Piers Morgan: Hey, let’s amend the Bible

posted at 9:01 am on December 27, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

And not just the Bible, but Piers Morgan wants to amend the Constitution, too. It’s a darn good thing that the CNN host needed work badly enough to emigrate to a place that he finds so disagreeable.  What did we ever do without him?

I have no issue with the concept of amending the Constitution — and neither did the founders, who accepted that it might prove flawed for later use.  That’s why they included the mechanisms for amending the foundational document of American law within it, mechanisms that have been used 17 times since the original passage of the Constitution.  We have even had one amendment repeal another (the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th).  If Morgan wants to press for an amendment repealing the Second Amendment in whole or in part, he just needs to convince two-thirds of both the House and Senate to pass it, and then get three-quarters of the states to ratify it. Have fun storming the castle!

His insistence on amending the Bible amuses more than it shocks, because it’s impossible to take Morgan seriously.  He’s needling Rick Warren, nothing more, and attempting to provoke him into a heated exchange. Warren is simply smarter than Morgan, and takes a pass.

If Morgan was serious, then it’s still less offensive than humorous, but the joke is on Morgan.  If you believe that the Bible is the unerring word of God, then you know that it’s absurd to suggest that it be “amended” based on the latest human fashion, which is what Warren explains.  God is, after all, unchangeable — or He wouldn’t be God at all. It would be equally absurd to think that anyone would base their faith on the amended product, a Gospel According To Piers, if you will, unless people decided that Piers is either God Himself or a new prophet, in which case he’d probably have a better gig.

And if you don’t think that the Bible is the unerring word of God … why would you care what’s in it at all?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 11

And, once again, someone thought a fool, speaks…and removes all doubt.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:35 AM

And now the argumentum ad hominem. You really are like a walking, talking bag of logical fallacies aren’t you?

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM

You attacked me first. Let’s not be imperious, now.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 11:03 AM

The Roman historian, Tacitus, wrote of Christians and their persecution. The easy links are on Wiki.

Keeping on topic, Morgan is probably enjoying his moment. His lefty friends will fawn over him for awhile, until they get bored, then poor ol’ Piers will have to think of something new to get his seat back at the cool table.

Lightswitch on December 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Do you know what I wish? I wish Warren had asked him “What about the Koran? Is the Koran flaweed, deeply or otherwise?”

I guarantee that Morgan would not have had the courage to answer that one,

Blaise on December 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM

How about getting the village together to stone people who don’t “stay holy on the sabbath” and, you know, work on sundays?

Or stoning children who fail to “obey thy father and mother”? Or how about we bring back slavery, since it was totally cool in the old testament?

Also, why do we not judge people who eat sea creatures without fins? That’s an abomination according to levidicus (right near “laying with a man as you would a woman”)… Or wearing clothes made of 2 different types of fibers?

What about all of the stuff about pigs being unsanitary and eating them being against gods will? All you bacon lovers are certainly going to hell.

But no, we don’t talk about THOSE parts of the bible, only the cherry picked stuff that allows us to judge others not ourselves.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Surprise, surprise. Another atheist that completely “forgets” that the New Testiment exist, that it actually talks about negating many of those laws, and that those laws which you mentioned were specifically for the jews.

DethMetalCookieMonst on December 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM

What part of the fact that your statements are strictly your opinion, don’t you understand?
kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM

No I understand your statement just fine. The problem is that they’re not my opinion, it’s what the bible states. THAT’s not an opinion. It’s a statement of fact backed up by scripture.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM

And if you don’t think that the Bible is the unerring word of God … why would you care what’s in it at all?

Because it is a cultural/historical artifact? What’s next, are we going to amend Star Wars to make Greedo shoot first? Oh, wait…

Xasprtr on December 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM

You are interpreting cherry-picked passages from the Bible in order to justify your own myopic view, which is the same thing you accuse Christians of doing.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:53 AM

the bible was compiled centuries after the supposed life of jesus. Before that there were countless gospels that have been considered heretic by the church fathers.
having faith in the bible is not having faith in jesus or god, but having faith on all those shady figures that centuries after jesus, selected and compiled it in a form similar to the modern one.
read it all here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testament_canon

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Piers Morgan: Hey, let’s amend the Bible

…better yet!…let’s eliminate Purse Morgan!

KOOLAID2 on December 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM

You attacked me first. Let’s not be imperious, now.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM

I merely pointed out your frequent use of a logical fallacy.

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 11:55 AM

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Now all we need is Pablo Honey and Good Lt. and the atheist trifecta will be complete..

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

No one grants rights on to others. Simply by being born and existing with free will as equals to all other humans, we have the right to not be subjugated by others.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Wow, talk about wrong answers skippy. In a Universe where there is no divine, no God, there are no rights what-so-ever. There are, to the best of our knowledge three distinct types of life forms on this tinny tiny little planet we live on.

Chromophores
Chemophores
Carnivores

A Chromophore is a living entity that derives it’s life sustaining nourishment from water, minerals and sunlight.

A Chemophore is a living entity that derives it’s life sustaining nourishment from water, minerals and heat.

A Carnivore is a living entity that derives it’s life sustaining nourishment from the consumption of other living entities.

The most basic and primal rule of life is, eat or be eaten. This is a rule you will obey no matter how much you like it or dislike it. Because you are a member of the life-form categorized as Carnivore you have absolutely no choice in this matter. Every single day you are alive, something else that was alive had to die for you to remain that way. You cannot derive your life sustaining nourishment from water minerals sunlight or chemicals and heat.

This is the evolutionary process at work. Whether Man was created by God, or God was created by man borders on irrelevant, because of the consequences of there being no God. Intelligence demands a justification for it’s own existence and continued survival. Without a God, that justification is reduced purely and exclusively to physical force. It is done so because in the end, like it or not, without a God, existence is reduced to eat or be eaten.

So, no, indisputably and irrevocably simply, being born does not automatically convey upon you the “Right” to exist. It only guarantees that you must kill to survive and that you will eventually become food for something else. That is the absolute and indisputable fact of reality.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Yeah whatever, Piers. You can take up your argument with the author of the Bible when you meet Him, and you can tell Him all about your ideas that are so much better than His. Good luck with that.

