home
RSS
March 28th, 2011
03:16 PM ET

Tiny church finds original King James Bible

By Richard Allen Greene, CNN

Hilmarton, England (CNN) - A little English village church has just made a remarkable discovery.

The ornate old Bible that had been sitting in plain view on a table near the last row of pews for longer than anyone could remember is an original King James Bible - one of perhaps 200 surviving 400-year-old original editions of arguably the most important book ever printed in English.

In fact, the Bible at St. Laurence Church in Hilmarton, England, was sitting right under a hand-lettered sign saying it was an original.

The sign said it had been found in "the parish chest" in 1857, that the cover had been added, and that it was the second of the two impressions published in 1611 - the year of first publication.

But no one knew whether to believe it, parish council member Geoff Procter said. As the anniversary of publication in 1611 approached, they decided it was worth investigating.

"We had no way of knowing whether it really was a 1611 Bible so we had to get it verified somehow," he said.

He and two other church members took it to a specialist, the Rev. David Smith at the Museum of the Book in London.

Smith knew immediately what he was looking at, Procter said.

"We put it on his table and he opened it and immediately he said, 'Yes, this is a 1611 Bible,'" Procter remembered.

Geoff Procter of St. Laurence Church in Hilmarton, England, reads from the church’s King James Bible.

Smith identified it thanks to a printing error - a place in the Gospel of Matthew that should say Jesus entered the Garden of Gethsemane and spoke to his disciples instead says that Judas, who betrayed Jesus, entered the garden.

That the St. Laurence Bible had that error, but not another one in the Book of Ruth, enabled Smith to pinpoint exactly when the book had been printed, Procter explained.

"We realized that this is quite an important find," he said, and last month the church quietly announced the discovery in the diocese newsletter.

They hesitated before going public, Procter said.

"It was one of those discoveries that we wondered if we should tell everybody or tell nobody," he said. "And we thought that as it was the 400th anniversary, we should talk about it."

St. Laurence Church is far from the only one talking about the King James Bible this year - the Globe Theatre in London is planning a reading of the whole thing in the days before Easter, and a literary festival has already done one. Cambridge University has an exhibition, and the King James Bible Trust lists dozens of special events planned this year to mark the anniversary.

The reason is simple, said Moira Goff of the British Library.

The King James Bible is "so embedded in us that we can't overstate the significance of it," she said.

It's the source of dozens of phrases and concepts that have become part of the English language - "an eye for an eye," "born again," "eat, drink and be merry," "God forbid."

The church recently discovered that its old Bible was a rare 400-year-old original King James Bible.

Experts point out that the King James is based on at least two earlier major English translations, so its creators were editors as much as originators of these phrases, but it is the King James Bible that the great English writers knew, Goff said.

"It's passed entirely into the English language, into the thinking of English speakers around the world," she said.

Its influence has been greater than that of Shakespeare, she argued.

"I think it's permeated the language in ways that we can't count as we can count Shakespeare, influencing people's religious thinking, influencing people's social thinking in a way that Shakespeare probably does now - but that's a more recent development," she said.

"It's the Bible that was read to people in church every week," she explained. "The great literary figures from the early 17th century onwards, this was their daily reading. It passed into their works," she said, citing John Milton and John Bunyan among others.

But the King James Bible shouldn't be reduced to merely its influence on writers, she said.

"I think we have to be very careful in looking at the Bible only as a work of literature. It is also Holy Scripture and I think that makes it a different sort of book than the great works of literature," she said. "It will be read by people who will possibly never read Shakespeare or Milton."

The St. Laurence discovery is very unusual, she said. Perhaps 200 copies of the 1611 printings of King James Bibles are known to exist, she estimated. No one knows how many were printed, she added, but she guessed that the number was probably around 1,000.

Most of the surviving copies are in institutions, such as major libraries at universities, colleges and cathedrals in the United Kingdom and United States, she said.

"Some of them may be in private collections," she added, saying there is no way to know how many such copies there might be.

The sign hanging above the Bible, announcing its origins.

The St. Laurence discovery is technically a fragment, not a Bible, since it is missing a few pages (including most of the first pages of Genesis, up to chapter 4, verse 17) and has been trimmed at the top to fit the wooden cover added in Victorian times.

But it fits a pattern, she said. As King James Bibles got old and needed to be replaced, many were tucked away as church treasures, as seems to have happened with the St. Laurence Bible.

The people of St. Laurence Church are now trying to raise money to build a special case so they can keep their Bible in use and on regular display.

That would make the church more or less unique so far as Goff knows, although she speculated that there just might be a few village churches still using their 400-year-old Bibles.

