What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
He sings, he strums, and he works at Best Buy. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Musician and Best Buy employee, Keith Parsons, rocks his Best Buy holiday campaign audition.
346 Comments
- bsonline, on 07/06/2009, -6/+126This is one article no one on digg will read before commenting on.
- bwjacket, on 07/06/2009, -30/+137Oddly, this version of the text has Jesus wakling on ice, cooking fish for dozens at a fish fry, waking Lazurus from an afternoon nap, and being condemned to death for tax evasion.
I guess some of the story got translated poorly through the years. - CTK14A, on 07/06/2009, -15/+113I read this as 'Earliest Surviving Christian Bale Put Together and Online'
- Typographreak, on 07/06/2009, -24/+110Before a war erupts here, I'd just like to say something. Christians, don't feel you have to defend yourselves. Enjoy your faith, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Athiests, this isn't worth your time, if you've accepted that you don't believe in any religion, move on and don't ruin it for those who believe in it. Hopefully I've prevented what will be a long stretch of repetitive, boring, and typical comments.
- orlyfactor, on 07/06/2009, -1/+63Bale 1:14
Me and Jesus are so done professionally. He's so amateur. - appleseed1234, on 07/06/2009, -24/+85Looks like this is one early Christian heretical manuscript the Church forgot to burn.
- eadnams, on 07/06/2009, -14/+56Agreed, religious intolerance is just as bad as athiest intolerance. Both are equally disrespectful.
- mogdor, on 07/06/2009, -2/+40It's sad that some people can't just see this as a cool historical find, and instead gotta come on here looking for a fight about religion.
- beatle42, on 07/06/2009, -8/+44Doesn't that strike you as a somewhat important omission though?
- thomn8r, on 07/06/2009, -2/+37>The Codex Sinaiticus is one of the world's greatest written treasures
Great! *Another* codec we have to find, download and install? - phylaxer, on 07/06/2009, -6/+41Many people don't know the king james bible was assembled by committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorized_King_James ... and filtered out manuscripts that were not consistent.
- Kentj1, on 07/06/2009, -43/+73This version ends with a dead Jesus - no resurrection. Here is the last chapter of Mark, translated from the website:
45 . . . he gave the corpse to Joseph. 46 And he bought linen, took him down, wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulcher that had been hewed out of a rock, and rolled a stone to the door of the sepulcher. 47 And Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of Jesus saw where he was laid. 16:1 And when the sabbath had passed, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint him.
Most biblical scholars believe that Mark was the first book written, and the other 3 copied Mark and embellished the story. So does this mean that Jesus just . . . died? - chuckDontSurf, on 07/06/2009, -5/+35@dafragsta: *****. Don't believe everything you read in 'The Da Vinci Code." The process of selecting which books belonged to the New Testament began at least a century before Constantine. And Constantatine certainly had no part in picking which books went in there. BTW, I'm not Christian, but it bothers me when people spout off about nonsense like that.
- mogdor, on 07/06/2009, -2/+31This is more about an important historical find than about religion.....but people who just read the title and wanna pick a fight will be oblivious to that.
- Mujokan, on 07/06/2009, -4/+31The history of what made it into the Bible is kind of interesting. Although a lot of Christians think the Bible is literally the word of God, it was down to the vagaries of fate over hundreds of years as to what got into the current version.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Ne ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Ol ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocryp ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library - Themarsbar91, on 07/06/2009, -7/+33Dumbledore dies!!!!
- enantiodromia, on 07/06/2009, -3/+28it's not supposedly. you can read the some of the other gospels here: http://jewishchristianlit.com//Resources/Texts/nag ...
it is curious they left out the Gospel of Thomas when arranging the canon, considering the book is composed entirely of direct quotes of Jesus. seems like that's the sort of thing you would want in your religion based on the man. - bmcnally, on 07/06/2009, -0/+24That is a very interesting point. I'm not sure how many others will understand the significance.
(For those who don't) The First Council of Nicaea was convened by Emperor Constantine to help solve several of the controversies swirling in the church at the time, notably the Arian heresy which stated that Jesus was not co-eternal/existent/of the same essence as God the Father. It was the first council consisting of Patriarchs/bishops from across the Roman Empire and helped form Christianity into a religion that would follow a single blueprint (which kind of worked for a couple hundred years). - digitalArtform, on 07/06/2009, -7/+31God should have laser etched the Bible in a magical script that anyone can unambiguously understand onto impervious pylons every 100 miles across the world.
- DreKor, on 07/06/2009, -1/+25You must construct additional Bibles!
- Actionjax1, on 07/06/2009, -2/+23Damn, you beat me to it. I'm glad I am not the only one.
- vegask, on 07/06/2009, -13/+33Better link, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religio ...
"It offers different versions of the Scriptures from later editions of the Bible, notably in St Mark's Gospel which ends 12 verses before later versions, omitting the appearance of the resurrected Jesus Christ. " Guess they made that part up later. - TobiasParker, on 07/06/2009, -1/+21I saw that too. *hangs head in shame*
- copi35, on 07/06/2009, -6/+24"I guess some of the story got translated poorly through the years"
Nope, it's evolution, baby! - candlestickjack, on 07/06/2009, -2/+19Jesus didn't write anything in the Bible...
- Dauntless1, on 07/06/2009, -9/+26What anti-christian comment? I just pointed out that the bible is the most edited book in history, and for awhile it was common practice to collect and burn previous versions after a change.
- chuckDontSurf, on 07/06/2009, -2/+19Re Gospels of Mary and Thomas: one thing to realize is that those are they were written hundreds of years after Jesus lived. It'd be the equivalent of a historical document being written now about the Founding Fathers. It's not considered as authentic as those which were written closer to the time Jesus lived.
