mean your efforts are for naught but that what you did means you don’t have to do it again. Your duties are fulfilled. Christ fulfilled His duties, He fulfilled the law and thus we are no longer bound to it. If I may quote here: The meaning is this. Jesus did not come to this earth for the purpose of acting as an adversary of the law. His goal was not to frustrate its fulfillment. Rather, he revered it, loved it, obeyed it, and brought it to fruition. He fulfilled the law’s prophetic utterances regarding himself (Lk. 24:44). Christ fulfilled the demands of the Mosaic law, which called for perfect obedience or else imposed a “curse” (see Gal. 3:10,13). In this sense, the law’s divine design will ever have an abiding effect. It will always accomplish the purpose for which it was given. http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/485-did-christ-abolish-the-law-of-moses I hope you may take the time to read the article as it gives better explanation than I could or even have the room to type.

      Report Post » scarebear83  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 16, 2011 at 10:27am

      GREENWOOD, LOOK –READ THE FACTS. What the passage is stating that even though there were giants in the land they didn’t have enough faith in God to trust that they would overcome them. The Nephilium were BEASTS in the land with a higher intellect kind of like ogres. You only need to look at pre-flood conditions versus post-flood conditions to figure this out. Why the flood?–They were sinning. In order for them to sin they would have to go against the laws of God. God only had given them 2 laws outside the Garden of Eden. Genesis 1:28–1) Go forth & multiple 2) you have dominion over all living creatures. What sin is going on pre-flood –this my OWN belief- is beastiality. The reason I concluded this is by post-flood laws. Pre-flood both man & creatures were given fruits/plants to eat. There was no killing of animals for food or animals killing animals for food. Man was suppose to rule (dominion) over the animals & instead he was making them equal by engaging in mating with the animals which is an abomination to God. Post flood Genesis 9:2 God states that he will makes the beasts fearful of man. Pre-flood creatures were not afraid of man. There was no fear that any animal would kill you, or any fear for creatures that they would be killed by man. Nephilium were beasts that were on the ark but eventually became extinct. I know your going to disagree with meet regardless of what I say SO–No need to reply. Take care, Have a nice life!

      Report Post »  
  • palerider54
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:31am

    You libs are only showing your ignorance of the Bible when you try to use the history of the customs of a brutal age and a different culture, and knowingly try to twist it to mean the Bible is telling us to act that way now.

    God has said he can be a jealous God, and a wrathful God. Before Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for our sins, before the cross, it was a much harder life. Much more difficult to atone for sin.
    You did NOT disrespect your parents, you did NOT cheat on your spouse, you did NOT associate with the pagan prostitute at their temples. And yes the punishment was severe. Had to be for a brutal people.

    The lesson about the different crops in a field or the different cloth in a garment referred to inter racial marriage with the above mentioned pagans .(different cloth, different religion) Because God knew the young men would be drawn to the prostitution involved with the pagan religion.

    You have to be a believer to understand the messages of the Bible.

    Non-believers are just concerned in being happy in their sins.

    Find me one example of God telling Christians to stone other Christians to death for their sin.

    Just one.

    Report Post »  
    • Gold Coin & Economic News
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:49am

      Just wondering if the writers and editors of the Blaze will ever do such an expose on Mormonism? It is interesting that the Blaze prints this story just less that 2 weeks before Glenn shows up in Jerusalem. Any significance to the fact that a cult will be represented at the Southern Wall Excavations in less than 2 weeks and just maybe the Bible has been corrupted by “Evolution”?

      You might want to think about that before you go following Beck to Israel.

      Report Post » Gold Coin & Economic News  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:01pm

      How is The Blaze re-publishing some idiots’ article espousing the story? @ Hollow *****, I guess you missed the whole “new” part of the Bible (where Jesus came to fullfill the Law, including the Levitical instructions to stone sinners). However, just because we no longer stone, it doesn’t mean that we have to condone your (their) sin.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • walkwithme1966
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:01pm

      You are so judgmental and arrogant about the Bible and the religion that you follow that I fear for your souls – God has a place in hell reserved for people such as you!!! http://wp.me/pYLB7-1m1

      Report Post » walkwithme1966  
    • Right_on_the_Left_Coast
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:49pm

      This is not a controversial issue for Christians. The secular world is where this is stuff is eaten up like candy. How many Christians are going to question their faith or the trustworthiness of scripture based on this scholarly project? Few, if any.

      The Bible has been under intense scrutiny from day one. Yes there have been small errors here and there. But nothing has been found that drastically alters the message of the text. With every variation and human error the overall message has remained intact.

      As we discover more of these variations in the text, we get closer and closer to the original text, and that’s great! But we also discover getting closer to the original text hasn’t changed a thing about what we have understood from the Bible up till now. So where is the controversy in this project? There is none. When they discover an error so large that a major biblical passage is meaningfully changed in a way that alters our understanding of important biblical truths, then I’ll be worried.

      But it won’t happen. Study away boys, because this only strengthens my faith and gives me more proof that God protected the message of his word despite the inevitable copy-errors that were bound to take place over thousands of years.

      Report Post » Right_on_the_Left_Coast  
    • HankScram
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 4:42pm

      God is Jealous and Wrathful? Those sound like petty human emotions – feelings many people work to overcome. I’d like to give the almighty a little more credit.

      Report Post »  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:49pm

      Yes. He is Jealous. He doesn’t like to see any of His children enter into relationships with those that would do them harm. We aren’t talking anthropormorphism, we are talking love.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 2:58am

      @HANKSCRAM……….Exodus 34: 14 For you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because Jehovah, whose name is Jealous, he is a jealous God.
      He requires exclusive devotion , no worship of false gods.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Tretka
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 11:43pm

      Comment to Gold Coin and Review-

      Freedom of religion and practice is okay by you, right?

      Report Post » Tretka  
  • Firebrand
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:13am

    @blow
    I’ve never really thought about the origins of the religious cultures in a chronological way, can you post some links to your sources?

    Report Post » Firebrand  
    • Applehead
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:12pm

      The Bible says exactly what the Holy Spirit wants it to say!!! How can you believe that God created everything and could do anything and “He Is Who Is” and not believe the Bible was divinely inspired through man by the Holy Spirit! In case you haven’t noticed, LOL, God always leaves a little for faith! When you think about it, its brilliant! Do you expect any different from God!?!?

      Report Post »  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:56pm

      I never said that the bible wasn’t divinely inspired, just that man is flawed and extremely unlikely to be able to fully comprehend the message. Man, being man, would fill in his misunderstanding with what he did understand. It would be like trying to translate a latin version today. There would a large amount of the nuances of a different language lost in translation. It’s my understanding that the group here is trying to rectify that by trying to make sure that all modern texts are exactly like the most ancient texts they can find. That’s all I was saying.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
  • JGraham III
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:57am

    I read this story on MSN before I saw it here; the comments to that one were snarky to say the least. The comments there as well as here are much like the response Paul got when he presented the gospel at Mars Hill: some mocked the ressurrection; some said “we will hear thee again of these matters”, and some believed. The scriptures both OT and NT have withstood the critic’s attacks for a very long time. The critics are gone and in a few generations, forgotten. The Word of our God liveth and abideth forever. I applaud the work these men are doing. It is the duty of all who love the Word to “rightly divide” it. We stand before God on how we do that. What other men who disdain the Word think of this is immaterial.

    Report Post »  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:44am

      Some modern translations of the Holy Scriptures are taking a lot of liberties in their freely changing the proper language of the text. Be careful when buying some of these “new and improved ” translations.

      Stick with an old King James Version, an old American Standard Version or a New World Translation. They are accurate without taking inappropriate liberties in sentence structure.
      As far as a horrible new translation, don’t even think about the New Catholic Bible. It is a mess.

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:48am

      Proof of the design of the Bible can be found from within the Bible. Here is a prophecy about Christ found within Genesis 5-Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow; The Blessed God shall come down teaching (that) His death shall bring (the) despairing rest.

      Adam Man
      Seth Appointed
      Enosh Mortal
      Kenan Sorrow;
      Mahalalel The Blessed God
      Jared Shall come down
      Enoch Teaching
      Methuselah His death shall bring
      Lamech The Despairing
      Noah Rest, or comfort.

      Isn’t God and his word awesome and inspiring! Amen!

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:00pm

      beckwasfox,

      What are you saying??? Why are you saying it???

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • 4XGrace
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:33pm

      ALL modern translations of the Bible are PERVERSIONS!!!!! The NASB, ASB, RSV, RV, TEV, NIV, the Vulgate, the JB and all that crap comes straight from the pit of HELL! The only true Bible on earth IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE is the AV – the Authorized Version a.k.a. KJV – anyone that goes to a different Bible for salvation is dammed to hell.

      What the author of this article fails to point out is which text these perverts are trying to “modernize”. Is it the corrupted Bomberg text or the true Masoretic text? Answer me that before publishing this kind of drivel.

      God is a jealous God and he said that HE would preserve his Word, complete and without error. So what is man in this prideful endeavor? Nothing but a froward fool trying to put God in a box.

      “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2: 8 & 9

      Report Post » 4XGrace  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:37pm

      If you read the geneology of Adam through Noah and translate the Hebrew names to English you find a prophecy of the Messiah. The Bible is a perfectly integrated message.
      Hebrew English
      Adam -Man
      Seth -Appointed
      Enosh -Mortal
      Kenan -Sorrow;
      Mahalalel-The Blessed God
      Jared -Shall come down
      Enoch -Teaching
      Methuselah-His death shall bring
      Lamech -The Despairing
      Noah -Rest, or comfort

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • Bearfoot
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:41pm

      Old Truckers,
      I think beckwasfox is trying to use some code by associating names with their meanings, and then to create a sentence that is encouraging using those name meanings.

      He could have worked a bit more to explain what he is trying to do.

      Report Post » Bearfoot  
    • Bearfoot
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:44pm

      Ahh, looks like we were typing at the same time, thanks beckwasfox. :-)

      Report Post » Bearfoot  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 1:14pm

      Thanks Bear. I get a little excited about sharing God’s word. I hope that clarified the matter somewhat.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:07pm

      Grace, – “the Authorized Version a.k.a. KJV – anyone that goes to a different Bible for salvation is dammed to hell.”

      Who “authorized” the King James Version? It was King James.
      It was translated from Hebrew and Greek Scripture into English in 1611 by order of King James of England. It is a remarkable translation but your statement is not taking into account that other versions can be very valuable to a Bible student to have the ability to get insight into understanding a difficult verse. English, as spoken in 1611 is sometimes difficult for modern English speaking persons to understand.
      Thus a good modern translation is very valuable. Beware though of translations that are very loose in their respect of Bible canon.

      Here is a question – What makes the New King James Version new? How is it different from the old KJV?

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
    • foobear
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:53pm

      4XGrace: Oh, you’re a funny one.

      The King James Version of the Bible is a horrible translation, with hundreds of mistranslations and problems in it.

      I find it hilarious when fundies claim it is the only valid English translation, as if the Bible were originally *written* in English or something.

      Unless you were being sarcastic, in which case I apologize and join in with you in making fun of the idiots who think the KJV is the only acceptable translation.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • louise
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:32pm

      To 4XGRACE..
      You claim that there is only one true version of the Bible and if anyone reads other versions they are going to hell. I am wondering how exactly you account for people all over the world, reading all the different versions of the Bible that are available, have come to the saving knowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord and Saviour and they surrender their lives to Him? Scripture says that all scripture is God-breathed. It is Spiritual in nature. 4XGRACE, no matter what version of the bible a person happens to read, the Spirit of the Word always comes through. That is God.