"It's possible there are one or two churches that have gone on doing it and they just haven't thought to say," she said.

"People are now beginning to realize the value of this particular edition. This is the 400th anniversary and there is a lot more emphasis on it," she said.

"They value it. They want to keep it and they want to use it."

- Newsdesk editor, The CNN Wire

Filed under: Bible • Books • Christianity • Easter • Houses of worship • United Kingdom

soundoff (1,211 Responses)
  1. John

    What's so important about this?????

    March 28, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
    • MichaelR

      Ask God. He might be better able to explain it to you.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:20 pm |
    • bam

      because its from 1611 so it should have passages about crusades and the such, so this version of the book of hate should be burned so that history can be erased.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
    • John

      Book burning Bam? Grow up!

      March 28, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
    • History

      I think if you look at the article, it explains that it is an historically important book. It was, perhaps the only book that many many people ever heard read. It is a source for many expressions in English, and a source for some great authors. I don't see it as spiritually relevant, but many do. That makes it important too. Undeniably so.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
    • Wzrd1

      Erm, it's a 400 year old book? It had a major influence on English, hence OUR society?
      Take your choice.
      As for burning it, sorry, LEARNING from history is important, not erasing it, to repeat past mistakes.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  2. Mike

    Is bible word of God. See the debate between Jimmy Swaggart and Ahmed Deedat at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3483872398662557243#

    March 28, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
  3. wordhead

    now the challenge: how to make it readily available for continued public use & simutaneoulsy protect it from either being damaged or stolen by the unscrupulous.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
  4. ratty

    wow what an incredible find!... hey, i'm an atheist, and have a LOT of issues with most religions, and religion in general, but regardless of that, this is an amazing piece of historical value, in so many ways... i may not believe in God or Gods or Unicorns or whatever, but the knowledge of all religions, and their history, and how they shaped societies and cultures all over the world is an intrinsic part of human history... must be incredidble to read a book, ANY book, that was written 400 years ago and is still in good shape... heck the books on my shelves are mostly 30 or 40 years old tops, and they're disintegrating just sitting there! haha... this is a very cool find, awesome

    March 28, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
    • well

      i agree. not a fan of the author, but would be really nice to see.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  5. JayBee

    I am an atheist and I found this article interesting and uplifting. This book was immensely important to the development of western history and it is a great find. There is no reason to use this message board to bash religion, this story is as much about finding a treasure tucked away for years as it is about religion.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
    • Max

      As an atheist as well, I agree that this is an interesting story and I would personally love to own a 400 year old bible.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
    • uos_spo6

      I wouldn't mind having it for collective and historical signifiance, but all the same I'd rather have a 50yr old bottle of scotch which will eventually be empty than a 400yr old book full of stories, and nothing more, that will last for much longer.

      One has tangible applications, the other I know the content of more well than I care to and gain nothing from other than understanding the simplicity of simpletons.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  6. DWT

    Wow–400 years. And to think that most of our current media, like CDs and DVDs, really can't be trusted to hold their data in usable form past 50 years...

    March 28, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
  7. RichP, easton, pa

    Bet they don't leave it laying around any more.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
  8. Kingofthenet

    Landover Baptist Church will be PLEASED, this is the ONE and Only Holy Book of the TRUE Christian.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
  9. Dan

    The church better put it under heavy lock and key or it will be stolen quickly. I'm sure its worth a fortune!

    March 28, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
  10. cary lacayo

    This is solely based on if you believe in the Bible and its teachings...I do fully and I have total assurance and security in my salvation because of the evidence that the Bible has to offer. Your a fool if you really think there is no creator, so if you then accept a creator like many scientists are now starting to agree upon then you must consider the Bible and its teachings.

    I dare you to test it, try it under the microscope of reason. Like I said, I go by what it says and how it gives me my assurance and security of my salvation. That is why I live each day like it could be my last here on earth knowing that I am going to live forever after this life. Only because of what Jesus Christ did for me by paying the penalty for my sins, by his death on the cross. Jesus who died for me while I was still sinning and rose from the dead defeating death at that moment of His resurrection made it possible for me to be a child of God who will live forever in eternity. Only by His finished work on the cross is how and why I can say this and have assurance and security in my salvation.

    We will all have to answer this question when we die when we meet God – "Why should I allow you into My Kingdom of heaven?" Well, your answer should be the one I just referred to in how Jesus His Son died for you and me and paid our sin debt that was a free gift to us given by God...

    Make fun, laugh, heckle this reply/comment if you will, but just remember your banking on it being fake, a lie, a myth, fantasy, lack of intelligence and any other "denials" you can muster up. I'm going with the free gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ offered to me by the creator of everything who knows exactly when we will die...