LissaKay on December 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Didn’t somebody already try that one time?

Lu-somethin’.

How’d that work out?

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Didn’t somebody already try that one time?

Lu-somethin’.

How’d that work out?

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 11:59 AM

God is dead-Nietzsche

Nietzsche is dead-God…

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:02 PM

If the bible is the inerrant word of God, why is there so much contradictory nonsense and things we know to be false?

Seven Seas on December 27, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Right on cue.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Piers Morgan continues to troll hard for publicity to save his gig, and dupes just keep giving it to him.

Moesart on December 27, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Now all we need is Pablo Honey and Good Lt. and the atheist trifecta will be complete..

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

No, none of them are Atheists, they are Anti-Theists. Big big difference.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:04 PM

And furthermore, why shouldn’t socons decide what goes for their society? How is it any different from YOU deciding what goes for your society?

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM

As Margaret Thatcher said, there is no such thing as “society,” I believe in lower taxes because I believe in smaller government, and more liberty. I also beleive that the only thing holding our country together is that we all supposedly agree to the basic “rules of how the federal government will work” manual called the constitution.

I meant government shouldn’t be involved in medicare, medicaid, obamacare, etc., when i said get out of the doctors office, not abortion. I personally abhore abortion, and while I don’t think the federal government should be involved in the issue, I would fight at the state level to keep it as limited as possible.

So you are saying that state voters deciding their marriage laws or other various laws are Unconstitutional. Sweetie, you don’t need to read the Bible. You need to bone up on the Constitution..

I’m saying the defense of marriage act is unconstitutional, clearly, and that the “full faith and credit” clause is a valid piece of the constution. If state voters in CT vote to legalize gay marriage, NY has to recognize that as a valid contract just like any other.

While I’m not as knowledgable about the ins and outs of christian “logic” as others, I am definitely highly knowledgable about the federal constitution, and have a limited knowledge of a handful of states constitutions.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:05 PM

While I’m not as knowledgable about the ins and outs of christian “logic” as others, I am definitely highly knowledgable about the federal constitution, and have a limited knowledge of a handful of states constitutions.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Actually, you are not knowledgeable about “Logic” period.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Don’t waste your time trying to prove the existence of God or defend the bible. True change comes from the heart not the head. Just as I can’t prove scientifically that God exists, neither can anyone prove scientifically that He doesn’t exist.
Those who want to attack the bible are not doing so because they don’t believe it but because they hope it isn’t true (in my humble opinion). You can believe that there are no consequences for your actions or you can believe that you will be held accountable for your actions by a higher power. I can certainly understand the fear in thinking that you will have to be held accountable. The good news is that Jesus died so those who accept him will never be judged. Not because they are morally or intellectually better, but because the sacrifice that Jesus made in our place wipes away all of our past transgressions.

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I merely pointed out your frequent use of a logical fallacy.

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 11:55 AM

And, I merely pointed out your foolish and imperious nature.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I’m saying the defense of marriage act is unconstitutional, clearly, and that the “full faith and credit” clause is a valid piece of the constution. If state voters in CT vote to legalize gay marriage, NY has to recognize that as a valid contract just like any other

I agree, but it was also in RESPONSE to the fact that the leftists do not respect the law and use the judiciary to push their views. Anytime a socon wants a law passed, it is usually in RESPONSE to a leftist using the judiciary to go against the voters.

And gay marriage is not legally regular marriage therefore anyone who has to deal with gay marriage will have expensively change their family court system to allow for the marriage.. There is a whole slew of family court issues that arise for gay marriage that does not for regular marriage. DOMA was a way to protect those states from having to do this. If CT. wants to have gay marriage-fine, but Tennessee shouldn’t have to change its whole family court system and laws, because one couple wants Tennessee to now recognize their CT. marriage.

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Absolutely correct.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Yeah whatever, Piers. You can take up your argument with the author of the Bible when you meet Him, and you can tell Him all about your ideas that are so much better than His. Good luck with that.

LissaKay on December 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM

.
Didn’t somebody already try that one time?

Lu-somethin’.

How’d that work out?

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 11:59 AM

.
What Lucifer and his host of fallen angels did, was much worse. They have no redemption.
God has more respect for Piers Morgan, than Satan. If only Piers would accept it . . . . .

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

The Roman historian, Tacitus, wrote of Christians and their persecution. The easy links are on Wiki.

Keeping on topic, Morgan is probably enjoying his moment. His lefty friends will fawn over him for awhile, until they get bored, then poor ol’ Piers will have to think of something new to get his seat back at the cool table.

Lightswitch on December 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

He wrote after the fact, and wrote about followers of a new sect of judaism being mistreated by the main sect.

So, no, indisputably and irrevocably simply, being born does not automatically convey upon you the “Right” to exist. It only guarantees that you must kill to survive and that you will eventually become food for something else. That is the absolute and indisputable fact of reality.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Right. And the only way for me to not become your food is to band together with other people to protect our basic right to stay alive. Without that, your decision to eat me would have no negative ramifications for you as there is no way to enforce rights without a basic government.
Do chickens have the right to not be eaten? If they were sentient, aware, beings, they might argue they do. Unfortunately for them, humans are the top of the food chain and decide not to care about their feelings, because, well, they’re not sentient and probably dont have feelings. That doesn’t mean the chicken has to accept or like the fact that they are being slaughtered for our consumption.

Not sure how any of that matters or has anything to do with god though.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM

You are interpreting cherry-picked passages from the Bible in order to justify your own myopic view, which is the same thing you accuse Christians of doing.
kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Actually I’m not. I’m quoting the actual story and the truth. Is the bible literal or not?

If I’m wrong and just cherry picking bs.

Give me the passage that shows the laws actually on the tablets where they are the “accepted” 10 YOU think of.

Cold hard truth is you can’t, because it’s not there, and YOU’RE the one twisting to try to override what’s very clearly written in the book.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:17 PM

True change comes from the heart not the head. Just as I can’t prove scientifically that God exists, neither can anyone prove scientifically that He doesn’t exist.