      Report Post » louise  
    • 4XGrace
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:06pm

      BlackTooth, FooBear and Louise, you’re all heathens if you think that KJV is not the only true Bible in the English language. King James, duly made king by God’s authority authorized the translation as God moved him to. The RV and EVERY OTHER translation in the english language was not authorized but penned in rebellion to God’s Word. The KJV requires only a grade 5 level of education to read and comprehend it. Every so called bible requires something in the order of a grade 12 level of education. If you go to the KJV with heart willing to be taught by God, God will grant you understanding of the King’s english. The drivel that comes out these days as bible and inspired only confuse, confute and confound the true believing heart that seeks after God. People who say the KJV is full of errors and mistranslations have never looked at the facts or done an HONEST study of the Bible. Stop deceiving yourselves that your wisdom is higher and mightier than God’s. He will only blind you to the truth, turn out your lights and give you delusions. Remember that there is only one true Christ, one true WORD of God, one true light.

      “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8 & 9

      Report Post » 4XGrace  
    • louise
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 7:18am

      To 4XGRACE

      You still didn’t answer my question. How do you account for the people all over the world whose hearts have been turned back to God regardless of which Bible version they read…?

      Report Post » louise  
    • ChristianLayman
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 12:14pm

      @ 4XGrace

      You’ve got to be kidding me. The KJV, while one of the first English translations, was NOT the first, nor was it the translation used by the Pilgrims (that was the Geneva Bible, though I’m not sure on the date). I’ve gone over some of the verses in the KJV and compared them to some of the modern translations I have and yeah, there are differences, some more glaring then others, but taken in with the context of the entire chapter / book, not worth getting my bolts in a twist over. With that said, my DRV (Douay-Rheims) Bible is a fine translation, the first version coming out prior to the 1611 KJV and having a similar enough translation to be widely accepted. My personal non-study bible is an Ignatius Press 2nd Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, not to be confused with the NRSV, which has some of the more liberal language found in the NABRE and JPS Bibles. And yes, there are awful translations out there, but good grief, if I was to go to an extreme, I wouldn’t trust anything out of St. Jerome’s translation. LATIN VULGATE ONLY!

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 4:52pm

      .@4xGRACE……….KJV is a poor translation with many errors and was rushed to print.
      http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Textus_Receptus Received Text …………The language was out dated even at that time in 1611

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 5:07pm

      @4xGRACE………………James 2: 14 – 26 ……………….Faith without works is daed

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 5:10pm

      Faith without works is dead (sorry) I was rushing like Textus Receptus

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 5:16pm

      @4xGRACE…………Faith without works is dead (sorry) I was rushing like Textus Receptus

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • 4XGrace
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 12:03am

      Louise, to what god have their hearts been turned?
      Christianlayman, did I say that the KJV was first? But since you bring it up. the AV was 7th in a line of English Bibles. 7th to be tried by fire and purified.
      Greenwood, you are dead in your works because you cannot put your hands on the Texus Receptus. Maybe you are reading Scrivener’s. Did you know that he translated that from the AV? There is no TR. The TR was a body of texts in existence when the AV was translated but it has never existed in one book. Do your research.
      Ya’ll should count how many words are left out by every English translation after the AV. something to the tune of 34,000 words. Tell me, with your sophisticated modern and not so modern translations while you work to secure, procure and ensure your salvation are you very sure that what you read and worship is really the Word of God? Or is it some anti-christ? Some abomination that God put there in front of you because one day you decided to believe the lies of man or doubted that God could do what he promised to do. That one Bible in the English language was enough for him to change the world.
      BTW, to whom is the book of James addressed? Answer me that before you go to it to promulgate some perversion of salvation for our time; the time of grace. Rightly divide the Word of God because there are many gospels throughout the Bible. Adam’s was “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it”. Pretty darn simple, wasn’t

      Report Post » 4XGrace  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 2:13am

      @4xGrace…………….http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/TR.html

      James is addressed to the 12 tribes that are scattered about.

      James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father declared righteous by works after he had offered up Isaac his son upon the altar ? 22 You behold that [his] faith worked along with his works and by [his] works [his] faith was perfected,

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 10:37am

      Yo Beckwasfox:
      Cool… the bible is full of such examlpes.
      Yo 4XGRACE:
      You lost me. Please correct me if I am wrong. Are you saying that there is only one true version (re writing) of the origional? If I gave you some matches and wood, would you burn me at the stake because I read a different version than you!!! You are certainly comming across that way to me. Any man anywhere who hears the “good news” of Christ and believes and follows is saved. Is this not TRUE grace. Who the heck are you to condem another because they read a different version then you??? I have 5 different versions and compare them on ocassion. I have yet to find them to contradict one another. Why is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and to some extent John in the bible when they repeat the same stories???

      Report Post »  
    • 4XGrace
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 12:57pm

      So Greenwood you are a Jew then in the Tribulation?
      4Truth2All, I don‘t condem you but if your bibles don’t then you you‘re reading Satan’s version.
      Exactly what is the “good new” of Christ? Why do they have to “believe and follow”?
      Salvation is very simple. The Gospel of our time, the time of grace is very simple:
      “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2: 8 & 9.
      Though it is too simple for the money mongering Pastors, Priests and what have you that need to be fed with the mammon of this world. They teach from James as part of our salvation in this time of grace that we MUST work in order to show evidence of our salvation.
      Ephesians goes on in verse 10 “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”
      Salvation BEFORE works. Works have NOTHING to do with salvation. NO WORKS doesn‘t mean you’re not saved. NO WORKS doesn‘t mean you don’t keep your salvation. Salvation is not a work of ours it is God’s work.
      In the Tribulation there is a different salvation, it is a salvation that is dependant on one’s work of faith and holding on till the end. The millennium is a different salvation again because when we see him what more is there to hope for? That will be a salvation of submission.
      Adam had the simplest salvation “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, th

      Report Post » 4XGrace  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 2:39pm

      @4xGRACE…………You say that….The KJV requires only a grade 5 level of education to read and comprehend it.
      Well I guess you’re all set then.
      1 Corinthians 3: 10 -15 …………………..13. each ones works will become manifest,
      1 Corinthians 3:2
      1 Peter 2: 1,2
      Hebrews 5: 11- 14 ………….YOU have become dull in your hearing. 12. For, indeed, although YOU ought to be teachers in view of the time, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and YOU have become such as need milk, not solid food. 13………………………YOU ARE A BABE 14. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use of their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong. I believe You just have a lack of understanding.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • louise
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 4:30pm

      X4GRACE,
      You still did not answer my question. how do you account for all the people all over the world who have come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour no matter which Bible version they read? For me, back in the 60′s it was the RSV. I think you had better leave the judgement of the hearts of men to GOD who is the only one who CAN judge the hearts of men.
      Your argument with me is moot and not biblical because your focus is on language, not the Spirit of the Word.

      Report Post » louise  
    • 4XGrace
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 4:54pm

      GreenWood: Yuppers, I am a babe. I desire the sincere milk of the word. Notice though, that it is the sincere milk of the word … not some perversion penned just for the desire of more money from more sales of a version that changes words here and there (without reason) and leaves out words like blood, mercy, son of God, or even whole verses and chapters. Tell me, why are you so afraid of the AV? Is it because it has the power to convict? Does it make you feel like a sinner when you read it? Or is it too simple for thee to understand the difference between the plural you and singular thee, thou and thine?
      If you indeed are so mature, as you obviously claim to be why do you look down at me? Why not turn your face towards God and worship him in spirit and truth? Or is it because you don’t have his spirit nor his truth? Do you constantly have to check the ground that you are standing on because of the shifting sands of the new versions that you so obviously love. Go ahead, worship Satan for he is the author of all that confuses, confounds and confutes the Word of God. Putting instead of the true Christ forward, a froward bloodless anti-christ making nought of what you think you believe; making you food for the wolves that suck your life away while they make you feel good and right and dam you to hell.

      Report Post » 4XGrace  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 5:36pm

      @4xGRACE………………“ Ye are dull of hearing” is that better
      http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:1-3;&version=NIV;

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • foobear
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 6:50pm

      @4XGRACE: I commend you on your excellent parody of people who believe that the KJV of the Bible is the only acceptable translation. The KJV “needs only a 5th grade education”, whereas everything else needs a 12th grade education? Excellent trolling, ma’am, though a bit obvious, as most 5th graders can read the Good News translation, but struggle through the KJV.

      I also love how you think that having King James, who was “duly made king by God’s authority” (LOL!) authorize a translation somehow makes it more holy than the works authorized by actual churches.

      Your parody of a brain-dead fundie is spot on. Well played. Well played, indeed.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:11am

      Yo 4XGRACE:
      I am sorry, but I am having a hard time following your thinking. It seems very inconsistent and contradictory. I do not mean this as an insult. You said you are a babe and you enjoy the milk of the world. If this is so; OK. Than you should listen to those more mature, and maturity should be patience with your lack of it. I realize that we are saved by grace. I know the verses by heart, GRACE is not the allowance of one to sit around and do nothing, or continue to live as you please. Grace is what God gives in order for you to overcome the world and do those things he has called you to , and live life as the bible instructs. The bible says that a man without works is DEAD. So yes, if you claim to be saved you should be producing fruit as the bible says Do you know the verse that says… work out your salvation with fear and trembling…. I saw a bumper sticker one time that said — Read the bible, it will scare the hell out of you. I liked this because of the double meaning

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:38am

      Yo 4XGRACE:
      The good news of Christ IS HIS SALVATION. You say it’s simple,I agree. Why then do you complicate it. There is one salvation. It a one time eternal moment.WE are to believe and follow because that’s very SIMPLY what the bible instrusts us to do. What bible do you read, and what churches teaching do you sit under?

      Report Post »  
    • OpenMindedToo
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 9:37pm

      Old Truckers:
      You might want to reconsider your stand on the New World Translation. There are many translation changes in that bible (including no use of the word “grace” which is fundamental to the Christian faith).

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:35pm

      @OPENMINDEDTOO……………“Grace” = UNDESERVED KINDNESS isn’t it really the same thing.
      openminded I don’t know maybe you should change that to close minded one

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • riverforum
      Posted on August 16, 2011 at 12:33pm

      @ OldTruckers
      You mentioned…”Stick with an old King James Version, an old American Standard Version or a New World Translation They are accurate without taking inappropriate liberties in sentence structure.”

      Take a look at 1 John 5:7 in the KJV or NKJV and then in the NIV. Then, compare that to the Greek from the Textus Majorus or any authoritative Greek (try Alfred Marshall’s interlinear)

      Note that the passage about the “Father, Son, and Holy Ghost” do not exist. This is evidence of post Latin Vulgate Catholic tampering and trinitarian interpolation. It has been used for centuries as a trinitarian proof-text. This is akin to the Piltdown Man being used to prop up evolution. In this case, the bias of the translators made it into the KJV soI say that going back to source languages is ALWAYS important as we can stop perpetuating lies, letting them masquerade as Truth. We do need to get our Bibles as close to the original texts as possible to remain free from error. Paul said, though a man or an angel preach any other gospel than what he preached, that man was cursed of God. I am not one to hurl anethmas like Catholic and Presbyterian doctrine is apt to do, yet we should keep in mind the severity and importance of spiritual error. The KJV only crowd claims that the KJV is the only true word of God. It is a good translation indeed, but in this case the NIV revisers got it RIGHT when they changed the English text to more closely reflect the original sourc

      Report Post »  
  • trolltrainer
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:53am

    I am noticing a trend here with Billy Hallowell. I am guessing he is the “faith” editor for the blaze and he is obviously a liberal Christian shown by the nature of these stories that keep popping up. I wonder if Glenn Beck himself is aware of these stories? If so then I am going to have to agree with Beckisnuts and several others that are claiming Beck is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He preaches about coming to God but his website is running stories meant to detract from the Bible.