    Shoot, know one knows what is keeping your heart beating right now as you read this? You can make speculation, guess, make medical or scientific responses, but that's all they will ever be...

    March 28, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
    • Hobbit

      The Flying Spaghetti Monsters is obvious keeping my heart beating with his noodlie appendages.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • holy crepes

      Religion is like a 12 step program. It's great for those who need it... for those who are not alcoholics it is useless. I notice most born-again christians were incredible alcoholics with almost zero self-control. If the program works for you, great! Don't assume others suffer from the same problems though. It's ignorant, selfish, and just plan foolish.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
    • Tommas

      Have you ever thought that your omnipotent god might read blogs and see through your bs. The only reason you love god is for eternal life and that is what you are "banking" on. How do you know your god does not homage reason over blindfolded fear.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      If you cannot prove that your god exists, how can you attribute any particular words to him?
      You are basing your whole life on words written by men – and most Christians are willing to admit this.

      Where are the words Jesus wrote? Why do they not exist? The Dead Sea Scrolls are useless in determining the truth.
      Ask Jesus where he hid his personal journal or notes. Be the first one in the history of the world to prove he existed!
      Go ahead! He listens to you, right? Doesn't he say anything back?
      Can you imagine the uproar if someone found his own scribbled notes?
      Wouldn't that be amazing for you and your faith, not to mention Christianity?
      But he's dead if he ever existed. He doesn't give anyone secret treasure maps to his real words, nor does your god.

      March 28, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
    • Lycidas

      "Where are the words Jesus wrote? Why do they not exist?"

      I find this funny. Tell me, do you feel that Socrates existed? Plato? Where are their writings? Why don't they exist? All we have is hearsay right?

      March 28, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
    • Jeanine

      Peewee, you cannot face a simple question can you? What a coward you are. Where are the words Jesus wrote?

      Jesus wrote nothing because he couldn't.
      People who don't exist have a hard time writing things.
      Just ask your god.

      March 29, 2011 at 1:51 am |
    • Magic

      Lycidas,

      "Tell me, do you feel that Socrates existed? Plato? Where are their writings?"

      Many writings of Plato exist. None from Socrates, it seems. But nobody is claiming that Socrates is "God" or that we must live our lives according to his teachings ... or else. The ideas of Socrates, as passed down, stand on their own as jumping off points for many schools of thought... open to proof or disproof of their efficacy.

      Jesus' purported words are treated the same way.

      March 29, 2011 at 2:11 am |
    • Lycidas

      Wow, Jeani is just showing her true angry colors. Guess she can't handle it when ppl disagree with her and won't let her have the last word.

      @Magic- Actually, we have the words of those who claim those ppl said it. The point isn't about spirituality but of where we get our info. Do we have the very words of Socrates somewhere? No. Do we have the writings of Socrates as they have been passed down through the ages by those that claim the words are Socrates? Yes.

      Unlike some evangelical atheists on here (coughs Jeani) there is no reason not to think that Jesus existed historically just like Socrates. But if ppl like her want to play the "where are their writings" argument as some kind of left handed argument to say they didn't exist...I will point out that many ppl whom she probably thinks existed could fit into her argument and not exist.

      March 29, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
    • Huh

      You realize the story was taken from Persian sun-god Mithra, a story dating back to about 1400 BC, talks about a hero born of a virgin in a stable on the winter solstice. He was attended by shepherds who brought gifts. He was said to have taken a last supper with his followers before returning to his father, the god of all. Mithra was believed not to have died, but ascended directly to heaven. Followers believed he would return at the end of time to raise the dead in a physical resurrection, for a final judgment. At that time, the world would be destroyed by fire. And yes, followers of Mithra were granted immortal life following baptism.

      March 29, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
    • Lycidas

      @Huh- You realize that you have no evidence of such a transfer of Mithra ro Jesus.

      Perhaps you can show us how much Mithraism was in 20AD-90AD Judah and the Galilee region. Obviously if you are claiming a connection then there must be, well...a physical connection between the two. If you think that Jewish ppl took pagan beliefs and applied them to Jesus and went west into the Roman Empire, there must be a historical connection besides what you see.

      March 29, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
    • Lycidas

      Let's use biology as an example. penguins and Auks are very similar to each other. Both are flightless birds that swim. They share many features that would appear to make them related but they are not. They developed similar traits between them independantly.

      So it could be with Christianity and Mithraism. Just because they share similarities does not mean they come from the same souurce or that one directly took from the other.