I want you to prove to me, scientifically, that santa claus does not exist (as a thought experiment of course). It’s pretty hard to PROVE that something doesn’t exist, and if we choose to start with the assumption that EVERYTHING exists until PROVEN otherwise, then fine. Otherwise, stop with fallacies.

And gay marriage is not legally regular marriage therefore anyone who has to deal with gay marriage will have expensively change their family court system to allow for the marriage.. There is a whole slew of family court issues that arise for gay marriage that does not for regular marriage. DOMA was a way to protect those states from having to do this. If CT. wants to have gay marriage-fine, but Tennessee shouldn’t have to change its whole family court system and laws, because one couple wants Tennessee to now recognize their CT. marriage.

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Unfortunately, the constitution says that TN has to give full faith and credit to documents and contracts in CT. Marriage is a basic contract.

Want to fix your paper work problem in TN? Why don’t we all get behind the idea that its not the governments (state or federal) role to know / care who lives with whom and who sleeps with whom. Let people define marriage how they want, and if they want end of life and next of kin marriage “provisions” they can go sign a contract to that effect and submit it to the court when and if they want. Just like every other contract in the country.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I guess Old Morgan is concentrating on p_ssing people off now. Next Monday or Tuesday this snotty fraud is going to second Harry Belafonte’s call to Obama to declare the U.S. a dictatorship just for the lulz.

Aitch748 on December 27, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Now all we need is Pablo Honey and Good Lt. and the atheist trifecta will be complete..

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

No, none of them are Atheists, they are Anti-Theists. Big big difference.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:04 PM

I should also point out that Anti-Theists are the “cool edgy rebellious without a clue angry kids”. They just don’t have the knowledge of the intellectual process that derived the concept of atheism. Nor do they grasp the logic behind the assertion made by atheism.

Not accepting the existence of God, for example, is not equal to or the same as, insisting that God does not exist. That is a basic logic fallacy Anti-Theist’s routinely fall into. Logically speaking, one does not automatically lead to the other.

True genuine Atheists do not believe that God exists, but understand that their knowledge of the Universe is extremely finite and limited, and therefore leave the possibility open that God might in fact exist, though they consider the probability extremely low.

An Anti-Theist on the other hand insists that God does not exist in direct violation of the fundamental law of logic which states that, “A lack of evidence, is not evidence of a lack”.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:18 PM

What happened to this thread about Piers Morgan? I wish all you preachers would get your own thread.
1. You are never going to persuade the convinced.
2. Everybody has their own opinion, just like anuses. And most of those opinions stink in the same way.

Old Country Boy on December 27, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:17 PM

LOL. Says you. And, pray tell, what seminary did you graduate from, and what area of Theology is your Doctorate in?

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Is it moral to slaughter non-combatant men, women, children and babies?
chumpThreads on December 27, 2012 at 10:24 AM

I don’t know. Why don’t you ask your abortion-”rights” and euthanasia supporter friends?

chumpThreads on December 27, 2012 at 10:24 AM
Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 10:15 AM

You two just have to understand the concept of the old covenant and the new covenant, because you don’t get it. Why don’t you put your bitterness and hatred and ill-conceived notions away, find yourself a good, bible-believing church, and learn something about the bible before you open your mouths about it.

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

Sterling Holobyte on December 27, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Don’t waste your time trying to prove the existence of God or defend the bible. True change comes from the heart not the head. Just as I can’t prove scientifically that God exists, neither can anyone prove scientifically that He doesn’t exist.

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM

.
I don’t disagree with you about ‘real change’ coming from the heart.

But some people are “called and gifted” specifically for proving the existence of God, and/or defending the Bible.

I believe scientists have proven the existence of God.
But most of them “sweep it under the rug”.

It simply isn’t possible for the exponentially large amount of ‘genetic information’ contained in one living cell to have “evolved” on it’s own.

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 12:24 PM

And, I merely pointed out your foolish and imperious nature.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM

The self-styled “kingjester” calls me imperious for pointing out her habitual use of a logical fallacy! Lolz!

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Now all we need is Pablo Honey and Good Lt. and the atheist trifecta will be complete..

melle1228 on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Hey melle!! I resent not being mentioned among the atheists, and I haven’t made comment yet. :)

Although, I will forgive in this case, since I’m not one of the local atheists who attempts to dissuade the believers.

On a side note, I have studied ancient history, Biblical history, and Christian history (and former Catholic school student). I actually find them quite fascinating even though I’m not a believer. Genuine is actually quite correct about the Ten Commandments in the literal sense, but does it really matter? Whether they were THE Ten Commandments or not, they were still laws handed down to the Isrealites… both sets of “commandments”.

And actually Timin, the believers here (and melle) are quite correct about the historical references to Jesus. There is almost no doubt among historians that he was a real person, did do a lot of preaching, and was sentenced to death by the Roman authorities. And given that we have a stone found in Ceasarea Maritima from the period which names Pontius Pilate and gives his title as Prefect, and the records of Josephus and Philo which mention Pontius Pilate as Prefect of Judea, and we can place him as Prefect from roughly 26-36 AD, we likely know he sentenced Jesus. Whether one believes the stories of the Bible of Jesus being the Son of God or not is a different matter… I don’t personally… but there is little historical doubt that the man Jesus of Nazareth did exist.

gravityman on December 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

The self-styled “kingjester” calls me imperious for pointing out her habitual use of a logical fallacy! Lolz!

Foxhound on December 27, 2012 at 12:26 PM

You left your irony on.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Right. And the only way for me to not become your food is to band together with other people to protect our basic right to stay alive.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Again, your logic utterly fails. A right is something that cannot be taken away from you. Ergo, in a Universe devoid of God, there are no rights what-so-ever. Because there is nothing with the ability to prevent something stronger, faster, smarter and more hungry from eating you.

That is the whole point of a belief in God, that there is a final arbitrator of justice. Someone who has both said that their are rules and who has the power to enforce those rules. Without that concept there are no rights, only temporary grants of privilege.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Huh?

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Just a troll doin’ what trolls do.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

LOL. Says you. And, pray tell, what seminary did you graduate from, and what area of Theology is your Doctorate in?
kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Clever avoidance, kingsjester. What’s that you guys accuse liberals of when they’re arguments are clearly beaten? Shifting the focus to something else, moving the goalposts, and erecting straw men, when they can no longer effectively make their arguments?