    Let me say this, this story, like the Adam and Eve story is not only slanted, it can be shown to be bogus. Billy is welcome to his opinions but he should be professional enough to write in an unbiased way. He does not. Think about this, this project by literal critics has been going on for over 50 years yet all Billy can cite are the weak examples listed here? A mistranslated word? And what he claims is prophecy written after the fact, but there is no way to verify this despite the assurance of these liberal critics.

    Glenn, get a handle on your website and your editor or stand by him and be known by true born-again Christians as a liberal.

    Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:03am

      I wrote something this morning in a Christian slant, that was not printed. I am quite sure that it has to do with fear. But I just remembered something very important. Glenn is a Mormon, so I guess different strokes for different folks, but the important thing is that we believe in Jesus the Son of God who took the sins of the world upon Himself and was raised on the third day and still lives. I would love to hear your take on the Adam and Eve story. I happen to believe it, but it is interesting debate.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:21am

      Asheshtoashes,

      Thank you for the opportunity to further clarify my position here. Glenn is indeed a Mormon and I have defended his faith too many times to count in here. I will also stand by Catholics, JWs, and even Muslims and atheists. I am not saying they will all go to heaven, only that they have the right to worship (or not worship) as they choose. God Himself has given us this choice. Likewise, if Billy Hallowell wants to be a liberal “Christian” then he is certainly welcome.

      I also want to emphasize that I welcome the debate as long as it is an HONEST debate. The work these Bible Project scholars is doing is NECESSARY!!! There is a place for the literary critics. The problem is in the inaccurate slant of these articles. They claim things as fact that are not fact. They are designed to cast dispersion on the Bible and on Christianity even though they are offered from a “Christian” viewpoint. This is bogus, it is the work of Satan. It is intended to shake people from their faith. The true facts are there are indeed differences in these ancient manuscripts, but not a single one bears any significance. The Chicago Statement on Bible Inerrancy recognizes that translation and transmission errors are evident, the KJV is NOT the unadulterated Word of God, it is merely a faulty translation like every other faulty translation. BUT…the errors are insignificant, they do not change a single doctrine of theology.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:31am

      They do not change the meaning of ANY Scripture.

      Likewise, in the Adam and Eve story Mr. Hallowell takes the stand that DNA proves evolution. This cannot be further from the truth! The entire article was slanted and biased and false. To what purpose was it posted here?

      You asked where I stand on the issue? I am a young earth creationist. I was saved at age 35 and had believed 100% in evolution to that point. I researched the subject hard over 10 years, and it continues to be a major passion in my life, and I not only came to the conclusion that evolution is simply impossible, by the very laws of science they espouse, and that the age of the earth or universe simply cannot be proven one way or another. I have no reason not to take the Word of God on these matters. Do I think a saved Christian MUST believe in young earth creationism? Heavens no! However, I do not see how a born again Christian can NOT take the Word of God as ultimate and inerrant truth. Yom means 24 hours in the context given over and over throughout Genesis 1, there is no gap of eons where a pre-adamic race existed, and you cannot have sin and death BEFORE Adam fell. This is simply unbiblical. I do not see HOW a Christian can reconcile the Bible with evolution. To do so you must disbelieve the Bible.

      If I could not take the Bible as literal truth…All of the Bible…Then I would be an atheist. Why believe anything? Why believe in the resurrection of Christ?

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:36am

      Why believe what He told us? Why not just create your own brand of religion, like so many men do, with no guidance from God? No thank you. I will stick with the Bible.

      Anyway, that is my long sermon. I did not even comment in the Adam and Eve story for these reasons. I was not going to comment here, but this story weighed on my mind all morning. I was moved to make the comments I did in my first post. I thought Beck wanted to bring people TO God? These stories, presented in the way they are, are only designed to destroy faith and turn people from God. The issues are real, and they bear scrutiny. But baby Christians especially tend to believe the BS of the world over the Word of God. If a Christian wants to examine these issues then they need a full understanding of them, not the kind of silly “journalism” presented here.

      I am disappointed in this site and in Glenn Beck. But that is just me…

      Report Post »  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:19pm

      @Trolltrainer-Thank you for your comments. Truly inspiring to me today as I too was steeped in the culture of evolution until the age of 33 when I was saved. One day, I realized I had a problem as I was a Christian who retained my belief in evolution. I decided to argue with a Christian friend who simply told me to ask God. I prayed about it and wow did I recieve an answer. The scientific evidence against evolution has mounted ever since. You are also very correct in saying that those who don’t believe in all of the Bible are in danger and in need of having their hearts examined.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:44pm

      lynskinners,

      Do you honestly think you are telling me something I did not already know?

      Last I checked a person’s religion did not save them. In fact there is only one thing that will save them. That is Jesus Christ.

      Now, how can a Spirit led Christian be a Mormon or a Catholic? I do not know…It is not my place to answer that. I just know that eternal salvation requires a believer to be born again. I am. End of story. I just sow, I do not reap.

      Report Post »  
    • J-Law
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 1:13pm

      I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again… Beck is NOWHERE around The Blaze. We all know how ADD he is, and he’s starting this GIGANTIC project with BeckTV. The Blaze was his “next project” about four years ago. He set it in motion and has completely left it to others to manage. I don’t even think he checks up on it. Unfortunately, unlike most of his other endeavors, those in charge of The Blaze are either trying to bring it down from inside, or truly didn’t catch the vision Beck had for it. It’s a shame. I doubt he spent so much effort and MONEY on the project for this to be its result.

      Report Post »  
    • WSGAC
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 1:39pm

      Young Earth Creationism is buffoonery.

      Report Post »  
    • bteacher99
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 1:55pm

      I’m just not going to read all the comments on this article. If no one else has addressed the idea of Billy Hallowell being a “liberal Christian”, I’d like to know what specifically you consider a “liberal Christian” and what evidence you have against Billy?

      I’ve never met him, but I’ve read several blog posts and Twitter rants, and I don’t see that his views are liberal at all. Perhaps our definitions differ.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:19pm

      BTeacher99,

      I may have spoken out of turn about Mr. Hallowell. If he just grabbed these stories from the AP or another source then he is not the author and I would not know what his personal beliefs are. My complaint still remains though, why would you post stories like this on this site? Anyone can write trash and that is all these stories are. I am here for facts, not someone’s OPINION on whether the Bible has been significantly changed, which is what this article leads us to believe.

      WSGAC,

      That is a mighty convincing argument you have there! Tell you what, you prove the earth is any older than a few thousand years and I will listen. You think you can, but the thing is, all your proof is based on assumption. You are just not versed enough in science to know that. It is okay, I understand your ignorance. I used to laugh at young earthers myself, it does seem ludicrous. I cannot prove the age of the earth…But neither can you!

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:10pm

      Troll Trainer…What you have written is true. His laws are written upon the hearts of His own and His own hear His voice. Thank you so much.. Many blessings to you.

      Report Post »  
    • Darren
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:16pm

      trolltrainer;

      “Now, how can a Spirit led Christian be a Mormon or a Catholic?”

      It’s actually somewhat “typical” for a person who does not consder a Mormon as “Christian” to say the same thing about Catholics. I say they are both Christians and both firmly believe in being led by the Spirit.

      as far as you being a young earther is fine with me. I personally believe the earth is indeed far older, even hundreds and thoursands of times older, than 6,000 years and that the Bible does not deny this. In the original Hebrew the word they used for “day” is better understood as a “time period”. Thus God created the Earth in 6 “time periods”. Furthermore, a “day” does not have to mean “24 hours”. If someone says, “in the day of the dinosaur,” it does not mean a 24 hour period of the dinosaur.

      I’m not making an issue of your conclusion, and I’ve no interest in “proving” anything to anyone. I’m just giving you something to ponder on I guess.

      Report Post » Darren  
    • WSGAC
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:33pm

      @TROLLTRAINER – Yep, assumptions. I assume this universe is very large, and that it takes a long time for light to travel from one edge of the galaxy to the other…and an even longer time for light to travel from one galaxy to another. Take the Andromeda Galaxy for instance. It takes light 2.5 million years to travel from there to earth. Imagine that, a universe that gives plenty of evidence that it’s very old, but a buffoonish interpretation of Genesis that insists it’s only a few thousand years old? Guess that makes God some kind of trickster?

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 6:09pm

      Darren,

      I have a problem with any religion that uses anything extra-scriptural as divinely inspired. This is just me, I believe sola scriptura. I do believe a Mormon or a Catholic can be Spirit led, I have said as much. I also said that a Spirit led Christian continues to grow in the Word. Scripture nullifies much that is taught in these religions.

      As far as your day-age theory point I have already addressed this. The Hebrew word for day is yom. It is a consensus among Hebrew professors, many even secular and even atheistic, that in the context of Genesis 1 this word denotes a 24 hour period. But further, if you place dinosaurs, or any other living creature for that matter, before Adam’s sin then you have a serious problem. It was Adam’s sin that brought death and destruction to the earth. I do thank you for your post, I have seriously pondered this subject.

      WSGAC,

      I agree that the universe is unimaginably huge and that we do receive light that is millions of light years away! Creationists have several theoretical answers for this, I think the work done by Dr. Russell Humphries is probably on the right track. But let’s just use a theory you will accept. Does not the Big Bang start out with all matter compressed into a space smaller than the head of a pin? And has this matter not expanded from this point, much like a balloon being blown up, to the size it is today? Is it not still expanding? This easily answers your objection.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:55pm

      Troll Trainer
      I am so sorry, I was in a hurry, but the story that I was saying that I beleive is the one of the Bible.I noticed one on teh Blaze a few days back but I didn’t waste my time reading it. I guess I should have, but I saw it was a liberal Christian slant,. and to me that just means people who believe they are Christians, but haven’t come into the fullness of Jesus Christ, so I usually don’t [pay attention to them.. Do you think that the KJV is the most accurate text? That is all I have studied from.. but I have been told that the NASB is more accurate because it gives all the Hebraic meanings of the words. What do you think?

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:38pm

      Anyway, it has been good talking to y’all. I am stepping out for the evening but I am sure i will catch up with everyone in other threads in the future.

      God bless

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:53pm

      Ashestoashes,

      I wrote a full 1500 character reply that I guess is not going to post…Sorry…

      I am not going to try to recreate it. Suffice to say that I use the KJV as my personal Bible but I endorse reading whatever translation you are most comfortable with as that will encourage you to actually read your Bible and not skip it. For more serious study I actually suggest multiple reliable versions. As many as you can get. Also use Strong‘s or Vine’s and go back to the original Greek or Hebrew. I strongly suggest Bible software as it makes this task so much easier. I can recommend e-sword, it is free and is an awesome program.

      http://www.e-sword.net/

      Report Post »  
    • WSGAC
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:13pm

      @TROLLTRAINER, How does an expanding universe that is billions of light years across explain what you suppose?

      Put another way, if an expanding universe can be extrapolated back some 13.7 billion years, where is the evidence that suggests it’s really only 10,000 years old?

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:10pm

      @WSCAG ….You certainly have an argument about the age of the earth, but Troll Trainer is right, you can’t prove it. But what you do is limit God in Romans 9:20-23 God explains a lot to us. He says something to the effect of “How can the clay say to the potter…why have you made me like this?” Humans are created beings, we were created in God’s image, but we are not God. Man is wise in his own conceit and thinks he can explain everything. God is omnipresent, meaning He can be everywhere at once. you don’t think that he could roll up this universe in the blink of an eye and roll it out again? He created it. You cannot know the glory and splendor of the One who created glorious skies and sunsets, oceans , mountains, and waterrfalls, a perfect innocent newborn baby, or birds that sing outside our windows. We can not know the perfect beauty of heaven, but we can put all foolishness aside , accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour , believing He is the only begotten Son of God, that he was cruicified for our sins, was raised to life on the third day and lives, allowing His Spirit to live in us. There is rest in Him, and the promise of heaven to those who believe and are obedient to His Word.