      March 29, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
    • Spencer

      I thought the bible talked about the Israelites associating with sun worshipers, the Israelites frequently practiced it themselves (Lev. 26:30; Isa. 17:8). King Manasseh practiced direct sun worship (2 Kg 21:3, 5). Josiah destroyed the chariots that were dedicated to the sun, and also removed the horses consecrated to the sun worship processions (2 Kg 23:5, 11, 12). Sun altars and incense were burned on the housetops for the sun deity (Zeph. 1:5), and Ezekiel beheld the "greatest abomination" of them all: direct sun worship at the entryway to the temple of the true God. This was done by facing eastward to the rising sun (Ezek. 8:16-17).

      Or is this not the same thing?

      March 29, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
    • Magic

      Lycidas,

      The point is that it doesn't matter if Jesus, the man, existed or not. Some of the teachings ascribed to him are nice... and although not particularly original, are helpful in fostering peaceful behavior... but he claimed that he was "God". An omniscient and concerned-for-our-welfare god would have known that these 1st century writings would not be convincing to many people (yes, I know the legend of Thomas - not a bit helpful).

      As I said: Socrates – no proof, no problem - go for the ideas.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:08 pm |
    • PraiseTheLard

      With regard to the comments about Socrates and Plato not existing... I'll add another name: There's some doubt that Shakespeare was actually the man who wrote all that has come down in his name...

      Heck, I can't even prove that I woke up this morning...

      March 29, 2011 at 6:08 pm |
    • Magic

      dang... that posted before I was finished.

      Anyway,

      also with Jesus - no proof, no problem, go for the useful, valid ideas (and not relying on the unproven supernatural philosophy).

      March 29, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
    • Lycidas

      @Spencer- No, not the same thing. In regards to ppl in the Bible that stopped worshipping God and worship other things, what does that do to prove God doesn't exist? It proves that there were those that fell from the faith.

      The Temple facing east doesn't equate sun worship no more than in Christianity were Jesus is suppose to come from the east.

      If you notice in Isaiah, the prophet of God is condemning the practice and not saying it was ok.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • Lycidas

      @Magic- Just to be clear, in trying to show that the historical Jesus existed just as much as a Socrates or other historical character wasn't my attempt to show he was divine. My original comments were directed to those that just scratch Jesus off entirely in both the spiritual and historical senses.

      I mean, if one wants to have faith that Jesus is God then that is a personal belief, but to scratch Jesus away on the critieria they provided and not apply it evenly to all historical characters is silly.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:58 pm |
    • Lycidas

      "Heck, I can't even prove that I woke up this morning..."

      I have to admit, that made me laugh.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
  11. TomD

    It appears my comment was removed, must be a lot of guilty consciences!

    March 28, 2011 at 4:11 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @TomD – There are many people with such thin skin that they cannot face anything with courage. My posts have been deleted many times. I feel your pain. 😛

      March 28, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  12. john

    Cool story, whether you believe the bible is a work of man or god/man. Would have liked a picture of the church though...some of those small English churches & towns are a nice glimpse into the past.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
  13. Angela

    There are people in this world that would take such a wonderful find like this and try to turn it into some kind of opportunity to try to get their ignorant views up for people to see. Really sad, no matter what you believe, there is no need to share your negativity!

    March 28, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • Joe

      IT's a make believe BOOK. I want to find the first Playboy now THAT is a find.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
  14. Funny

    Remember that time atheists proved the bible to false... full of myths and fairy tales? Me neither.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • Joe

      It is totally illogical that these stories are so outlandish and people still think they are real. I thought America was based on LOGIC.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:11 pm |
    • monica

      Do you need us to prove to you that the Mother Goose and Brothers Grimm tales are false too?

      March 28, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
    • Bill

      Remember the time people proved the stories in the bible as fact? Me neither.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • NotFunny

      That's the great thing about religions. The things that can be explained (like lightning origins), are explained away or said to be metaphorical, leaving only the unfalsifiable parts. And it is impossible to disprove unfalsifiable statements.

      This naturally leads some people to use and argument from ignorance, and claim things not dis-proven are true.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
    • Lycidas

      "I thought America was based on LOGIC."

      You mean the nation that was vastly uneducated and with no standing well trained army taking on the world power of their day? Logic???!

      March 28, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
    • Lycidas

      "..and claim things not dis-proven are true."

