Even if you are not religious (I’m not) we really need a Bible tv show. But it has to be 100% accurate, no cuting corners, at most they could modernize the language, but it has to have 100% of dialogues there. It would be amazing
Unless you are cramming the whole book into a single episode or movie the religious weirdos will just cherry pick the episodes they like, as they do with the book now.
I’d settle for a Bible written in plain, modern English. The closest I could find was Word on the Street but it was a white guy trying to write like a gangsta and it fell a bit flat.
There’s “The Message” which is a modern, idiomatic translation of the bible. I remember looking at it ~20 years ago and it being a modern translation, but I didn’t like the translation even at 11yo.
I’m looking more for a complete modern overhaul, not a line-by-line modern translation. Like a novel. I still use the KJV in church so I get exposed to the original scripture but it’s often very difficult to actually grasp what’s going on.
100% accurate to which version? King James version? The Latin that was translated from? The Greek that was translated from? The original (I think) Hebrew?
Keeping the same language so no mistranslation is no barrier for religious wars. Shia and Sunni do fine despite both having the Koran in original Arabic.
Not exactly what you’re thinking, but Moral Orel dabbled in this. It was made by the guy you probably know as Starburns from Community. who provides the voice of Mickey Mouse, but you might know him better as the guy from the “this guy fucks” meme.
That would be insanely hard to do accurately. There’s some repeated stories (kings/chronicles or Matthew/Mark/Luke/John), there’s stuff that isn’t a story at all (Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, song of songs), and most of the new testament is letters.
“The thigh was considered the source of posterity in the ancient world. Or, more properly, the “loins” or the testicles. The phrase “under the thigh” could be a euphemism for “on the loins.” There are two reasons why someone would take an oath in this manner: 1) Abraham had been promised a “seed” by God, and this covenantal blessing was passed on to his son and grandson. Abraham made his trusted servant swear “on the seed of Abraham” that he would find a wife for Isaac. 2) Abraham had received circumcision as the sign of the covenant (Genesis 17:10). Our custom is to swear on a Bible; the Hebrew custom was to swear on circumcision, the mark of God’s covenant. The idea of swearing on one’s loins is found in other cultures, as well. The English word testify is directly related to the word testicles.”
Yeah I thought it trolled a little too hard at first, but when someone else pointed out what it ‘meant’ I feel like if they’re trolling they got it just right.
I mean, the moment you see a passage that barely fits a child and you think to yourself “Hey, I should get in there!”, you’re just aiming to be the year’s winner of the Darwin Awards.
As someone with an injured/handicapped leg. No this is not indicative of lying about your handicap and people need to stop being so miseducated about disabilities.
I can walk short distances even though I need a crutch usually. My leg will just hate me all day afterwards. I’d imagine this to be very much similar where he can in their walk but his quality of life is absolutely bad without his wheelchair
My favorite is the video of the old lady yelling at a younger guy for parking in a handicap spot (yes he had the handicap tag on his mirror). Then the guy walks out of the car and he has a prosthetic leg. Never jump to conclusions about people’s disabilities and mind your own business.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.