Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
It's hardly sufficient that every copy will come with a brief introduction penned by Michael Gove.
"a post three times the length of the comment that I have tried four times to put up"
Which is no doubt testament to your poor command of numbers.
"It would appear from these posts that atheism is in a bad way or that all the posters are about fifteen years old."
gosh, such venoum. so let's see how mature the religious camp is then;
"I tell you what, friends. Go and piss on a holy picture."
great, i see what you mean, most adult i'm sure.
"God is not mocked."
wrong. he is mocked rather easily because all the Biblical nonsense, supposedly from Him, is so transparently made up by people who meant well, but were ignorant of how things are.
"Oh, and if I had made the heavens and the earth in seven days, I would feel fairly chuffed with myself."
well done Fergus, the key word in your sentence was "if". and withoiut compelling verifiable evidence it remains if at best, at worst iffy.
"Yes but everyone's entitled to an opinion, even though there may be some who wouldn't know the inspired word of the loving God if it slapped them in the face"
verifiable evidence please, no violence needed to make others accept it. though i am aware your god likes a bit of bullying, genocide, murder, rape etc etc.
how that sits with your use of the word "loving" makes me wonder if you could ever communicate with correct use of the english language. but you're not alone, many doe-eyed Christians will always believe that allowing His son to be tortured to death was required to atone for the ever changing definition of "sin".
what an odd exercise in illogic.
Guy Fawkes will be rightly honoured with my school's copy. We'll send you an invitation for the occasion, if you like Lindsay.
England is the only country in the world where they elevate ignorance to the level of a virtue.
What Graham Hancocks has, and rather graciously so, said.
"Something which has given comfort and solace for 2000 years is bollocks, fiction etc etc. "
it's a fair point, but surely the comfort and solace gained is a bit hollow if it's all just made up?
the following sums it up for me; 'better to be hurt by the truth, than comforted by a lie'
Fergus: Obviously your God would hate us, I mean Eve's sin , which she persuaded Adam to join in with was acquiring knowledge. Firstly why would your god want an ignorant creation, secondly why would he create a flawed object such as man that fails at the first hurdle?.
It does seem you believers want to return to the state of ignorance in the garden of eden.
I'd not piss on any picture, have you been reading too many templar myths, Nor if I had the power would I destroy the great religious buildings or art works of the world, I'd let them stand as a tribute to mans great abilities.
AI, and I do.
Mark 16 is a particularly easy target. The only "evidence" presented for the lateness of the manuscripts containing it is that, er, they have Mark 16 in them. Yes, it really is as bad as that. They got away with it in the old Modernist days, when no one else cared what theologians got up to. But, thankfully, those days are gone.
And bringing up the Dead Sea Scrolls in this context proves only that you have never heard of anything else. Well, that, and that you never read anything either of or about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
I wonder on the scale of life whether the 2000 years of comfort balances out the levels of fear and oppression this religion brought.
Oh don't mention the dead sea scrolls, I think somebody did but, don't mention the earliest version of many of the books of the bible!!!!, don't mention the bits left out !!!!! do nothing that calls into question the perceived wisdom.
@Terrence, better that than the US way, elevating it to the level of a religion.
How about something really radical given to children- a copy of......
The Oxford English Dictionary.
Where have I said that I am a Christian, Ian my love? Or indeed that I believe in God. What does it matter what I personally believe or do not believe? I might change my mind on Tuesday. Good God, I would defend even a socialist if he/she were attacked in the ignorant, loutish way you atheists use. But perhaps you are not an atheist.
Personally if you take off the verses added in Mark the message becomes more powerful. After all you are left to decide whether indeed He has risen...
For all those atheist’s out there including Andrew Zak Williams the predictable Jew, try this...Learn what sin is and try just for just one day not to commit a sin. Now if the wages of sin is death...
"Mark 16 is a particularly easy target. "
fair enough. all this beating around the bush with those same old, tired old push overs. too easy. so let's get serious then, you up for it David?
what is the strongest piece of verifiable evidence in the Bible?
Fergus, you stated "God is not mocked", that is clearly a statement of his existence or at least your belief in his existence. Your correct in questioning if I'm an atheist, I find that term inadequate , I'm anti theist, anti deist , anti paranormal and anti little green men building pyramids or the nazca lines. I don't see the glory of god in the Sistine chapel, I see great works of art by extremely talented artists commissioned by the catholic church. I see the same great ability in many pieces made by godless Chinese artisans.