      Report Post »  
    • WSGAC
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:21am

      @ASHESTOASHES – Actually you can’t prove anything, but that is a lame argument for a theory on a young universe. You apparently are unaware of another problem you create! If God creates a universe which gives every indication/testimony of being billions of years old, yet really is not, then there is deception or trickery going on somewhere!

      Report Post »  
    • We are Americans
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 2:11pm

      @trolltrainer. I too am a born again
      Christian. I thank you for your wisdom
      and insight on these issues. I also
      dont understand why the Blaze runs
      these stories. My brother is a pastor
      who is concerned when Glenn speaks about
      miracles and the pillar of fire at his
      Jerusalem event. I too get a little
      unsettled when I hear those comments.
      I pray over these things a lot. God bless you.

      Report Post »  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:05pm

      @DARREN .you are correct about the creative days not being 24 hours. It’s simply a period of time God used to prepare the earth for man. When someone says back in the day or back in his day they are not speaking of a single day. Webster Dictioary 5. a period of time; as, the best writer of his day 6.a period of power, glory, etc. as he’s had his day. So even in english it can have different meanings.
      The Word or Logos means logic and reason we can all use some of that.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
  • CulperGang
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:25am

    blowback you were on the roll until you said “Jesus was not a Jew.” Go read his lineage. Where he ended living is totally immaterial to his ethnicity. Too much revisionism too much stiring the pot.
    Preception can be and is manipulated, aka “Mass Media” The scribes were the mass media of the times. Want to know God? Want to know his “truths of reality?“ Look at the ”Physics” of his creation….true perception of HIM is in plain sight. You just have to understand its workings. Now that is NOT so easy. People need to stop stirring the pot with their limited wisdoms and start studying “physics of nature” in earnest, for the natural order of things and for guidance from God.

    Report Post » CulperGang  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:04pm

      JW Law…….What I understand is that Beck hired some lady who was at a liberal media station of some kind because she thought it would be interesting working at the Blaze, so may be it. It could be similar to “The Vew” I understand that a Conservative owns it, but they have some idiot women liberals on it that everyone loves to hate. I don‘t patronize them and I don’t understand people that do. The Blaze has been pretty good. It does make for good debate. One person on here gets me pretty tickled and calls out the Blaze “Nazis” for not reporting what’s going on, and ya know what? I have seen Blaze report it shortly after. So it’s pretty cool.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:44pm

      Thank You TrollTrainer.. it is much appreciated.

      Report Post »  
  • ashestoashes
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:23am

    Blaze ….Did I say something wrong?

    Report Post »  
  • palerider54
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:19am

    Look over your shoulders and make sure nobody is listening. I am about to reveal a HUGE secret to you.

    READY?

    Come closer, The King James Bible is the PERFECT WORD OF GOD.

    Not one word added, not one subtracted that God did not author.

    If they found an old script that is different, it is different because God did not want that one in his word.

    He said in 1st, Corinthians Cp1 verse 27 ” For God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.”

    Non believers will never stop trying to change the word of God instead of changing their lives to fit his word.

    They think if they could just find one mistake, just one, then they can justify picking and choosing which scriptures they will accept, which ones to reject, based on the sin in their lives.

    Report Post »  
    • CulperGang
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:27am

      When did God come down to earth and write the King James Version? if he didn’t then it is NOT perfect. Scribes are humans and humans are flawed creatures. So to say that the KJV is the perfect word of God, is totally misleading. Shame on you.

      Report Post » CulperGang  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:33am

      Like believers pick and choose the parts that THEY live by. Do you give less than 10% of your income to your church? Do you ever wear clothes of more than one fiber blended? Do you stone rebellious children? Homosexuals? Adulterers?

      Thought not.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:39am

      you libs are so laughable with same old BS talking points…you always miss that part of about Jesus fulfilling the law…and since you libs don’t understand the meaning of fulfill…

      a: to put into effect : execute
      b: to meet the requirements of (a business order)
      c: to bring to an end
      d: to measure up to : satisfy

      you atheists need to get some new talking points, parroting the same old lies gets old…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • palerider54
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:47am

      When the Church canonized the Bible into the Kings English, it was inspired by God.

      Do you actually think he would let them get even one word wrong or out of place?

      If you can’t accept it as perfect and change your life accordingly, then the Bible becomes nothing more that a feel good book , people accepting only the parts they like, the parts that they can twist and squint until it approves of what they are doing.

      I have always said, to study the word you have to realize who is talking, who they are talking to, what they are trying to accomplish, where it is occurring and why.

      In other words the scriptures are just like POWs. If you separate one from the rest, and torture it long enough, you can make it say just about anything you want it to say.

      Report Post »  
    • spicemaster
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:47am

      If a human can get a dog to stay, sit, and beg, then an infinitely powerful GOD can get a human to write exactly what he wants him to write.

      Report Post »  
    • Possessor
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:58am

      University of Chicago has one of the original King James version, that has ALL the books. Certain individuals deleted the Macabee Boy’s, because they signed a treaty with Rome. The Treaty stated that Rome and the Jewish Nation WILL defend each other with ALL their heart. What did “WE” learn in biology class about the heart???

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:05am

      Bravo!!

      Report Post »  
    • palerider54
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:41am

      Lesbian, you said.

      Like believers pick and choose the parts that THEY live by. Do you give less than 10% of your income to your church? Do you ever wear clothes of more than one fiber blended? Do you stone rebellious children? Homosexuals? Adulterers?

      As I have already explained, not now we don’t, thanks to Jesus and the Cross.
      You should really take the time to study the Bible before misquoting it out of context.
      Sad thing is, until you accept it as Gods truth, and become a believer, you will NEVER understand its secrets.

      Report Post »  
    • palerider54
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:59pm

      @CulperGang
      The only time that God came back to earth since mans fall in the garden was when Jesus walked the earth.
      His third part of the trinity, the Holy Spirit came at the request of the people canonizing the scriptures for the King James Bible. If you do not believe the Bible is the perfect word of God I do not understand how you can consider yourself a Christian.
      Jesus fulfilled 100 per cent of the prophecies concerning his arrival, his life, his death and resurrection. A true fact that is mathematically impossible.
      Just as the Holy Bible is 100 per cent the truth, the light and Gods word to his children

      MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND OPEN YOUR EYES..

      Report Post »  
    • Darren
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:24pm

      Palerider;

      I strongly recommend you read this article:

      http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271337/bible-translation-changed-world-rich-lowry

      Its a very appropriate “happy 400th birthday” to the King James Verson of the Bible. While I do not agree it was “perfect”, it is undoubtably the most influencial Bible in the English-speaking world.

      Report Post » Darren  
    • ChristianLayman
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 2:56pm

      It’s awesome. This is what cracks me up. The KJV is an Anglican (English Catholic) translation authorized by that country’s secular monarch, and all the fundies claim that’s the be-all, end-all to everything in the whole wide universe as far as English language translations go, but the can‘t answer the the follow up question which is why the heck they aren’t all good Traditional Anglicans (not to be confused with the travesty of what calls itself the Episcopal Church or liberal Methodist communities).

      Of course, the only reason I can think of that fundies reject Traditional Anglicanism is that their beliefs and practices seem to be too Roman for them. Now it’s stange. The KJV supposedely refutes Catholicism, yet the institution that produced the ULTIMATE translation not only declares itself to be Catholic, we have observed Anglican parishes re-unifying with the Church of Rome! But I‘m supposed to trust some fundamentalist’s PERSONAL interpretation of Holy Scripture instead of the people responsible for producing it in the first place! Good Grief! No wonder the Heathens think we’re all nuts. To all fundamentalists: Please, do everyone else a favor and shut up until you’ve actually gone back and READ Church history, starting with the Fathers immediately succeeding the Apostles and learn what your faith actually teaches rather than this weird perversion of “Bible Alone”. The Church has NEVER taught this.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 6:54pm

      @Palerider: “Come closer, The King James Bible is the PERFECT WORD OF GOD.”

      LOL. There is NOTHING SPECIAL about the KJV. It was authorized by a despot, with no real skill of translation made. There’s HUNDREDS of mistranslations in the KJV, which is why we got the NKJV.

      Claiming it is privileged or special is just one of the blockheaded common mistakes that fundies make.

      The Bible wasn’t written in English. Think about that for a second.

      Report Post » foobear  
  • WakeUp
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:19am

    Wait and see how the hypocritical liberals will jump on this. For a book that they consider all man made and made up, suddenly a one word inaccuracy will be the most significant find in human history.

    Report Post »  
  • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:17am

    “Is it possible that there are errors and man-made blips in the Hebrew Bible?”

    A better question would be, “Is it possible that there are NO errors and man-made blips in any man-made holy book centuries or even millennia old?”

    Of course, this Atheist has long confronted Religionists with the truth of this, but they are blinded by their faith in the “infallible word of god”. Thank you, TheBlaze.com for shining the light of truth on this as well as stories such as the building blocks of life found in space rocks and evangelicals finally doubting the literal existence of Adam and Eve, etc.

    The truth will set you free.

    Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:35am

      when have the atheists ever had any truth? all we’ve seen from atheists is a century of bloodshed, hatred and violence….

      as far as the accuracy of the bible, the dead sea scrolls, which have a version of isaiah a thousand years earlier than the next oldest manuscript, have already proven the accuracy of the scribes…but don’t let facts get in the way of your ideology…you ‘scientific’ types never do….

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • palerider54
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:37am

      Yours is a perfect example of picking and choosing which scriptures you will accept and which ones you must reject in order to justify your lifestyle.

      The Bible IS perfect. Yes it was written by man, but inspired by God. Whenever the man was writing and he tried to change what God told him to write, God firmly let him know to get it right.

      Accept his word as the truth and it will set you free. It will also heal you and free you from your sin.

      Report Post »  
    • Cesium
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:34am

      religious wackjobs on the blaze cannot process the concept of how bibles have been transcribed and translated away from the originals… furthermore if christians really gave a crap about “the word of god” they would heed the torah, and see that christ is not the messiah as god defined the messiah would be!! …. all christians live in their little world of BS…

      Report Post »  
    • Cesium
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:40am

      joe what is funny about you is anyone who questions god (which is even a basic practice in judaism and a major aspect to midrash) or is awed by the compilation of facts that produce evolutionary theory… these people are just racist.. yet if you go to any article on the blaze where your fellow believers are spewing some quite racist comments on incidents of crime involving black people, you are no where to be found to defend them or say anything… Your angle is atheists and evolutionists = racist.. It is totally irrational and psychotic.. my jewish ancestors where slaughtered by christians including hitler

      Report Post »  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:51am

      @cesium…oh so you’re a religious expert as well as a darwiniac wacko…LOL explain Isaiah 53 then to us…and tell us how it does NOT refer to Jesus…this should be good…

      and explain psalm 45 to us…

      6 Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom [is] a right sceptre.

      7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

      this should be good…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:53am

      @cesium, you’re a hate-filled lying wacko, ie a perfect darwiniac. the old lie about hitler being a christian…I mean seriously is that the best you can do? you atheists just spew the same old lies and BS..and you‘ve never explained your god and savior’s comment…

      “The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.” (Darwin, Charles R. [English naturalist and founder of the modern theory of evolution], “The Life of Charles Darwin”, [1902], Senate: London, 1995, reprint, p.64).

      list those lower races…LOL you don’t have the guts to…

      and whats funny is you support your oppressor…you’ve learned to love big brother…

      A direct line runs from Darwin, through the founder of the eugenics movement-Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton-to the extermination camps of Nazi Europe.” (Brookes, Martin.,”Ripe old age,“ Review of ”Of Flies, Mice and Men,” by Francois Jacob, Harvard University Press, 1999. New Scientist, Vol. 161, No. 2171, 30 January 1999, p.41).

