October 8, 2007
Christianity 2.0
Good to see religion doesn’t necessarily mean being stuck in the dark ages. Now if someone can just update the bible, we’d be set.
Oh wait, that’s being done too…
Popularity: 96% [?]
Friendly outgoing eclectic agnostic seeks one gram of soul
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
Good to see religion doesn’t necessarily mean being stuck in the dark ages. Now if someone can just update the bible, we’d be set.
Oh wait, that’s being done too…
Popularity: 96% [?]
Ricky Gervais on Creationism (taking the piss, of course…). He even opens with a disclaimer:
Some of the things you’ll hear do sound a little bit far fetched, I’ll admit that. But then I found out that the other name for the bible is “The Gospel”. So it is all true. Luckily, the clue is in the title.
Ahh… the old “the bible’s true because it says so” argument… put much more eloquently, of course.
Link to Video
(Via Luke Pilarski)
Popularity: 28% [?]
Here are some of the sites I’ve been looking at recently, that I wanted to share:
Popularity: 47% [?]
I saw this clip on TV tonight (The Chaser, an Australian comedy show, are playing repeats at the moment), and I thought it was funny. If you haven’t heard of these guys, I suggest you check out their show (currently taking a break) – you can download it at the ABC website.
Let me hear you say “I will empty the contents of my wallet into that little collection plate when it comes around…. hallelujah!”
Oh, and if you liked that, you might also like this:
VIDEO: What Have We Learned From History?
Popularity: 29% [?]
Here are some of the sites I’ve been looking at recently, that I wanted to share:
Popularity: 31% [?]
I just came across a review of a book I’ve been reading off and on for the last month or so – Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why – on a couple of different sites. The review itself (at Powell’s Books) gives a nice summary of Bart Ehrman’s arguments regarding the impossible task of obtaining and understanding the “original texts” of the bible.
Many people have a vague notion that all the original biblical texts are preserved in vaults somewhere, and translators work from those original texts. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case. The earliest surviving versions of the gospels are handwritten copies dating from centuries after the original texts were written. Also, we don’t just have a single version of each gospel; we have many versions, and even more fragments. The trouble is, none of the versions agree with each other.1
If you haven’t read the book, I’d highly recommend it. Dawkins even mentions it in his recent “God Delusion” (so, it’s gotta be good, right?). Ehrman details many specific examples of differences between versions of the biblical texts, and also examines how the specific books were chosen and compiled.
Also, if there’s any Christians reading this – please, tell me – how DO you reconcile the problems Ehrman mentions? Were all of the copies of the bible divinely inspired? Was there one particular version that was divinely inspired? Please… I’m dying to know!
Popularity: 20% [?]