Gove is doing this, he says, to improve awareness of English literature. When we see Dickens, Hardy, Wordsworth, Blake and even that Shakespeare back on the menu, his reason will seem at least feasible. At the moment, this looks more like an action that he will regret at his considerable leisure.
And so will Dave.
"the dead sea scrolls ... the earliest version of many of the books of the bible"
Which ones, exactly? You don't have the first idea what you are talking about. A dear friend and mentor of mine, a great expert on them, takes considerable, if a touch exasperated, delight in what he calls "nutters and the Scrolls". He would love you, although you might not love him once he had finished with you.
jackaas, of what, exactly? That there was ever a city called Jerusalem, or what?
Honestly, what a trip down the time trumpet this thread is. All the way back to the summer of 1968, or to when The Life of Brian came out, or something like that. But you lost in the end, you know. This remains no less Christian a country than it was in 1960, and possibly slightly more so.
Church attendance is much lower, but a revival in that sort of thing, which has always had peaks and troughs, is about due. And when any of the English, the Scots and the Welsh have religious revivals, then ... well, we shall all see for ourselves soon enough, in all three cases.
You lost. You can keep reprinting these antique articles or writing them up as books, full of fresher-like glee at supposedly having just discovered them. But you lost. Get over it.
What about the unspoken Gospels and of the woman disciple. These were hidden away from the public by the Roman Church. We haven't been told the complete truth.
you mean me? typo i hope.
"jackaas, of what, exactly? That there was ever a city called Jerusalem, or what?"
since we're not discussing geography, that is a bit silly i think. clearly no. unless you worship a city, it is the cast of central characters and the events they were key to. those things are of interest. so what is the strongest piece of verifiable evidence?
"But you lost. Get over it."
what a bizarre thing to write. who is it aimed at btw, it's almost as if you are imagining some sort of conversation no-one else is privy to.
"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" - Case fucking closed as far as I'm concerned. If I ever have children they will NOT be educated in the UK and certainly won't be indoctrinated into Christianity or any other Hocus-Pocus! Michael Gove is a caricature of the archetypal, puritanical, posh-boy tory nincompoop who is so far detached from my perception of reality that his writing a foreword for the bible strikes me as extremely appropriate and entirely in keeping with his hideous, self righteous posturing persona. What a tremendous fucking prick!
swatantra nandanwar, we have found the sub-Dan Brown level, I see. The reason why the four canonical Gospels were recognised as such was because they were the only accurate ones, by common, even universal, consent. Still we have now arrived at the 1980s. We're getting there.
Dear, dear. Some shocking levels of ignorance and spite displayed in some of these comments!
Literalism, fundamentalism is a fairly recent phenomena. Most Christians, do not - never have - taken the Bible as literal word of God but would use the word "inspired". Most understand that it is a complicated library of books brought together after 2000 years of oral and written tradition which recount the journey of faith of the Hebrew faith community and then the early Christian. No biblical scholar worth anything would deny that they have been edited, re-edited and combined nor that there are not "extra-canonical" books - Gospel of Thomas, Shepherd of Hermes et al. Most Christians would understand the langauge of allegory, paradox and myth (as in "mythos", not fairytale).
THe KJV contains many grammatical and some typo errors. Those who read Greek or Hebrew know it is certainly not the best translation nor the earliest. Like everything else it is coloured by the men- they were all men! - who were very much of their time, with an agenda (the unity of the country after a time of political, social and religious turmoil). I wish the Gove chap hadn't got into the act but that is the nature of this government. But its importance in the history and the development of the english langauge is well attested, whatever one's views about its content.
One may disagree with the Christian view, reject altogether and think those of us who practice it misguided or stupid.
But, please, none of this ignorant, nasty, and unintelligent stuff. Its childish and unworthy of this esteemed organ!
Graeme Hancocks. Graeme Hancocks. Everybody back to Graeme Hancocks. :)
because so many people deny his existence, so this sort of interesting discussion becomes difficult. but i see the current conservative party as trying to convince themselves that god is on their side, and agrees that inciting hatred against the disabled and poor is exactly what god wants.
so i suppose this is a further attempt to prove that god and modern conservatism are still in tune.
but then there has always been a battle between those who want to want to create a god that always supports their own prejudices and the real god, and this is another attempt by the loony right to prove god is a loony right winger too.
In the first place, the KJB is only a TRANS-LITERATION from the greek text, which was transliterated from a HEBREW text, which was destroyed by the ROMANS in order to destroy all facts of Jewish events and literary scholarship. The ARAMAIC text from the church of the east will verify this statement.