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:58am

      oh and what facts that support evolution? nothing in the fossil record, nothing in the lab, no ‘junk dna’ no ‘vestigial organs’ why don‘t you list all these ’facts’ for us? tell ya what, since you’re such a scientist, (or so you say) why don’t you just take a bacteria and evolve in into a multi-cellular animal…you can even name your creation!! play god, its what you atheist wackos want above all else…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Cesium
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:04pm

      oh you want to go quote mining again
      “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” -Hitler

      The Messiah can trace his lineage through his human biological father, back to King David (Isaiah 11:1,10; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:23-24; 37:21-28; Jeremiah 30:7-10; 33:14-16; and Hosea 3:4-5). But Jesus’s lineage cannot go through his human father, according to Christian theology, as Jesus’s father was not Joseph the husband of Mary. According to Christian theology, Jesus’s father was God.

      -from http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation3.html

      Report Post »  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:08pm

      @joe
      Is the book you keep referencing by George Thomas? I searched Amazon and only found one book called “The Life of Charles Darwin”. G. Thomas was the author of that one.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • Cesium
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:11pm

      @joe you also sound like a broken record with your “junk DNA” defense.. It is quite clear in the genetic, and molecular biology community that this was a presumptuous claim, but before regulatory regions and non protein encoding RNA’s were discovered people had no idea and made a hypothesis that the extra DNA were remnants and tagged along… That is both true and false… There are sequence remnants, especially of viral origin that so far are just there… there are also ‘pseudogenes’ which are inactive having once been. If you’re going to yell and scream about junk DNA you might as well be trying to convince people in this day and age to take down the berlin wall…. give it up, it’s in the past

      Report Post »  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:12pm

      @cesium…you do know mary was a descendant of David right?

      and if I am quote mining, then so are you.

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:14pm

      @cesium, the false prediction of junk dna by darwinists prove what a hollow theory evolution is…same for vestigial organs…evolution is useless to science…

      In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin‘s and Alfred Russel Wallace’s evolutionary theories.
      The same can be said about a variety of other 20th-century findings: the discovery of the structure of the double helix; the characterization of the ribosome; the mapping of genomes; research on medications and drug reactions; improvements in food production and sanitation; new surgeries; and other developments.
      Additionally, I have queried biologists working in areas where one might have thought the Darwinian paradigm could guide research, such as the emergence of resistance to antibiotics and pesticides. Here, as elsewhere, I learned that evolutionary theory provides no guidance when it comes to choosing the experimental designs. Rather, after the breakthrough discoveries, it is brought in as a narrative gloss.
      http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/23/evolution-creation-debate-biology-opinions-contributors_darwin.html

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:22pm

      I found another reference for that quote of darwin’s…so I assume its been reprinted in several books…

      2. Charles Darwin: Life and Letters, I, letter to W. Graham, July 3, 1881, p. 316; cited in Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution, by Gertrude Himmelfarb (London, Chatto and Windus, 1959), p. 343.

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:25pm

      @cesium. You are quite wrong about Hitler being a Christian. The Nazi party was a very paganistic cult. There is even a quote of Hitler saying he would stamp out Christianity root and branch. You need to do some research and since you have written falsely you have lost all pretense of authority on any given subject.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:27pm

      @cesium…still waiting for your explanation of Isaiah 53 and psalm 45……along with all those facts that prove evolution….and of course that list of lower races darwin refers to…perhaps another evolutionary textbook will help you….‘a civic biology’ you know, that book at the heart of the ‘scopes monkey trial’…

      Hovannisian quotes from page 196 of Hunter’s textbook:

      At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the other in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or n egro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan, and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America.

      and of course the title of your bible…

      On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

      struggle…where else have I heard that used in the title of a book…..oh yeah my struggle…mein kampf…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:31pm

      @beckwasfox…yeah cesium is of course ignorant of the deutschen christen church hitler and the nazis started to replace christianty…and this….

      So this second Christmas of Hitler’s war finds Niemoller and upwards of 200,000 other Christians (some estimates run as high as 800,000) behind the barbed wire of the frozen Nazi concentration camps. Here men bear mute witness that the Christ—whose birth the outside world celebrates unthinkingly at Christmas—can still inspire a living faith for which men and women even now endure im prisonment, torture and death as bravely as in centuries past.

      http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,765103-1,00.html

      if hitler was such a good christian, why would he put so many christians in concentration camps???

      answer that cesium you gutless piece of trash.

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 12:49pm

      @joe
      I made sure to read Dr. Skell’s op-ed in Forbes. I don‘t think that he is arguing against the validity of Darwin’s theory, but instead on it’s usefulness in modern experimental design. He actually says that Darwin’s theory has been beneficial near the beginning of the article. I’m not trying to support anything, I’m just saying that the context of the quote you are using may need to be modified a bit.

      “Moreover, there are a number of us in the scientific community who, while we appreciate Darwin’s contributions, think that the rhetorical approach of scientists such as Coyne unnecessarily polarizes public discussions and­–even more seriously­–overstates both the evidence for Darwin‘s theory of historical biology and the benefits of Darwin’s theory to the actual practice of experimental science.” – Dr. Skell Forbes article

      He explicitly says that there is an “overstatement”, but not a fallacy.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:23pm

      @firebrand..really? please provide the quote…I look over the early part of that article…the title of which is

      The Dangers Of Overselling Evolution
      Philip S. Skell, 02.23.09, 01:47 PM EST
      Focusing on Darwin and his theory doesn’t further scientific progress.

      Skell is saying evolution isn’t science with this statment:

      Coyne seems to believe the major importance of biological science is its speculations about matters which cannot be observed, tested and verified, such as origin of life, speciation, the essences of our fossilized ancestors, the ultimate causes of their changes, etc.

      Skell also adds this in the beginning..

      Crucial to all fruitful experiments in biology is their design, for which Darwin‘s and Wallace’s principles apparently provide no guidance.

      I think you are the one taking his quote out of context. I think you are placing far too much emphasis on ‘appreciate darwin’s contributions’ which skell does not bother to list…..

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:27pm

      @firebrand…ok you don’t think evolution is a fallacy…so post your evidence for it. and do you believe in darwin’s atheistic unguided evolution, or wallace’s directed evolution?

      my point in posting that article wasn’t to disprove evolution, but to state exactly what that quote I said stated…evolution is USELESS for science. I think you are taking me out of context.

      btw there are allegations that darwin plagiarized evolution from wallace….

      Hardcore Wallace backers say that isn’t good enough. In a new book, “The Darwin Conspiracy: Origins of a Scientific Crime,” Roy Davies, a former producer of science programs for the BBC, accuses Mr. Darwin of stealing ideas about evolution from Mr. Wallace — who was corresponding with him from Indonesia — and passing them off as his own. “Once you change the focus from Darwin to Wallace, you start to realize what a genius Wallace was,” Mr. Davies says.

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122972744031122737.html

      which wouldn’t surprise me at all…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:14pm

      @joe
      I think you miss my point and possibly Dr. Skell’s.
      You posted:
      -Coyne seems to believe the major importance of biological science is its speculations about matters which cannot be observed, tested and verified, such as origin of life, speciation, the essences of our fossilized ancestors, the ultimate causes of their changes, etc.

      –This is a debate on the importance of the basal ideas used when drawing up a hypothesis. Again, Skell is not denying the importance that evolutionary theory has played in the advancement of science and the scientific method. He is arguing that the lack of a historical (and personal) observation prevents definitive conclusions on the causation of an experimental observation. This is the same argument that many astrophysicists use to debate the existence of black holes “I‘ll admit that I’m wrong on the existence of black holes when I see one.”

      -Skell also adds this in the beginning..

      -Crucial to all fruitful experiments in biology is their design, for which Darwin‘s and Wallace’s principles apparently provide no guidance.
      –This proves my point. Skell is not arguing about the contributions of evolutionary theory, but on their validity in designing an experiment.

      The context of the article was not to disprove evolutionary theory as you commonly espouse it to be, but is instead to warn that it is incomplete and cannot be used a priori as a basis for experimental set-up and design.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:20pm

      @fire you say “Again, Skell is not denying the importance that evolutionary theory has played in the advancement of science and the scientific method” yes he is…he’s saying evolution is totally useless in science…

      Crucial to all fruitful experiments in biology is their design, for which Darwin‘s and Wallace’s principles apparently provide no guidance.

      He also states…

      Coyne seems to believe the major importance of biological science is its speculations about matters which cannot be observed, tested and verified, such as origin of life, speciation, the essences of our fossilized ancestors, the ultimate causes of their changes, etc.

      if something cannot be observed, tested and verified…is it science at all?? .

      you say “The context of the article was not to disprove evolutionary theory as you commonly espouse it to be,”

      that is a LIE…I use that quote to do exactly what the article states. to show that evolutionary theory is USELESS in science. I have plenty of other evidence that disproves evolution as a theory starting with the lack of fossil evidence for it.

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:23pm

      oh and actually coyne admits that evolution is useless in science…

      To some extent these excesses are not Mindell’s fault, for, if truth be told, evolution hasn’t yielded many practical or commercial benefits. Yes, bacteria evolve drug resistance, and yes, we must take countermeasures, but beyond that there is not much to say. Evolution cannot help us predict what new vaccines to manufacture because microbes evolve unpredictably. But hasn’t evolution helped guide animal and plant breeding? Not very much. Most improvement in crop plants and animals occurred long before we knew anything about evolution, and came about by people following the genetic principle of `like begets like’. Even now, as its practitioners admit, the field of quantitative genetics has been of little value in helping improve varieties. Future advances will almost certainly come from transgenics, which is not based on evolution at all.

      http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7106/full/442983a.html

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:33pm

      @joe
      “evolution is USELESS to science”
      Again, you may want to modify your argument. The methods and principles used to investigate evolution are extremely valid. The results gained from experiments based on the ideas of evolution have greatly advanced science and scientific questioning. The discovery of the double helix by Franklin and it’s subsequent structure determination by Watson and Crick were based in a growing field trying to determine what substance (protein, nucleic acids, deoxynucleic acids) was responsible for the passage of hereditary information from a parental generation to their offspring. These ideas came directly from the ideas of evolution and heredity.

      I‘m assuming that you are saying that evolution doesn’t explain why different species exist. I would argue that it is a theory that is still be investigated and that the answer hasn’t been found yet. I know that for you, that the answer has been found, and that’s great! Now how do you test your hypothesis? Not how do you prove it, but how do you test it, what are the positive and negative controls, and is your answer law or theory based on your evidence?

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:47pm

      @firebrand.. quote “Again, you may want to modify your argument. The methods and principles used to investigate evolution are extremely valid”

      those methods and principles do not come from evoluitonary theory..and so far they haven’t found very much to support the theory.

      quote “The results gained from experiments based on the ideas of evolution have greatly advanced science and scientific questioning”

      really when Skell just argued that evolution added nothing to the advancement of science? why don’t you list all of those magnificent results from evoluiton? hmmm??

      quote “was responsible for the passage of hereditary information from a parental generation to their offspring. These ideas came directly from the ideas of evolution and heredity. ”

      you do know that evolution had nothing to do with genetics, which was discovered by Mendel a monk, until the synthesis in the 1940s…because evolution was a dying theory by then… in other words you are trying to give credit to evolution where there is none.

      as far as how do you disprove evolution? well to people like you there is no disproving evolution, obviously because its not science, its faith. lets see there is nothing in the fossil record to support it…so where is the data to back up evolution? I don’t see any in the lab either… lacking evidence for evolution, then design is the best alternative…..everywhere we look we see massive complexity that shouts DESIGN…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:48pm

      even the darwinists admit the design…

      One of my favorite resources on flagellar assembly is the book Pili and Flagella: Current Research and Future Trends, edited by Ken Jarrell. The most interesting chapter in that book was contributed by Shin-Ichi Aizawa and is entitled, “What is Essential for Flagellar Assembly?”

