The Irish monks used to have a very similar bible. Except theirs was painted by hand and took a lifetime tyo make. The images in books like The Book of Kells were meant to illustrate stories of the bible and intrigue those who could not read or were not interested into "reading" the bible.
They did it as an act of worship and dedication to the Lord, and to make money for their monestaries. It sounds like this guy is doing the same thing. He is reaching people with God's word in a relavent way. I like it.
As for Angelina Jolie...I like her too. She is amazing in The Changeling.
And therefore Angelina... that whole Brad thing is sad & sketch... is tight with me.
As far as the Bibles... I tend to be hesitant with marketing strategies & religion. Just a little bit overplayed for me. But I like to be provoked and, generally, things that provoke. Sometimes you need to be shaken awake. Or, at least, I do.
I don't think it should be necessary to "spice up" the Bible.
Revelation 22:18-19 "For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book o this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the thigns which are written in this book."
It's fine to provoke people to think more deeply about their faith (i.e. Rob Bell, Donald Miller, etc.) but they're writing books, not adding their own interpretations INTO the Bible and selling the attached photos and stuff as scripture.
1 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."
I'm not saying they're adding words to Scripture, but in theory, aren't they doing the same thing with pictures?
2) If whoever feels the urge to make the Christian church a cool, hip place to be, he/she is stupid. I say stupid, not because of a lack of a better term, but because of its definition. These people obviously havent learned that church bands, new age bibles, and non-traditional services aren't getting the numbers of the 12-24 age crowd. The Bible doesn't need pictures and celebrity references as supplements...it needs a pastor, or a catechism. Changing the Bible in order to accomodate the needs of punks like them who always have to have 'change' is B.S and frankly, it's scraping the bottom of the bucket.
4 comments:
The Irish monks used to have a very similar bible. Except theirs was painted by hand and took a lifetime tyo make. The images in books like The Book of Kells were meant to illustrate stories of the bible and intrigue those who could not read or were not interested into "reading" the bible.
They did it as an act of worship and dedication to the Lord, and to make money for their monestaries. It sounds like this guy is doing the same thing. He is reaching people with God's word in a relavent way. I like it.
As for Angelina Jolie...I like her too. She is amazing in The Changeling.
WANTED? Best movie of all time?
Quite possibly.
And therefore Angelina... that whole Brad thing is sad & sketch... is tight with me.
As far as the Bibles... I tend to be hesitant with marketing strategies & religion. Just a little bit overplayed for me. But I like to be provoked and, generally, things that provoke. Sometimes you need to be shaken awake. Or, at least, I do.
I don't think it should be necessary to "spice up" the Bible.
Revelation 22:18-19
"For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book o this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the thigns which are written in this book."
It's fine to provoke people to think more deeply about their faith (i.e. Rob Bell, Donald Miller, etc.) but they're writing books, not adding their own interpretations INTO the Bible and selling the attached photos and stuff as scripture.
1 Timothy 3:16
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."
I'm not saying they're adding words to Scripture, but in theory, aren't they doing the same thing with pictures?
1) you're welcome...haha
2) If whoever feels the urge to make the Christian church a cool, hip place to be, he/she is stupid. I say stupid, not because of a lack of a better term, but because of its definition. These people obviously havent learned that church bands, new age bibles, and non-traditional services aren't getting the numbers of the 12-24 age crowd. The Bible doesn't need pictures and celebrity references as supplements...it needs a pastor, or a catechism. Changing the Bible in order to accomodate the needs of punks like them who always have to have 'change' is B.S and frankly, it's scraping the bottom of the bucket.
Post a Comment