- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 15,910
- Reaction score
- 12,630
- Location
- Plano, Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
Thought this was appropriate to the copyright/publishing comment:
If someone wants to change the Bible, let them. Why not? If it sells well (and they don't get successfully sued for it), then maybe people prefer that version to the other versions.
Does anyone have a copyright on the Bible? I really am just wondering. Can someone be sued for changing the Bible and selling copies of it that are almost identical to one version of the Bible or the other, with maybe just a few things changed to make it fit with a particular religion's beliefs? How much would need to be changed, I wonder?
Too bad God can't vote on it..
For nonreligious folk out there, why should you care about the Bible being edited? Do you really care what the flyig spaghetti monster says and his followers believe?
For nonreligious folk out there, why should you care about the Bible being edited? Do you really care what the flyig spaghetti monster says and his followers believe?
For nonreligious folk out there, why should you care about the Bible being edited? Do you really care what the flyig spaghetti monster says and his followers believe?
For nonreligious folk out there, why should you care about the Bible being edited? Do you really care what the flyig spaghetti monster says and his followers believe?
Given that you use the book to dictate your public policy, we have to stay in the know. I mean heck, you guys might decide that gay sex isn't all that bad and let us have a shot at marriage.
Wake's proposal could arguably be interpreted as an effort to return to the purity of Christ's message. I don't hold with it, but it isn't my god so it's none of my business. The Conservapedia project is explicitly a politicized project.
This is nothing but another anti-Christian bait thread...
No, the Bible shouldn't be revised because some people have a problem with the morals of the Bible.
Do you think portions of the King James Bible (and earlier versions) should be erased?
There's multiple verses in the New and Old Testament that speak against homosexuality, adultery, fornication, etc. There's also many other verses that are unpopular with our society, so shouldn't we change them? Since the Bible is full of bigotry and hatred, why not mold the Bible to our liking? Shouldn't we have new Christian churches that can help progress Christianity?
*Computer working again; poll added.
Not only no but hell no. You do not **** with other people's religion. You can create the whiny liberal eurotrash politically correct for ******s edition of the bible that would be merely a pamphlet after heavy editing but it should not in any shape or form be used to replace the King James or any other version of the bible, it would merely be the eurotrash politically correct for ******s edition bible that doesn't offend anybody except for actual Christians. I am surprised that no one has made a pc edition of the bible. Instead of the story of creation it would be a summed up version of evolution, Thou shalt not pollute and thou shalt use energy efficient stuff would be commandments, any commandments regarding sinful sexual behavior would be removed, and it would advocate that the government tax the living hell out of anyone making over a 100 grand a year.
Do you think portions of the King James Bible (and earlier versions) should be erased?
There's multiple verses in the New and Old Testament that speak against homosexuality, adultery, fornication, etc. There's also many other verses that are unpopular with our society, so shouldn't we change them?
Wake said:Since the Bible is full of bigotry and hatred, why not mold the Bible to our liking?
Wake said:Shouldn't we have new Christian churches that can help progress Christianity?
I don't see the problem. It's not like the bible hasn't been edited, cut, re-written, modified by committee, translated through several different languages and cultures, and had major portions deleted before. Modifying the text to fit a political agenda is actually exactly what those "old-school" christians would do.
I'm curious, Wake. Any particular reason you are creating devils advocate threads, lately? Trying to hone your debating skills by presenting arguments that are the opposite of what you actually believe? Just curious for disclosure purposes.
This is nothing but another anti-Christian bait thread...
No, the Bible shouldn't be revised because some people have a problem with the morals of the Bible.
WHile I agree with you 1,000,000% on the OP and him baiting/trolling I do have a question. I started another thread see here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/relig...mons-and-all-religions-please-educate-me.html
Yes and no. I'm not sure what I believe anymore, so probing for understanding can't hurt.
Also I'm checking the menu of ideas here in an attempt to try and roughly predict the future. Based on my results, there are some people here who would deal with the church somewhat in one way or another.. Interesting.
I'm neither trolling nor baiting, digsbe & Centrist77. It's your perception, so I will respectfully say you're mistaken, and I will leave it at that.
Yes and no. I'm not sure what I believe anymore, so probing for understanding can't hurt.