      On page 91, Aizawa provides one of the most revealing passages in the book:

      Since the flagellum is so well designed and beautifully constructed by an ordered assembly pathway, even I, who am not a creationist, get an awe-inspiring feeling from its “divine” beauty (Pallen and Matzke, 2006). However, if the flagellum has evolved from a primitive form, where are the remnants of its ancestor? Why don’t we see any intermediate or simpler forms of flagella than what they are today? How was it possible that the flagella have evolved without leaving traces in history?

      http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/08/the_awe-inspiring_beaut049211.html

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:53pm

      and whats funny fire, is you attribute the double helix to evolution when skell EXPLICITLY denies that….

      In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin‘s and Alfred Russel Wallace’s evolutionary theories.
      The same can be said about a variety of other 20th-century findings: the discovery of the structure of the double helix; the characterization of the ribosome; the mapping of genomes; research on medications and drug reactions; improvements in food production and sanitation; new surgeries; and other developments.
      Additionally, I have queried biologists working in areas where one might have thought the Darwinian paradigm could guide research, such as the emergence of resistance to antibiotics and pesticides. Here, as elsewhere, I learned that evolutionary theory provides no guidance when it comes to choosing the experimental designs. Rather, after the breakthrough discoveries, it is brought in as a narrative gloss.
      http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/23/evolution-creation-debate-biology-opinions-contributors_darwin.html

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:57pm

      @fire you say “The discovery of the double helix by Franklin and it’s subsequent structure determination by Watson and Crick were based in a growing field trying to determine what substance ”

      when Skell DENIES evolution had anything to do with it…

      In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin‘s and Alfred Russel Wallace’s evolutionary theories.
      The same can be said about a variety of other 20th-century findings: the discovery of the structure of the double helix; the characterization of the ribosome; the mapping of genomes; research on medications and drug reactions; improvements in food production and sanitation; new surgeries; and other developments

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 4:11pm

      I‘m glad we’ve come to an agreement that Skell wasn‘t saying that evolution isn’t a valid science, but that he argues that it doesn’t dictate how experiments are set up or what experiments are done.

      Genetics has nothing to do with evolution? And genetics didn’t exist until Mendel discovered it? That’s kind of like saying Mt. Everest has nothing to do with plate tectonics, and it didn’t exist until it was discovered by the GTS of India in 1819.

      Mendel read Darwin’s book on speciation 6 years before he sent his work on peas off to be reviewed.

      Again, Skell’s argument was that Darwinian evolution did not dictate the design of his experiments, not that it wasn’t an important scientific theory or that the research thereof was useless.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • Cesium
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:39pm

      @joe call me a gutless piece of trash again but only say it to my face… ill give you my address if you want and i’d love to see you do it! If you say it again on a thread i’ll assume you are the gutless one. you use your same little toy box over and over.. you already posted me that forbes link and it’s total ignorance.. The nature article I agree with…the article also totally acknowledges evolution and you don’t but i guess the author is just another racist.. heliocentric theory is still not proven, why don’t you go after that as another racist scientist ploy.. fool

      Report Post »  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:54pm

      @joe1234- It appears that cesium couldn’t answer it. Credibility fail. LOL!

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:00pm

      @fire uh no, again you’re a LIAR, we haven’t come to agreement about anything…but hey lying for darwin, its what you darwiniacs do…

      no evolution didn’t have anything to do with genetics until the synthesis…

      uh I didn‘t say genetics didn’t exist before mendel…nice lie you do that quite a bit…..I said mendel discovered genetics…get a clue.

      why don‘t you post your proof about mendel reading darwin’s book?? hmmm???

      . (Notably, Charles Darwin was unaware of Mendel’s paper, according to Jacob Bronowski’s The Ascent of Man.) His paper was criticized at the time, but is now considered a seminal work.

      darwin didn’t know about mendel….or genetics…

      At first, Mendel’s work was rejected and was not widely accepted until after he died. At that time most biologists held the idea of blending inheritance, and Charles Darwin’s efforts to explain inheritance through a theory of pangenesis were unsuccessful. Mendel’s ideas were rediscovered in the early twentieth century, and in the 1930s and 1940s the modern synthesis combined Mendelian genetics with Darwin’s theory of natural selection.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel

      why don’t you get a clue?

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:05pm

      @beck, LOL yeah cesium is just another darwiniac nut-case lying for darwin. now he’s threatening me…looks like the truth hurts. but then I’ve made him look SO stupid SO often he has nothing left other than to threaten me.

      he actually told me that cancer proves evolution is true…have you ever heard anything so idiotic?

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:29pm

      @beck, whats funny is that these darwiniacs cannot post any proof of their ‘science’ all I see is bluster and hatred from their side…calling any who disagree ‘ignorant’ but they sure don’t have many facts to back them up. but then when you don’t have the facts or the evidence, bluster and lies are all you can do…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 3:22am

      @joe
      -Lying for Darwin
      – You keep coming back to an argument that I’m not making. I think because you want to have the argument that you are making. I’m saying that whether you have the evidence for evolutionary theory or not, doesn’t change the fact that pursuing the answer to the question has led to discoveries that have advanced science, thus it has not been useless.

      -on Mendel reading Darwin
      “Mendel lived around the same time as the British naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882), and many have fantasized about a historical evolutionary synthesis of Darwinian natural selection and Mendelian genetics during their lifetimes. Mendel had read a German translation of Darwin’s The Origin of Species (as evidenced by underlined passages in the copy in his monastery), after completing his experiments, but before publishing his paper. Some passages in Mendel’s paper are
      Darwinian in character, evidence that The Origin of Species influenced Mendel’s writing. Darwin apparently received a copy of Mendel’s paper, but there is no evidence he read it; he also had a book by Focke with references to it.” – http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gregor_Mendel
      (Evidence that genetics was influenced by the theory of natural selection?)

      -Not posting proof of the science of studying evolution
      –I posted multiple links in previous posts to pubmed. There are over 12000 peer reviewed articles that deal specifically with evolution. 40000 more on related topics. Did

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:11am

      @fire, no I know exactly what you’re saying, and skell denies that…you even attribued the discovery of the double helix to evolution…and skell EXPLICITLY denies that…so who am I to believe, you or skell? I think I’ll stick with skell…

      as far as mendel..ok he read it…so what? why do you darwiniacs see the all-powerful hand of your god and savior darwin in everything? its why evolution isn’t science, its faith.

      as far as papers that mention evolution…yeah lots of paper use that magic word ‘evolution’…but then when you get into the details….

      Our work provides a new perspective on the genetic basis of adaptation. Despite decades of sustained selection in relatively small, sexually reproducing laboratory populations, selection did not lead to the fixation of newly arising unconditionally advantageous alleles. This is notable because in wild populations we expect the strength of natural selection to be less intense and the environment unlikely to remain constant for ~600 generations. Consequently, the probability of fixation in wild populations should be even lower than its likelihood in these experiments. This suggests that selection does not readily expunge genetic variation in sexual populations, a finding which in turn should motivate efforts to discover why this is seemingly the case.
      …….

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:12am

      This experiment was begun in 1975. After 35 years and 600 generations, accelerated by artificial selection, the net evolution (in terms of adaptation and improvement in fitness) was negligible if not nil.
      ——————————————————————————–
      1. Burke, Dunham et al, “Genome-wide analysis of a long-term evolution experiment with Drosophila,” Nature 467, 587-590 (30 September 2010); doi:10.1038/nature09352.

      after you look at the details there is no there there….

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 10:54am

      @cesium…still waiting for your address! LOL BWAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHA

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 3:22pm

      @joe
      I want to clear up some misconceptions that you may have 1) about me, and 2) about the point I’m trying to make. I have a feeling I’m not being contextually explicit.
      1) There is a difference between believing that evolution occurs and that scientific research is being done to investigate whether or not evolution occurs. I don’t think you are differentiating. A study whose results support the theory of evolution is not the same thing saying that evolution has occurred. [I believe that] science indicates that evolution is a very complex process in which natural selection COULD play a part. This doesn’t mean that I observe Darwanism solely as catholic or dogma. i.e. I don‘t think Darwin is any kind of god or that his theory couldn’t be proven wrong. That also means that evidence could arise to strengthen his theory (even if the basis of his conclusions were incomplete). I’m not demeaning your questions, just saying that NO EXPLICIT CONCLUSION can be drawn at this time. The burden of proof is absent when proving a negative.
      2) The advancement of any field is enhanced by critically thinking about experiments without preconceived conclusions (but with data). Make a hypothesis, test it, and if it is incorrect, you modify your hypothesis. This is standard practice. Evolutionary experimentation will continue to develop as the tools to study it or new information comes about.
      -You raise valid questions, but that doesn’t mean they invalidate the opposing que

      Report Post » Firebrand  
  • Lloyd Drako
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:58am

    Would that Muslim scholars applied the same critical methods to the Koran and hadiths!

    Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
  • Seede
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:44am

    It has been known for centuries that copyists and or scribes have made errors in their work and have even inserted their own understanding. This has been noted in the Greek NT for centuries but should not flag the impression that the meaning is not true. Translations vary from one culture to another simply because communication in languages change from generation to generation. By the time this project is completed it will have changed in our English understanding and the translations will once again have to be altered. Even the Hebrew language changes from one generation to another. The Hebrew of two thousand years ago is not even the Hebrew of today. Purchase the original KJ1611 Greek NT and then purchase the same bible with the modern translation. You will see exactly what I am talking about.

    Report Post »  
    • Thomas
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:55am

      The bible was not meant to be perfect if it was God would have just made it appear. The bible is written by people who were dealing with Truth (the imagless Spirit of Life our loving Father whom Jesus cam to introduce us to) and they were offering us a choice to have that same relationship. That’s it is also written the letter kills but the Spirit gives Life.

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • SamIamTwo
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:22am

      But it doesn’t detract from the central overall theme.

      Report Post » SamIamTwo  
  • Qoheleth
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:44am

    As a general rule, these errors are relatively trivial and don’t effect the meaning too much.
    The drive to find and fix mistakes by copyists and revisions by even well-meaning scribes is a good thing in my mind as long as it’s done with a mind and heart set on accuracy and not some agenda.

    Report Post » Qoheleth  
  • SHvnDave
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:35am

    I guess that I am not sure what the theme of this story is.

    1) We have a statement of suprise that There only jews on the committee – why would anyone that knows anything about Jewish history think it should be anything different. The Jews are charged – by God – to maintain and protect the holy writings. It doesn’t belong in the vatican, or in Dallas Theological Seminary. Only the Jews can perform this task and have any chance of getting it right.

    2) They are comparing our texts against a text that is 1100 years old – so, roughly about 900 years AFTER the Messiah came to Israel. That 1100 year old text has been used to produce several translations over the last 1100 years, but is itself 2300 years after some of the texts it preserves (OK, 1500 years if you accept the liberal view that this fairy tale was written about 500 BC).

    So, what these scribes are really doing is comparing the ability of the (roman controlled) Christian Church to maintain fidelity of the scriptures as compared to the (Known) ability of the historical Jewish scribes and priests to maintain every jot and tittle of the text.

    You want proof that the Jewish scribes performed their job correctly? Read what the Son of God said about the veracity of the (Old Testament) Scriptures. I guess if anyone knew whether the scroll in the temple at Jerusalum were the same as he instructed Moses to write, it would be Jesus, your savior (or our savior, if you perfer).

    Report Post » SHvnDave  
    • Applehead
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 2:32pm

      92% of the Jews today are Khazars that converted to Judaism around the year 700 AD. It would be like Ireland converting to Islam and Muslims going to them to interpret the Koran! The oldest versions of the Bible if I remember correctly was written in Aramaic! Love Glenn but I totally disagreed with Khazar Rabbi’s teaching us on the OT! See analogy above! Glenn knows history and I‘m sure he knows that Jewish Khazars aren’t the Jews of the OT! Your best sources on the OT in my opinion are the Catholic Church! I do love my other Christian brothers and sisters though and they do have valid Baptism! I personally don’t hate anyone and if I saw a Catholic picking on a Jew I would personally step in and defend the Jew! I just don’t like what they have done in this world! We should treat everyone with dignity and respect, do whats right and let God judge! But the truth needs to get out!