If I’m wrong, give me the passage of the bible where the stone tablets say what YOU think they do as opposed to what I’ve said they did, cause I gave you the irrefutable passages that proved my point.

The only times the words “Ten commandments” are used is referring to the actual stone tablets given by god to Moses on mount Sinai. The ten commandments written on those stone tablets are different from the ones quoted and portrayed in modern Christian.

Prove me wrong. You’ve yet to be able to so far.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

And if you don’t think that the Bible is the unerring word of God … why would you care what’s in it at all?

Because many of those who do believe the Bible is the unerring word of God want to make unbelievers like me adhere to its bronze age morality.

piersMorgan on December 27, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Welcome to Hot Gas, Piers!

Honestly, I’ve seen Piers in the East River with more intelligence.

F-

Del Dolemonte on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

You got that right.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Thank you HA for giving the reprobates another chance to confess the fullness of their hearts.

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Prove that, troll.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:17 PM

So my options are that I either accept what science tells me does exist, or I believe everything exists because an argument can be made for their existence (that’s my quota for today on the word exist). How about a third option. We both believe as we want to without the need to denigrate each other.
You did make my point though. People who don’t believe in God always fall back to science as the answer. As you so aptly pointed out, using that stratagem backfires. Since intellectually we can make a scientific argument for any position that we want, using science to disprove my beliefs is a pointless endeavor.

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Hey melle!! I resent not being mentioned among the atheists, and I haven’t made comment yet. :)

gravityman on December 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

ROTFLMAO… Sorry gravityman, all indications are that you don’t belong on that list in that you appear to be an actual Atheist, rather than a Anti-Theist. (Yea, having been an actual Atheist before becoming a Christian, I do know the difference ;) )

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Prove me wrong. You’ve yet to be able to so far.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM

What part of those Commandments being written for the Jewish people, don’t you understand. Does it just literally tear you apart, that Christians in Sunday School and Church here in America and around the world,including the Capitol Building until 1848, (look it up)have been taught these commandments as The Ten Commandments?

Also, what about the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, don’t you understand?

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:37 PM

People who go on about the different translations don’t understand what those different translations are. The original documents used to translate the King James Bible are used by translators seeking to make a more modern language version. It would be as if 10 groups of translators decided to translate Mein Kampf into English. They all will say the same things but may use different adjectives or sentence structure. They are not adding doctrine. The only exceptions would be the ridiculous translations by those who attempted to eliminate all references to God in the masculine form.

Rose on December 27, 2012 at 12:42 PM

May I direct you to a brief and well-written series called: Gospel Hypothesis/Myth Hypothesis. Using Occam’s Razor it gives a really good answer to your question.

chumpThreads on December 27, 2012 at 9:49 AM

From your link:

So three days and nights go by before it even occurs to God to create the sun. That’s precisely the kind of mistake you’d expect to find in a story invented by people who were speaking from their own uninformed experience, as the Myth Hypothesis implies the story’s authors would have to be.

You freethinkers are really bright. Too bad you missed the day in school where we learned that a day’s length is a function of the earth’s rotation and has nothing to do with the sun.

Yeah. the Author of that ancient text sure was dumb.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

but there is little historical doubt that the man Jesus of Nazareth did exist.

gravityman on December 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

actually, the opposite is true. there is no reliable historical evidence for jesus.
try here:http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
the problem with this argument is that you quickly get bogged down in textual criticism and there are experts for all opinions.

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Say, Piers old boy, you could of course PUBLISH your own version of The Bible with your own amendments in it, you know?

It is the most printed book in history, so you should be able to get a millionth of a percent of the trade in it and make a bit of cashola… that is if your version actually attracts any readers…

I know that is a hard thing for a man used to being a SUBJECT to think about, but it is something you could do all on your lonesome to show just how POPULAR your idea is. Can’t fail if its a great idea, right? Self-publishing has moved out of the ghetto lately, so what’s to lose? Make it Print on Demand and put some glossies of yourself in the thing to make it MORE popular.

Basically, old chap, DIY.

Or just STFU.

ajacksonian on December 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Thank you for proving the point that there is a certain contempt in modern society for anybody who dares declare the Bible the unerring holy word of God. You don’t have to believe but that doesn’t give you the right to be intolerant of those who do.

Happy Nomad on December 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Those same people who take great joy in standing in front of a church denigrating Christians and mocking the Bible and everything it represents would never – not in a hundred years – stand in front of a mosque and denigrate islam. They wouldn’t dare mock the koran and those who believe it.
Oh, sure…they’ll get on Hot Air and denigrate islam anonymously, but they’d never dare do it face to face.

Because they’re cowards and hypocrites. They know that a Christian will pity them and pray for their soul…whereas, the muslim will cut their throat. So, like the cowards they are, they pick the safe target; and hypocritically call for “tolerance and understanding” of islam – all the while denigrating it in anonymous safety.

For the most part, the vast majority of atheists are just sad, pitiful little cowards.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I don’t personally… but there is little historical doubt that the man Jesus of Nazareth did exist.

gravityman on December 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM

What I said was in response to someone saying the bible is historically accurate. I imagine a guy named jesus probably did exist, but there certainly is no way for me to prove it either way. There are people who believe he never existed, most people accept the premise he existed because there would be no way to disprove.

But again, the only historic evidence I’m aware of is all written after jesus died, and are just passing references to a sect of judiasm that probably refers to christianity, but again, might not.

My point is that it is far from proven that any event in the bible happened and the book is in no way to be taken as historically accurate.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

You freethinkers are really bright. Too bad you missed the day in school where we learned that a day’s length is a function of the earth’s rotation and has nothing to do with the sun.

Yeah. the Author of that ancient text sure was dumb.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

LAWL!

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Thank you HA for giving the reprobates another chance to confess the fullness of their hearts.

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 12:32 PM

the socons also were attracted to this thread quite easily! who is missing? trafalgar should be here too, calling us atheists agents of the devil!

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Now, with all the uproar, Morgan’s viewership has probably quintupled, and he’ll be infesting our airwaves for months longer than he should have.