Again, a disclaimer: I'm not Christian; I'm more interested in it from a historical perspective. - Methusalah, on 07/06/2009, -1/+17You obviously only saw the first verse of chapter 16. Change the chapter to 16 and then select the verse 1, 2, etc. The interface is kind of touchy so I can see why you were confused.
- JCEEZ, on 07/06/2009, -1/+17lol me too
- enantiodromia, on 07/06/2009, -1/+16Anyone know if this is pre or post Nicean Creed? It's just about old enough to be either.
- consonance, on 07/06/2009, -6/+21Yeah, dudes coming back from the dead isn't something you would normally forget about.
- DreKor, on 07/06/2009, -0/+15Don't worry, I'm sure it will be bundled with the next VLC release.
- geodebug, on 07/06/2009, -0/+15Even as a non-believer I'm interested in the Bible from a historical perspective, how it was pieced together, edits, politics, etc.
- atmenterprises, on 07/06/2009, -1/+15Wow. You're +32 on the Digg column with a lie. Did you try scrolling down and reading the rest of Mark, chapter 16? Verse six says this:
6 But he says to them: Be not amazed. You seek Jesus the Nazarene who was crucified; he has risen, he is not here: see the place where they laid him.
I believe that would be a resurrection. - Dauntless1, on 07/06/2009, -2/+16"Mommy, do all fairy tales start with Once upon a time?" "No honey, there are thousands of fairy tales that start with If elected to office, I promise to...."
- enantiodromia, on 07/06/2009, -3/+17home schooled?
- ereinei, on 07/06/2009, -8/+21Notice this is the earliest BIBLE, which means the earliest artifact of a fully assembled Christian Canon. The letters and writings that were eventually collected into the canon are much older and artifacts of those go all the way back to just a few decades after the Resurrection for New Testament writings. From the Old Testament (the Jewish scriptures) there are extent manuscripts going back to before Jesus lived. In fact there are over 5,000 extent manuscripts from the Old and New Testament making the Bible the most historically reliable document from an archaeological point of view. For example "The Republic" by Plato only has a few extent manuscripts, but would be considered by a lot of people on Digg to be more historically reliable, which is actually not the case.
- RockMuncher, on 07/06/2009, -9/+22It's really fascinating to see an ancient, un-edited version of the Bible in side by side comparison with the more modern versions... even for us non Christians. It demonstrates the various cultural shifts throughout history and how religion influences and adapts to outside influence by changing certain aspects of their faith. What's really interesting to me is the humanization of Jesus... as in referring to him as a man, as a fallible non perfect person... it makes the stories much more interesting as moral lessons.
This is, however, going to give the Christian literal interpretationists fits. Heh. - Dauntless1, on 07/06/2009, -8/+21Supposedly, the Vatican has an "original' bible in the vault, but of course mere mortals don't get to see what's in the Vatican's closet.
- Xproject01, on 07/06/2009, -1/+14same here
- pushforpeace, on 07/06/2009, -12/+25Are you kidding me? This is in perfect alignment with the Synoptic Gospels. The only part that is missing is the Resurrection after the verses you just quoted.
- dafragsta, on 07/06/2009, -14/+27There are supposedly several gospels of Jesus, but Constantine picked only the juiciest, most supernatural ones and even added an editorial pen to the final copy. You know, the whole "born of a virgin" thing.
- Mujokan, on 07/06/2009, -4/+17There's even a Gospel of Mary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mary_Magdal ...
rocknog is right, the bits in the NT about a virgin are due to NT authors trying to align with prophecy in the OT, but the OT translation was misleading. This was a big deal when Jerome tried to introduce a better version than the Septaguint as I recall. - WhiskeyLemur, on 07/06/2009, -0/+13Yeah, who needs historic resources for one of the most influential works in human history, anyway?
- bpoteat, on 07/06/2009, -11/+23I'll believe that when I see fanatical atheists lobbying for laws to take away the rights of large populations because atheism says so.
- consonance, on 07/06/2009, -0/+12No. Those are the Anglicized names. For example, Jesus's Hebrew name was actually Yehoshuah (in Aramaic Yeshua), which itself is separately Anglicized as Joshua.
- mrpunman, on 07/06/2009, -29/+41[citation needed]
- ApokalypseNow, on 07/06/2009, -6/+18Historically significant, yes.
Historically *reliable*? No. - magamiako, on 07/06/2009, -5/+16ereinei:
It's not that we doubt that there is some historical significance to the bible. To actually think that is quite insane and ludicrous. There is a *LOT* to be learned from the Bible and from all of those early texts. The problem we have with it is all of the BS surrounding "supernatural" powers, coming back from the dead, etc.
As a story, of which some *might* be based on people that actually existed, there's nothing superbly wrong with it.
Unfortunately, most people who "believe in the bible" have never read it thoroughly. I've been reading the Old Testament for some time now and it's rather....how shall we say....interesting. For what it's worth, I'm reading the JPS version of the OT. - RuSTeDs, on 07/06/2009, -2/+13[Citation Needed]
There were never "copies of Quran" before the one which exists right now, that is the Hafsa's compilation under Uthman the 3rd Caliph. The "variant readings" that didn't pass the critical examination by Uthman's staff were burned, but there was never an "early copy of Quran" that was somehow drastically different and threw the religion off its feet.
Wiki article on Quran compilation is not checked for neutrality, but here's a historical examination of Quranic compilation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYwvgXOU1e4 -
Show 51 - 100 of 355 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is