      Report Post »  
  • rfycom
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:04am

    Remember the game you played as wee lads. Someone started with a whisper and my the time the statement came back around to the original it was completely changed. That is what happens in story telling.

    Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:19am

      Yo Rdycom:
      Your example does not fit your subject. You should find out some more truth to what you speak concerning the passing on of the words of the O.T. You are like so many people that believe the lies concerning the truth, but will not believe the truth concerning the lies!

      Report Post »  
    • hi
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:43am

      That is not true when it comes to the Bible. The scribes copied everything perfectly and counted letters and words. If there was anything wrong it was destroyed and they started over. Their job was to make sure it was perfect.

      Also, the dead sea scrolls proved the accuracy.

      Report Post » hi  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:28am

      Even if the Bible was perfectly translated people would still put their own spin on it. You could have 100 people read the same passage of scripture & would get 100 different interpretations of it based upon their current beliefs. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to help each person draw what they need from each passage, but they need to be open to listening. I also believe that you can learn from being open to others opinions but half the time people are so closed minded & are more interested in forcing their own opinions then learning. My personnal view in regards to perfect translation of the Bible-both Old & New Testament is that it can vary–go & look at 50 versions of the Bible & it varies in termonolgy especially with the New Translations of the Bible. I truly believe that God is more interested in that we treat each other with respect & be willing to help anyone in need more than He is in how well we perfectly interpreted each passage.

      Report Post »  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:42am

      1 Corinthians 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men & of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

      Report Post »  
  • Stegall TX
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:02am

    I guess the Nestle-Aland project that has been going on for about the same amount of time on the Greek texts is equally evil. I don’t have a problem admitting that humans are prone to error. I’ve already have to correct three errors in this message, and I have a computer to point them out to me!

    As far as I can tell, these guys are just looking at manuscripts and attempting to reconcile any differences between them. I have to do that with my checkbook every month. It doesn‘t mean I don’t trust my numbers or the bank’s abilities to track transactions. But over time, I’ve detected many, many errors on my part, and two on the part of the bank.

    Humans are fallible beings. When they were entrusted with the Scriptures, they did their best to transmit them accurately. Proving that the manuscripts of 2,000 years ago are different than those from today proves that humans are fallible beings.

    Report Post » Stegall TX  
  • bitter.clinger
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:56am

    Not sure why The Blaze is making a big story out of pretty much nothing…so I’m going to “question with boldness” as to why all the hype on this. One prophecy and only a few phrases are mentioned here. The miraculous thing is that both the Old and New Testaments have remained so intact for millenia (and that it has transformed more lives than any other text in history). God is in control, and the faith he has blessed me with is not so weak that a liberal academic can so easily change what I already know to be true (and have observed time and again being played out before me in my own life). On a related note – I am very interested in archeological finds that give external confirmation to Biblical truth/history…such as when they discovered the city of Ophir (mentioned in OT) using ground-penetrating radar a number of years ago…up til that point Ophir was almost as “mythical” as Atlantis.

    Report Post »  
    • saranda
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:04am

      They have ben working on this for 53 years. Do you really think it is one prophecy and a few passages?

      Report Post »  
    • bitter.clinger
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:48am

      @Saranda…read the article…that’s all the article mentions. Now the ball’s in your court – what else have they specifically found that’s such a big deal? Looks to me like you may be doing a lot of assuming in the face of no facts to back up your argument. Progressives have been re-writing history for the past 120 years…are you saying that I should trust them too? No thanks, babe.

      Report Post »  
    • saranda
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:04am

      “This is an endeavor so meticulous, its pace so disconnected from that of the world outside, that in more than five decades of work the scholars have published a grand total of three of the Hebrew Bible’s 24 books.”
      Kind of looks like the work has just begun. You think they might find a couple more changes in the 87.5% left.
      Return of serve. Your turn.

      Report Post »  
    • bitter.clinger
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 4:22pm

      @Saranda…once again you site no specific examples of discrepancies, errors or anything other than the alleged translation/meaning items in this weak article. All you have done is to describe the process these academics have gone through over the past 53 years…simply regurgitating what the article already said. So…if you can’t come up with any specific & real problems with the Bible text (other than the single potential prophecy issue and other minor wording items listed in the article) then this article (and apparently the past 53 years these scribes have been dissecting a few Biblical texts) is 99.99% a complete waste of everyone’s time. Not to mention that the time they’ve spent tearing into the few Biblical texts mentioned here is only a tiny fraction of the time God has been protecting His Word over the past millenia (2.7% for the NT and 1.8% for the OT). The Truth Has No Agenda.

      Report Post »  
  • FactOrFiction
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:49am

    For those who think this proves the entire bible is invalid, sorry but you’re wrong. The divine message is still the same, you need a savior. Jesus fulfilled that role when he took your punishment…fulfilling 109 SPECIFIC prophecies of the OT in the process. Tell me, could all that really be coincidence? We can see bible prophecy unfold before our eyes even in this modern age with the rebirth of Israel for the 2nd time, the reclaiming of jerusalem, the threat of the coming war with islamic nations, globalization, the increase of knowledge, the high frequency of disasters, and so much more…but believe what you want.

    The bible speaks for itself, it’s your choice whether to listen or not.
    http://www.preservedwords.com/prophecies.htm
    http://100prophecies.org/page5.htm
    http://100prophecies.org/page6.htm

    Report Post » FactOrFiction  
  • WillB
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:48am

    I don’t read that they are changing the text; but that they are attempting to see what changes have been made to it. That is an important work! I will hazard a guess that when they are finished that the errors will be minor enough that it won’t matter.

    And yes Christians the “OLD Testament” matters as much as the “New Testament”. Christ came not to abolish/destroy/remove the “Law” but to fulfill it! (Matt 5:17)What “Bible” do you think the apostles studied and preached from!? Look at Stephen’s declarations before he was stoned. He begins at Genesis! Reread that passage if you think the Old Testament doesn’t matter. (Acts 6:8 -7:53)

    There have been groups that have tried to alter the Christian version of the Bible over time. I have been extremely opposed to those alterations (making God gender neutral, or trying to add more feminine pronouns-yes I’m a woman and opposed to those changes and all changes that alter scripture); but waited until I knew what exactly they were doing and why. I say, go get some of the released texts and see for yourself any changes that have been made and THEN judge.

    Remember the warning by Christ not to take or add one tiny mark (Matt 5:18); it doesn’t just apply to now it comes from back then. It is important to go back over our scriptures and make sure we haven’t done exactly that.
    -MrsWillB

    Report Post » WillB  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:12am

      Amen Willb:
      I believe this unconcern which leads to a lack of reading the O.T is in large part a reason for the weak Christianty in America today My personal belief is that the O.T has some of the best lessons to be taught.and this would be for many reasons.

      Report Post »  
    • blowback
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:19am

      There was no Judaism at the time of Christ. Pharisee-ism was what later became the Talmudic religion of today’s Judaism (300-500 AD). Christ was more Essene than Pharisee. Christ was not even Jewish, as Jews were the people from Judah. Christ was from Nazareth. He was Galilean. This is why Pilate hung the sign above his cross, Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews. It was a finger poked into the eyes of the Jews from Judah. Christ told us what he thought about the Jews of Judah in John chapter 8.
      There is no Judeo-Christian as we know it today. Judeo-Christian, in its original form, defined those Jews who became Christian. 20th century Judeo-Chrisitan was an invention by the Jews to dilute out the Christian culture of our country.

      Report Post »  
    • Sines314
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:41pm

      I am glad to see you are open to the idea of these people genuinely trying to correct the bible, as well as acknowledging what Jesus said about not changing the law. However, since you accept the OT, I must ask what you think about stoning unruly children (Deuteronomy 21:18-21) or about women being forced to marry their rapists (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

      Do those laws still apply? If, as Jesus himself said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled,” (Matthew 5:18) then how do you justify not supporting those OT laws?

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 6:21pm

      Yo Sines314:
      Who is your question directed to?

      Report Post »  
    • louise
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 7:46am

      to BLOWBACK….
      You make the bold statement that Jesus was not a Jew or descended from the tribe of Judah.
      Let us go to school now.
      Hebrews 7:14~~~~For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.
      Blowback read all of Hebrews chapter 7. Also if you do not already know, Jesus is also called ‘The Lion of Judah.”

      Report Post » louise  
  • blowback
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:10am

    More Jewish revisionism.

    Report Post »  
    • beckisnuts
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:24am

      People are not perfect and the Bible is full of flaws, which has been proven obviously. It’s just another piece of proof that demonstrates that GOD is a concept created by ancient people, just as this book was. That is the reality.

      Report Post »  
    • briten821
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:46am

      Proven? Funny, if the article was all about scholars supporting the bible, you’d say the exact opposite. The fact is, NONE of the “evidence” they found is shown in this article. So, making a judgement without seeing the evidence shows your clear bias on the issue.

      If I had a dollar for every time a group of scholars has come out with a study showing something wrong gin the bible, which was later shown to be pure BS… There are at least a hundred such cases that can be found in the Google book collections. Books written by groups just like this, who were said to be just as meticulous and just as certain. And within a few years every bit of it was shown to be a bunch of hooey. Is this one of those cases? We don’t know yet.

      When I see the evidence, I’ll gladly study it with an open mind and see what it says. But, based on the past record of these kinds of studies, I reserve my judgement until then.

      Report Post »  
    • Applehead
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 3:01pm

      Essenes were a small sect within the Tribe of Judah from which Mary, Joseph and Jesus descended! Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich has written about this. They were exceptionally holy and would give the best of what they had to the Church, second best to the poor and kept the least of quality for themselves! Anne Catherine Emmerich was a Catholic nun that lived in Germany from the late 1700‘s to the early 1800’s and was a stigmatic and her writing were used my Mel Gibson to fill in detail thats not in the Bible for “The Passion Of The Christ”! She was granted more visions from the Fall Of The Angels to beyond the crucifixion of Christ! She told the church were to find Mary‘s home after the crucifixion and explained what every room looked like and was found in exact detail to how she said it to be and is excepted by the Catholic Church to be the Blessed Mother’s home. It is located in Ephesus Turkey!

      Report Post »  
    • Sines314
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:33pm

      And yet I can think of many instances where science has proven the Bible wrong. The Bible claims the sun is a light in the firmament of heaven. No, it’s a big ball of fire in space that the Earth goes around. Not a light moving in a firmament. The Bible speaks of the ‘ends of the Earth’ and how one can see all the kingdoms of Earth from atop a high mountain. The Bible thought the Earth was flat.

      Either the Bible has been damaged by people rewriting it throughout history for their own reasons, or the Bible isn’t the word of God at all.

      Besides, if you accept that these scholars could rewrite the Bible… then you must accept that someone could have rewritten it in the past. Maybe these people just want to be sure they don’t have some doctored version. What makes anyone think that they’re not just trying to UNDO any changes to the Bible?

      Report Post »  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 11:13am

      sine..the sun is moving…everything in the universe is moving…and the bible never claims the earth is flat…perhaps you should read it before making a fool out of yourself…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 8:32pm

      @SINES314 Isaiah 40: 21 -23……………………22 There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,…………………………
      Job 26: 7 ……………….Hanging the earth upon nothing
      In the Dark Ages when people thought the earth was flat the bible shows that it was not.

      People who don‘t study the bible always seem to claim it says this or it doesn’t say that. Try researching before you make any claims that you can’t back up.