Scriptor on December 27, 2012 at 10:23 AM

So, now he’s got fifty viewers?

I find that hard to believe.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

When you call Christians names, why are they not allowed to respond in kind?

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

The least intelligent are usually his agents.

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Again, your logic utterly fails. A right is something that cannot be taken away from you. Ergo, in a Universe devoid of God, there are no rights what-so-ever. Because there is nothing with the ability to prevent something stronger, faster, smarter and more hungry from eating you.

That is the whole point of a belief in God, that there is a final arbitrator of justice. Someone who has both said that their are rules and who has the power to enforce those rules. Without that concept there are no rights, only temporary grants of privilege.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM

If a right is something that cannot be taken away from you, then how are there so many people worldwide who are denied their basic rights?

In other words, in a universe without god, there are no rights, right? So it’s safe for me to assume that in a universe with god, there are rights… And a right is something that CANNOT be taken away from you. But even though it cannot happen, it still happens daily.

Yes, the physically stronger can and do suppress peoples rights regularly. With or without god. That doesn’t mean the rights don’t exist. There is no cosmic justice that will judge someone for taking away rights, and as a practical matter, there is nothing from stopping a government from infringing on a persons rights.

The only thing we can stop is other people infringing on our rights, which is why the court system and the second amendment exist. When government infringes on our rights, the only things we can do are accept that life is unfair and unjust, or try to over throw said government.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM

If the bible is the inerrant word of God, why is there so much contradictory nonsense and things we know to be false?

Seven Seas on December 27, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Like what?

Nutstuyu on December 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM

You freethinkers are really bright. Too bad you missed the day in school where we learned that a day’s length is a function of the earth’s rotation and has nothing to do with the sun.

Yeah. the Author of that ancient text sure was dumb.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Not to be a devils advocate here, but there is a great deal more implied here than meets the eye. Even with the day being tied to the rotation of the earth, how do you get a day, before the earth itself was formed.

I do not believe that the Genesis Account was intended to be taken 100 percent literal, it was I believe a simplified account of creation. Remove the word day, and replace it with unspecified period of time (a far more complex concept to grasp) and the Genesis account makes a whole lot more sense.

More importantly, once you have removed the literal translation of day, the entire rest of the Genesis account lines up perfectly with the Scientific account of creation.

Genesis gives the exact correct sequence of events that science has verified actually transpired.

How did the author of that ancient text know that the entire Universe came into existence in a blinding flash of light? That first there was light, then there was matter, that matter coalesced into stars then planets that life started in the oceans and then moved onto the land and eventually intelligent life appeared?

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

What part of those Commandments being written for the Jewish people, don’t you understand. Does it just literally tear you apart, that Christians in Sunday School and Church here in America and around the world,including the Capitol Building until 1848, (look it up)have been taught these commandments as The Ten Commandments?

So now you’re saying that the actual ten commandments were written for the Jewish people and the real christian ten commandments are just what Moses told the people god had said when he came down from the mountain for the first time? And that some how the new covenant makes all that clear?

As you asked me, can you site you source for any of that? ;)

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

There are 6500 documents dated within 100 years of Jesus’s life that have a 95.5% accuracy rate. Compare that to only 10 copies of documents that talk about Caesar and are dated 900 years after his life.

Rose on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Apologetics is the art of explaining why the Bible doesn’t say what it says, and why it says what it doesn’t say.

chumpThreads on December 27, 2012 at 10:24 AM

You do realize that you are free to believe or not believe anything that you wish, don’t you?

Why is it that you people find it so difficult to allow others to believe as they wish?

Is it just that you people have some sort of perverse need to control others?

Or are you afraid?

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Thank you for my first good laugh. You want me to believe the “facts” that are posted on a website called “jesusneverexisted”?
Just a hunch, but with a name like that, I tend to think they might be a little biased. If I referred you to a website (for example) that was entitled “thebibleiscompletelytrue” would you accept their facts?

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

At least we have their signatures. I doubt anyone would believe stories of the founders walking on water and arising from their graves and ascending into heaven.

mazer9 on December 27, 2012 at 10:59 AM

How do you know it was really them that signed teh DoI? How do we know taht document was even truely written by Jefferson? After all, if we use the anti-theist logic of why Jesus didn’t exist then since each testiment that people gave who claim to have seen it happen aren’t 100% exactly the same, then it must not have happened.

DethMetalCookieMonst on December 27, 2012 at 12:57 PM

You did make my point though. People who don’t believe in God always fall back to science as the answer. As you so aptly pointed out, using that stratagem backfires. Since intellectually we can make a scientific argument for any position that we want, using science to disprove my beliefs is a pointless endeavor.

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I’m not trying to nullify or disprove your beliefs. Faith trumps logic 10 times out of 10, there’s no way to argue someone how of a faith. I don’t have a problem with people believing in god or thor or whatever they want to believe in.

Swalker, enough with the anti-theist atheist stuff. I don’t believe in god, or spend much time thinking about it. Could god exist? Sure. But if god existed, what makes you think your flavor of god-belief is the right one? It’s a historic accident (and a testament to the influence of the roman empire) that christianity is as big as it is now, and not some other, long forgotten, sect or religion.

I’m not opposed to the idea of a god… Like all of you, a part of me wishes there was some cosmic force for justice out there willing to reward me for my god behavior and punish others for their bad behavior. But because I want to believe something is true does not make it so.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

You really do not understand the Old and New Covenant, do you? Nor, do you seem to recognize the differnces in the Old and New Testaments.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM

RE: the Ten Commandments. The subject is too broad to be treated in blog-thread soundbites, but I will hit some high points.

The Ten Commandments are historical. That’s the way they are most often read and applied today. Wrong approach.

The Ten Commandments are prophetic. That is the way they should be understood for today. Jesus gave us two commandments: Love God with all your being and your neighbor as yourself.

The kind of love Jesus is talking about is defined by Paul In 1 Corinthians 13.

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8 Love never fails.

Fulling those two commandments results in the fulfillment of the Ten: You shall not steal. See the prophetic reading of that?

