He-larry-ass

[Glacier]

I remember this coming around e-mail a while ago - it's still good! I personally think that the bible is a historic document- not to say that it wasn't divinely inspired, but acknowledging that humans have had quite alot to do with the editing! But people, being people, will interpret it to suit their own purposes.

I'm actually reading a book right now called "Misquoting Jesus". The author is a minister and professor of theology. The book is all about how the scribes who made the first copies added all sorts of things, some intentionally, some just transciption errors as this was long before the printing press. It's fascinating!

I've always loved this email.

[Cinder & Smoke]

"Misquoting Jesus" ...
how the scribes who made the first copies added all sorts of things,
some intentionally, some just transcription errors,
as this was long before the printing press.

This thread reminds me of a few services I've attended where the Minister picked
one of these more "colorful" quotes from the Bible and "re-phrased" it in modern language -
to sound REALLY controversial!

The first 10 minutes of the sermon were a series of plays on the words ...
building up to an illogical conclusion of what the writers "must have meant".
THEN he'd get serious and expound upon what they "should have said".