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 10:58am

      Yo sines314:
      When the bible speakes of the ends of the earth it is meant as a way of describing the entirety of the planet and has NOTHING to do with the shape! It was “science” that thought the earth was flat. There is a verse in Isaiah that mentions the circle of the earth. Isaiah was written hundreds of years before Christ. EMAGINE THAT! To this day there is not one FACT that has disproven the bible. You need to recognize the DIFFERENCE between fact and theory!!! I do not mean this as an insult: it is more of a concern to what you believe as factual.

      Report Post »  
  • brntout
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:10am

    I think the fear really is in the phrase “those who swear falsely in my name”.Pay attention politicians.

    Report Post »  
  • MidWestMom
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:06am

    I really wish this topic could be discussed here in a mature way….sadly it won’t happen.
    Every conversation involving religion on this forum quickly degenerates into a childish battle of “I’m right – You’re wrong” , bashing those who believe and those who don’t.. etc. Not all posters resort to this but a great many do.

    The rude & hateful comments, the comments meant only to ridicule & infuriate others and the infantile name-calling will now begin. ::sigh::

    Report Post »  
    • beckisnuts
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:29am

      You mean like the phrase “I’ll pray for you” that is hurled at others and meant as a demeaning jab? Or other hateful snarky comments such as “You’ll find out when you burn in hell“ and the ever popular ”When ‘your’ standing in front of God your gonna find out blah blah blah………..”/

      Report Post »  
    • briten821
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:49am

      Beckisnuts- Yes, but also the anti religion comments you freely throw around all the time. Don’t those count as inappropriate too?

      Report Post »  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:55am

      @nuts did you ever think God doesn’t want you? and given your posts its easy to see why….

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:56am

      To Beckisnuts:
      What are the obvious flaws? Do you make this comment only because you have heard it? I do agree with you that the MANNER in which some people who CLAIM to be believers make the statements they do with improper motives and not out of love. True Christians many times prove the love of God from there own bad behavior unfortunatly, in that they have been saved from hell because of faith, not their own goodness. However, I would neither make excuses, we do as you yourself can see need to raise our standard. Grace and mercy are not something you can see. You see with your eyes only.

      Report Post »  
    • MidWestMom
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 9:16am

      @ beckisnuts

      Did you miss the part where I said “bashing those who believe and those who don’t” ?

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:45am

      @Joe 1234:
      Not a very Christian thing to say. Maybe Christ doesn’t want YOU. When I was a Fundamentalist Baptist, I was taught that Jesus was sent for the salvation of ALL.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 11:12am

      L oh thank you for being the arbiter of all things christian!! I love it when an athiest tells us how to behave.

      but then you libs don’t like to think outside the box do you now? and of course you don‘t have to ponder things like why did God reject Cain’s sacrifice, or why did the Lord harden pharoah?? but then in order to be an atheist you would have to reject deep thinking…

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 5:49pm

      Yo Joe:
      I hate to tell you but hollow points is not making a hollow point… John 3:16 God so loved the WORLD. You do not speak for God. He is the judge. Let Him do His own job. Concern yourself about doing yours better. You know… that verse about the plank and the splinter!
      Yo Hollow Points:
      Why did you turn away? Isn‘t it kind of a double standard to quote something to someone else that you yourself don’t even believe in?

      Report Post »  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 6:47pm

      @4truth well I’m glad to see YOU speak for God! yeah God loved the world…and He also hardened pharoah…and refused Cain’s sacrifice…so tell me why, since YOU speak with His voice oh holy one!!

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • joe1234
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 6:51pm

      @4truth explain this to me oh holy one since you speak for Him..

      Romans 9

      10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[d] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”[e]

      14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

      “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
      and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]

      Report Post » joe1234  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 2:58am

      @4Truth2All:
      Up until the point when I joined the Baptist church I did, I’d never truly devoted myself to any religion, not even Atheism. I guess you can say, my Atheist faith was being tested. I fell from the pew of faith and had my dalliance with fundamentalist Christianity, but ultimately I returned to my religion with my faith renewed. I had even been baptized.

      During my time in the Baptist church, I absorbed a lot of lessons about Christianity that stick with me. I still consider pride a sin, just not for the same reasons as Christians. To me, it’s a form of theft. And as for how I can quote from the Bible and reference Biblical precepts to make my point against rabid Biblophiliacs, I don’t consider it underhanded at all. If I don’t know what a person is SUPPOSED to believe, according to their own professing, then I have no basis on which to judge his judgement of me.

      And after all, James 2:19, “Even devils believe, and tremble”. You think Satan isn’t capable of quoting chapter and verse to serve his ends? Just consider me to be doing my part to feed into the delusions of those whose delusions I find entertaining.

      It also helps that I have the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible bookmarked.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Greenwood
      Posted on August 13, 2011 at 8:02pm

      @JOE…………..1 Samuel 16:7 Proverbs 21: 2 Jeremiah 17:10
      God searches, sees and reads the hearts

      Report Post » Greenwood  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 11:23am

      Yo Joe:
      I’m sorry if I offended you: truely, because you sound like a man offended. At NO point, sir, did I ever claim to speak for God. I think my point was to let Him speak for himself. In fact the verses you use against me actually verify my point. If God wants to harden someones heart….. HIS CALL… NOT YOURS. I can throw out verse after verse to, big deal. Gods not impressed! Gods impressed when we love people that don’t love us…. you know that verse!!! Gods says that if you love those that love you SO WHAT, BIG DEAL (took some liberty with the words) Jesus hung out with sinners!!! I came into this world not to condem it, but to save it.So said Jesus!!! I mean not disrespect to you, sir.

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 11:58am

      To Hollow points:
      Thanks for your reply. I am sorry that you may find me entertaining at least in the manner you stated.I hope you can put you guns down while we speak, not that I’m afraid. I’d like to think that even a bazooka will not help you, but we know how big and bad everybody is in their car! You did not say what caused you to leave the church. I do not mean to pry into personal affairs. My concern would only be you and if you find this entertaining then have a good laugh. I do not mean that sarcastically. You mention sin, with pride being one. I agree that pride is a nasty one, maybe the worse. They say that the person with pride is the last one to know it. Is it not true that sin is a biblical “concept” You also mention satan another biblical “concept”. Yea, he knows the bible really well. The problem is he also mis-uses it really well. The maker of a baseball bat does not make it for harm, he makes it for joy, entertainment. What TRUTHS have you found that disprove the bible. Is it not possible that pride still abides with you??? Are your guns still down, because I DO NOT SAY THIS IN JUDGEMENT. I make no hollow points!

      Report Post »  
  • Moocephus
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:40am

    Forget the old testament…If you can refute the Message of Christ…then I may be interested. Until then I will cling to my old rugged cross.

    Report Post » Moocephus  
    • ZengaPA65
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:56am

      The original version of the New Testament starts out as “Once upon a time…”

      Report Post » ZengaPA65  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:57am

      Another desperate attempt to discredit the Word of God. This is the (liberal) Jewish version of the idiot project by liberal (supposedly Christian) scholars to take the red out of the words of Christ (Jesus Project?). If it were up to these people, God would be a myth and the words of Jesus would be misinterpreted paraphrases.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:47am

      @sheep
      It doesn’t seem like they are trying to undermine the word of G-d. Instead it seems like they are trying to accurately fix the errors of man in transcribing it! Since the bible is written in a way that leaves many scriptures undeniably interpretive, this project may help to cement the actual meaning of passages that are obscure. How many times have you heard people laud the use of original sources? The same applies here. One has to admit that men are imperfect and would make mistakes either through ignorance, malice, laziness, or accident. Many things can be lost in translation, and I believe that’s what the group is trying to rectify.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • mils
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 12:03pm

      i truly believe the bible..christian bible..is a work of truth and fiction. i do not in any way believe god spoke to these people…jesus was probably a real person…but in being so great in his time…there is not record of this man..so be it.. when he was crucified, it stands to reason that it would be part of the official history of the world..he was so bad..had to be stopped, challanged authority and so forth. However, man is going to believe what ever makes them feel good. It’s like we need a tether. if you believe someone came to“save” us from ourselves, i believe you are delusional.
      only you can lead a good life, no one can do it for you..no man in a closet or fancy robes, or in a pulpit can forgive you…. .believe what you will.
      The fact remains that “no one”..absolutely “no one” can prove anything in the bible was not just man’s words, made up by man, written down by man, changed over the years by man..to control man. Faith?..sure, believe what ever makes you feel good.
      IF YOU BELIEVE the bible then it should be the “original” words, not the ones that have been changed over the years to fit society. The “original” words…if they were good enough to write down and believe..then you should not change them, PERIOD. what did man kind ever do without these writings??? he lived, he loved, he did what he could to survive, he died…he is every bit as saved as many of you consider yourselves and god loves them as much as he does you, bible or

      Report Post »  
    • This_Individual
      Posted on August 14, 2011 at 9:17pm

      Forget the old testament? Without it, you do not have a religion.

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 15, 2011 at 10:59am

      Yo MILS:
      What happens to you when you die ???

      Report Post »  
  • teddrunk
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:29am

    Hey, Commie liberal Democrats, and their Commie religious leader buddies in this country have been re-writing the bible longer than these guys have been doing it.

    Report Post »  
    • Applehead
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:16am

      What does it say about Khazars, Turkic Asiatic Mongoloids who have no blood relation to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob making a deal with England to throw Germany under the bus to get the land of Israel and kick out the Palestinians who many are Christians and have more blood to the 12 Tribes that the current Khazar occupants? What does no one expose these frauds? Oh yea, bc they control the Media!!! You never hear it brought up in a debate! So if my Christian brothers want to give their support to these “Fake Jews” that do everything in their will to rid the world of Jesus Christ as well as religion then you can answer to God for it! They could careless about religion and only use it bc its a way to do anything they please bc of a misinterpretation of a Biblical verse that you will be cursed or blessed on how you treat Israel! ISRAEL IS JUSUS CHRIST NOT THE COUNTRY!!! CAN YOU SEE THEY ARE THE ANTI CHRIST!!! Believe you lying eyes! This is another attempt to discredit Jesus! Will God bless you if you bless Khazars?

      Report Post »  
    • briten821
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:51am

      You mean the media that always takes the Palestinian side and portrays the Jews as evil occupiers… THAT media is controlled by the Jews?

      Report Post »  
    • JGraham III
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:46am

      @Applehead:
      Wow! someone else has read “the thirteenth tribe” by Arthur Koestler, yes? I would like to know what other ‘esoteric’ books might be in your library…I read my copy for the first time at a bible college in Kansas in the early 80′s.

      Report Post »  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 10:56am

      @apple
      The Jewish state of Israel is the most religiously tolerant country in that region. It seems to me that they want people to be able to worship as they wish. That doesn’t make them anti-christian, just pro-religious freedom. Based on scripture, the LAND was given to the children of the slaves of Egypt. With that being said, it is true that not all in Israel are practicing Jews. In fact there are probably atheist in Israel in addition to Muslims, Protestants, and Catholics. My opinion is that you may be painting a really small picture of Israelis with a really large brush.

      Report Post » Firebrand  
  • beggindog
    Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:23am

    What a surprise…NOT!

    Report Post »  
    • Applehead
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 7:58am

      I don‘t need Khazar scholars who weren’t the Tribe of Judah from the OT teaching me the Bible! The Bible was written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit! They Khazars should pay close attention to what the Bible says about usury! Maybe you should also tell them that 100% of the Bible, every letter and word is about Jesus Christ!

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on August 12, 2011 at 8:40am

      Agreed Beddindog:
      Could have made my own prophetic statement that the attempt to discredit the bible would become more prevalent in these comming days. They also say you can get a scholar to say anything, I have found this to be true. In Revelation it states that if it was possible even the elect would be deceived. This clearly means that the enemy is going to pull out all the stops. I believe we are in the preview, the warning stage prior to the releasing of the seals. God is warning His people.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love