The Ten Commandments are also eschatological. When we reach our final abode, fulfilling the Ten Commandments will no longer a struggle. It will be as automatic as breathing. Oh, blessed day.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Unlike anyone named jesus, who may or may not have existed, and who has exactly one source (the bible) attesting to his life.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Apparentely you aren’t aware that the Bible is a COLLECTION of books, letters, etc. And let’s not forget the stuff that didn’t make it into the Bible that mention Jesus. So actaully there is a lot of documentation on his existance.

DethMetalCookieMonst on December 27, 2012 at 1:00 PM

How did the author of that ancient text know that the entire Universe came into existence in a blinding flash of light? That first there was light, then there was matter, that matter coalesced into stars then planets that life started in the oceans and then moved onto the land and eventually intelligent life appeared?

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

I’ve heard that argument, and sure, if we accept the premise of the bible, then it makes total sense that without a sun there is no reason why a ‘day’ would mean a 24 hour period. Also, the original word used might not have an exact english translation, and may not mean day as we mean it.

But again, we’re getting into “some of the bible is literal, some is just anecdotes” which makes the whole argument that much more difficult.
Look at genesis, there are two creation stories back to back. The details differ but the stories are mostly similar.

These were probably two similar stories, written by men, that were meshed together for our current creation story. Thats fine, but that makes the bible the work of MAN, not the work of GOD, and if we can accept that fallible men made the bible, then why do we give it any more credence then anything else man has written?

And if they were men inspired by god, why would god confuse people by telling true stories and then liberally sprinkling in anecdotes with no way to tell what should be taken seriously and what is just a cute story about god damning thousands of people?

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Why would you say that? Because I’m choosing to take the words used a LITERAL and intended as they were said? The ONLY time the words 10 commandments are used are when listing the ten laws actually put on the tablets. And they ARE different from the accepted set, which were never put on stone, never written down, and were only Moses repeating the things he heard. It’s just the way it is. I’m sorry. The actual ten commandments given by god, carved in stone, are almost completely different.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Your interpretation is tendentious because it is not based upon the clear grammar evident in the passage you cite. You are not using the “Literal” interpretation of that passage or any other, except in the fashion that Biden uses that word. It is also tendentious because you keep talking about “the Ten Commandments” as if it is a fundamental pillar upon which to base Christian theology. The phrase (as you probably well know) is a shorthand to refer to the key components of The Law. Those key components are found in Exodus 20.

You’re also clearly ignoring the recurrence of the “Ten Commandments” found in Deuteronomy 5, where the same laws as found in Exodus 20 are followed by the words in verse 22:

“These words the Lord spoke to all your assembly at the mountain out of the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice; and he added no more. And he wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me.

So, you’re tendentious and you’re wrong on the facts.

Also, my reading of Jesus’ statement about the commandments is based on Deuteronomy 6:5, which immediately follows the re-presentation to the people of The Law:

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

What do I think about those? I think you’re proving my original point for me, that’s what I think. My original post and what my subsequent posts came out of was referring to a quote from the story.

No, this proves you’re being tendentious. If you want to do something other than play word games, you would answer that question directly. I think you probably can’t because you’ve never even explored the question, and lack any knowledge related to it.

as well as basic accepted things in modern Christianity such as the 10 commandments show very clearly that people WILL accept amended versions and base their faith on them.

You might have chosen actual arguments to support your position, but you instead chose the incredibly weak position of this silliness related to the “Ten Commandments”. I think that shows your actual position – a desire to mock that which you cannot understand. Oh, the “Ten Commandments” are definitely not a “thing in modern Christianity”, as they are held up as the key components of The Law in Jewish texts dating back centuries before Christ.

Good enough for you? ;)

Nope. Unlike some modern public school teachers, I don’t accept bad faith argument and poor logic as a substitute for showing your work. D-. And, that’s only because of your tenacity.

Consider humility, Genuine. Your life will be much easier.

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Ah, well the liberals running Hot Air have found a way to resume their attack on conservatives again.

rayra on December 27, 2012 at 1:05 PM

There are 6500 documents dated within 100 years of Jesus’s life that have a 95.5% accuracy rate. Compare that to only 10 copies of documents that talk about Caesar and are dated 900 years after his life.

Rose on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

What? 6500 documents of what? And what the hell does 95.5% accurate mean? That they were accurately dated?

Ceasar is a title, not a name, not sure which roman leader (or russian, if we’re considering alternative spellings) you’re referring to, but we certainly have much more contemporary documentation on roman rulers then we do on jesus.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 1:05 PM

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 12:32 PM

.
the socons also were attracted to this thread quite easily! who is missing? trafalgar should be here too, calling us atheists agents of the devil!

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

.
HEY ! Yo ! (maniacally waving hand) Over here ! (whistling)

I’m here, I’m here. I’m the most self-promoting, self-serving sexual-Con on the whole blog, and I demand equal recognition.

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

You really do not understand the Old and New Covenant, do you? Nor, do you seem to recognize the differnces in the Old and New Testaments.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM

He doesn’t understand anything, kingsjester. He’s just trying desperately to mock something he can’t comprehend.

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:57 PM

“People believing in god or thor”. That’s exactly what I am talking about. You DO have a problem with people of faith or you would not have mentioned thor in your comments. That you felt compelled to equate God to a mythical Norse god shows your true disdain for Christians and belies your argument that you are tolerant. You remind me a a man I worked with. He said “I am completely tolerant of other people, no matter how stupid or wrong they are.”

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Aw shaddup, all you pharasees and preachers. Your yammering is not the subject of this thread. Give it a rest. Although, all this yammering proves Piers Morgan’s point. None of you can let it go.

Old Country Boy on December 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

You’re right…and it’s very sad.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 1:08 PM

But the faith, interpretation, and indeed the TRUE ten commandments have been forgotten and ignored in favor of the ones that sounded better, we’re never referred to as the ten commandments, and are not the laws god gave to Moses carved in stone.

So… Yes, amended. That good enough sourcing for you? ;)

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Except that the first set of rules is NEVER (as you admit) referred to as “The Ten Commandments”…but the second set of tablets IS called “The Ten Commandments”.

However, if you would prefer to use the first set of rules as a guide for your life, you are certainly free to do so.

See how that works?

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Apparentely you aren’t aware that the Bible is a COLLECTION of books, letters, etc. And let’s not forget the stuff that didn’t make it into the Bible that mention Jesus. So actaully there is a lot of documentation on his existance.

DethMetalCookieMonst on December 27, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Ah, good point. By the stuff that “didnt make it” into the bible, I assume you are referring to the books that early christian leaders voted against including? Stuff that while it was the word of god, was deemed not as important as the rest?

Anyways, my point stands. I used ‘the bible’ to mean ‘the writings of jesus’ followers, after his death’ sorry for the terminology.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

The 6500 documents are the letters which comprise the New Testaments. Each book is a letter written by one of the apostles to the early churches which sprang from Jesus’s ministry to the people who followed him. The apostles wrote letters which outlined the doctrines which became the foundation for the churches. The 95.5% accuracy means that for each corresponding copy of a letter, the copies were accurate to that percentage. Of all the copies there were only two errors and these were transcribing errors. This shows a great effort on the part of the early churches to make sure that the copies that they used were totally accurate to the original letter written by the apostles.

Rose on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

You really do not understand the Old and New Covenant, do you? Nor, do you seem to recognize the differnces in the Old and New Testaments.
kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM

No I do. You’re just not making any points or providing any support for why the New Covenant some how fixed the ten commandments back to what you and modern Christianity says they are, as opposed to what the bible states and shows they are.

You’re just throwing, “The new covenant! The new covenant!” out there as your attempt to wiggle out of the box you’ve found yourself in, but you can give no scriptural support to show why the new covenant changes or affects the reality of anything I said, or where it shows or says that the ten commandments to be the ones YOU think they are instead of what god said they were and had carved in stone.

You don’t have any, but rather than admit I’m not wrong about it, you’re trying to throw anything out that you can to avoid it and continue to…

base you’re their faith on the amended product

Just like the author of this article said it would be absurd to think anyone would ever do. Truth is, they do it every day. Just like you.

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

After his (alleged) involvement in the cell phone hacking scandel, maybe we should send the twit back across the pond and let Scotland Yard have a go at him.

I really am getting tired of these pompous, sanctimonious media types acting as if they are the be-all and end-all of “knowledge” simply because they have a microphone . . . but not a lick of common sense.

(Common Piers, let’s you and I have a go on Jeopardy and see who comes out on top. If you can do twice as well as Wolf, I believe I’ll still win easily.)

EB

EdmundBurke247 on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM

If a right is something that cannot be taken away from you, then how are there so many people worldwide who are denied their basic rights?

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Again you fail at basic logic. Having a right and being denied the ability to exercise that right are not the same as not having a right. This is where the distinction between a right and a privilege comes in.

In a Universe that has no God, nobody is ever denied their rights, because they don’t have any rights to be denied. They only have such temporary privileges as are granted to them by the most powerful elements of their society. Those privileges are only granted so long as they serve the interests of the powerful.

It is only with the existence of a ultimate authority capable of extracting retribution that rights exist. A authority from which their is absolutely no possibility of escaping accountability. A final arbitrator before whom all must account for their actions.

Without such a final arbitrator, all living beings exist at the whim and convenience of those more powerful then themselves. Who holds the most powerful accountable. If there is no one capable of doing so, then there are no rights, only temporary grants of privilege that suit the convenience of those who nobody can hold accountable.

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Very few in human history are as proud as you are of their ignorance.

tom daschle concerned on December 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

SWalker on December 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

It seems that the earth was created from the git-go. (But I think the first verse would be better translated, “In the beginning God created space and matter.” I believe the Hebrew allows for that.)

Then light. The source of that light is not given. From what little we know about light, that is a problem yet to be understood.

So, since the earth was already in existence and presumably rotating, the question of 24 hour time periods is answered.

I believe that the “days” in Genesis 1 are 24 hour time periods. But it is not, as some make it, a belief essential to one’s salvation.

Genesis chapters 1 and 2 are not scientific treatises, but they will be shown not to conflict with science.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

You’re flailing. Please allow me to suggest a Life Raft. Please, read the Gospel of John.

By the way…As Christians, we’re not perfect. Just forgiven.

kingsjester on December 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

“People believing in god or thor”. That’s exactly what I am talking about. You DO have a problem with people of faith or you would not have mentioned thor in your comments. That you felt compelled to equate God to a mythical Norse god shows your true disdain for Christians and belies your argument that you are tolerant. You remind me a a man I worked with. He said “I am completely tolerant of other people, no matter how stupid or wrong they are.”

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

What?! You’re insulted because I grouped your god with a “mythical Norse god”? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize it was intolerant to mix your real god with mythical gods when talking about peoples religious beliefs.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Oh, Axe, gets a re-treat (is that like re-gifting or sumthin’?)!!

I hang my head in shame that Piers is one of mine. I hang it further since he knows so little about the Bible and the role Merry, Olde England played in writing the most famous version:

From what Axe calls “My Pecker Placement Tales” — since I can distill hundreds of years of English history down to “p3cker placement”:

Do you know who was behind the most used version, the KJV?

Most people know about Henry VIII, The King’s Great Matter (his desire to divorce Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn), the English Reformation, the Oath of Supremacy, Edward VI’s imposition of austere protestantism, Bloody Mary’s return to the Catholic Church, and Elizabeth I’s reinstatement of the Oath of Supremacy and the Church of England, but many do not know about the origins of the KJV and how it changed the course of history.

Picking up after Elizabeth’s death…

King James I of England and VI of Scotland, who convened the Hampton Court Conference in 1604 and instructed translators and scholars to create a new version of the Bible to conform with the Church of England – today, this Bible is known as the King James Version – was bisexual. His wife Queen Anne gave birth to his three children. While considered a decent husband and father, Jimmy loved getting him some Esmé Stewart, Duke of Lennox; Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset; and, George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham.

While riding through the bustling streets of London from 1603 to 1621, one was liable to hear the shout “Long live Queen James!” King James was so open about his homosexual love affairs that an epigram had been circulated which roused much mirth and nodding of the heads: Rex fuit Elizabeth: nunc est regina Jacobus—

“Elizabeth was King: now James is Queen.”

His son, Charles I, who was married to a Catholic, was executed by Oliver Cromwell and the Roundheads in 1649.

His grandson, King Charles II, was a legendary philanderer. He had a harem of mistresses and at least 8 illegitimate children. His wife, Catherine of Braganza, was infected with a STD by him and became infertile as a result. No heirs, which caused a HUGE crisis because his heir was his brother, King James II, who was Catholic…and, we all know about what happened in England after the English Reformation so a Catholic on the throne was always going to end badly. James II was driven from the throne. He was succeeded by his daughter, Mary, and her Protestant husband, William of Orange (William and Mary). She died without heirs and was succeeded by her sister Queen Anne, who also died without heirs. Upon her death, the closest Protestant heir was George of Hanover.

The Hanoverians introduced into the royal family madness and haemophilia. George III was mad and many of Queen Victoria’s descendants were born with haemophilia, including the last Tsarevich of Russia, Nicholas II’s son. His condition introduced Rasputin into the family and many believe that the entry of that fraud led to the downfall of the 300 year-old Romanov Dynasty.

I find it ironic that the King, who ordered the Authorised King James Bible, which is still the most popular version of the Bible in the world, was bisexual while the King with a heterosexual sex drive that would kill most men infected his wife with numerous STDs rendering her infertile, which eventually led to the crown falling into the hands of the haemophilia-plagued Hanoverians, who became the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (later renamed the Windsors). In turn, the SCGs infected the royal families of Spain, Germany and Russia.

If the heterosexual, King Charles II, had kept his pecker in his wife and not in his mistresses, who knows? There might still be a Tsar in Russia and Lenin and Stalin wouldn’t have killed tens of millions of people and without a crazy George III, the US might still be a British colony!

lol

BTW, many in the UK doesn’t want Piers back either. Mark Steyn suggested that he be deported to Bermuda so that he can hang out with the 4 Uighurs, who Obama gifted to the Land of the Rising Google Offshore Accounts.

Resist We Much on December 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Except that the first set of rules is NEVER (as you admit) referred to as “The Ten Commandments”…but the second set of tablets IS called “The Ten Commandments”.
However, if you would prefer to use the first set of rules as a guide for your life, you are certainly free to do so.
See how that works?
Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Stfu, Donny. You’re like a kid who rolls into a movie theater halfway through trying to figure out what happened.

Yes, the first set of rules were NEVER written down, never referred to as the ten commandments and were only Moses repeating things god had told him on mount Sinai.

But THOSE are the “ten commandments” you’ve been taught when they are no such thing.

The ACTUAL 10 commandments, the only thing refered to as such in the bible, and what was carved in the stor tablets and given to Moses list an entirely different set of 10 rules.

So… You just made my point. Thanks. The ACTUAL ten commandments and why was on the stones are not the 10 commandments taught as such today.

The story was amended for popular culture because what Moses said is a lot more applicable, and mass consumable, than the real ones on the stone tablets that modern people can hardly relate to at all.

Oh well though, right? Gotta keep the faith relevant. Even if it has to be a little contrived, amended, and cleaned up for the discerning modern Christians. ;)

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:18 PM

The ones you cited are not one time referred to as the 10 commandments, and in fact there are 20+ that were whittled down to the convenient 10 used today, and those are NOT what god sent down on the tablets.

See? Amended. ;)

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Those numbers mark verses – not Commandments. Learn how to read, at least.

(Some of these people are too stupid to walk around unleashed)

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:18 PM

.
Tell it to God, when you see him.

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Thank you for my first good laugh. You want me to believe the “facts” that are posted on a website called “jesusneverexisted”?
Just a hunch, but with a name like that, I tend to think they might be a little biased. If I referred you to a website (for example) that was entitled “thebibleiscompletelytrue” would you accept their facts?

bandutski on December 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

you can allways check the facts by yourself. for example, the “Testimonium Flavianum”, which is the passage that seems to refer not just to some jesus(quite a popular name in those days), but to christ. reading more about it, for example in wikipedia, there are many evidences that the passage was forged(catholic encyclopedia calls it “interpolated) and does not fit the text or style of josephus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Testimonium_Flavianum

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Rose on December 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Correct.

Some like to say that the Bible contains thousands of mistakes. But it’s the way they “add” up those mistakes.

If one manuscript copy says “Our Lord Jesus Christ” and a hundred other manuscripts say “Jesus Christ our Lord” that to them is 101 mistakes.

Their goal is not honest intellectual debate; it is to destroy Christianity.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM

HEY ! Yo ! (maniacally waving hand) Over here ! (whistling)

I’m here, I’m here. I’m the most self-promoting, self-serving sexual-Con on the whole blog, and I demand equal recognition.

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM

lol! you too! recognition granted! :)

nathor on December 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Genuine on December 27, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Awww. What’s the matter, nancy-boy? You still hurt from the pwning I gave you the other night?
Are your little feeeeewins all hurted, simple b!tch?

Perhaps you are the one who should STFU; and FOAD while you’re at it.

But you keep flailing away, princess.

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Those numbers mark verses – not Commandments. Learn how to read, at least.

(Some of these people are too stupid to walk around unleashed)

Solaratov on December 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM

And the verse numbers weren’t in the original manuscripts. They were added much later to aid in referencing.

davidk on December 27, 2012 at 1:26 PM

we certainly have much more contemporary documentation on roman rulers then we do on jesus.

Timin203 on December 27, 2012 at 1:05 PM

You don’t believe it, because it contradicts what you’ve been told. But, it is true that there is more documentation about Jesus’ life than about many other things that you would accept as fact based on the history you have been taught. Any honest historian will admit that Jesus not only existed, but caused quite a turmoil in the little Roman province called Palestine. They will also admit that this Jesus had a great many miraculous events ascribed to him contemporaneously. The resultant events – the journeys of the apostles, the divisions within the Jerusalem church, the growth of this sect – are also pretty well attested by non-Biblical and non-church sources.

You don’t have to believe in the miracles based on that evidence, but you do have to admit that scripture is not just a fairy tale concocted by a handful of men. Jesus did exist. What you believe of him is what matters.

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 11