      I see no difference in regards to atheists with the above statement. They say God doesn't exist which is their right and I don't expect them to prove he doesn't exist. But by saying there is no God they imply that someone had to have created the story of God. When asked to prove this, they tend to get bumbly with their statements and claim that they are still right bcause it's not disproven.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
    • McDowell

      I think what Funny is trying to say is if you're going to make such claims, you should have something to back it up. Your words alone won't suffice.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      Here's a quote from a friend of mine:

      "Evangelical Rule of Thumb: If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally.
      If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers
      to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than
      what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic."
      – David Johnson

      He hit the god-damn nail on the god-damn head, don't you think?

      March 28, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
    • Lycidas

      @Sum Dude-No, not really.

      March 28, 2011 at 7:10 pm |
    • FormerChristian

      @Lycidas

      > > ..and claim things not dis-proven are true."
      > I see no difference in regards to atheists with the above statement. ... they imply that someone had to have created the story of God. When asked to prove this ...

      The difference is between proving something (supernatural or otherwise) and disproving something.

      Making the question about a stories creation (by a god or a man) is a complicating a more basic question about a gods existence, and attempting to present a lack of belief as a belief.

      Try to disprove this for example: "Gilgamesh was written/inspired by the gods."

      I cannot disprove it, but that does not prove (or disprove anything).
      But all evidence says that stories on earth were written by humans.
      There is no evidence to the contrary.

      Any assumption about magical influence is an unfalsifiable claim.

      I also cannot prove that someone fabricated the story of Zeus.

      Do you believe in Zeus and all the other gods for that reason?

      Compare and contrast these statements:
      Zeus exists (and influences my life).
      Zeus does not exist (or at least there is not compelling evidence of such a thing)
      France exists.
      France does not exist.

      March 28, 2011 at 7:57 pm |
    • Lycidas

      I have no reason to believe in Zeus or anyone else. I have been offered any evidence to believe in them unlike my belief.

      And I am not arguing that a man did not write the first story about God. No where did i say God wrote down his own story. What I am asking is evidence to show that a man made him up. With that there is no more scientific evidence than scientific evidence for God.

      One flaw in your statement is when you use the word "influence". You neglect to mention knowing influence to not knowing influence. What if you had a first hand account (it's a what if statement ok) of God? Obviously you cannot use that as evidence correct? But it would still mae it a factual event.

      March 29, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
    • Spencer

      The debate will go on and on...

      RESEMBLANCES BETWEEN MITHRAISM AND CHRISTIANITY
      1. Both Mithras and Christ were portrayed as young and bea-rdless; both sometimes appeared in the shepherd's role, and both saved mankind by performing sacrifical deeds.
      2. Both Mithras and Christ had virgin births in the sense that they were conceived without any s-e-xual union between man and woman. Christ's father was said to be God, while Mithras was said to have had no father or mother, having emerged as an adult from a large rock.
      3. Both Mithraism and Christianity celebrated the birth of their god on the winter solstice, the 25th of December according to the Julian calendar. Both featured the sharing of presents, the use of Christmas trees with candles, and nativity scenes that included shepherds attracted by a sacred light. The special importance of this solstice ceremony to Mithraists would be indicated by the name Mithras, which derived from Meitras, which in Greek numerology refers to the number 365, the last day of the solar year at the winter solstice.
      4. Both the Old Testament and Mithraic legend told of the first human couple having been created. Mithra supposedly kept a watchful eye over their descendents until Ahriman caused a draught that caused such thirst that they begged Mithra for water.
      5. Both told of a major flood, in the case of Mithra through his having shot an arrow into a stone cliff to quench mankind's thirst. Unfortunately, the entire world's population was drowned in a flood produced by the water spout that gushed from the hole his arrow produced. One man alone (a Noah figure borrowed from the earlier Sumerian myth of Atrahasis) was warned in time and could therefore save himself and his cattle in an ark.
      6. Both Mithraism and Christianity emphasized mankind's redemption resulting from a sacrificial death followed by the god's ascent to heaven. In the case of Christ, it was the god himself (or his son) who was sacrificed; in the case of Mithra, it was a sacred steer that Mithra sacrificed.
      7. Both featured resurrection through sacrifice. Mithraism more obviously drew upon spring equinox fertility myths by depicting Mithra's sacrificial bull with a tail that consisted of sheaves of wheat that were supposedly scattered throughout the world once it was slaughtered. Also, the bull's blood formed the milky way, allowing human souls both to be born and to return to the heavens after death.
      8. Both told of a Last Supper linked with the blood sacrifice whose symbolic recreation by eating bread and wine provided salvation for all worshippers. After Mithra killed the bull depicted in Mithraic art, he feasted upon it with the Sun God and other companions before ascending to the heavens in the sun god's chariot. The sequence was slightly different in the New Testament: Christ's Last Supper necessarily preceded his crucifixion rather than following it, after which he ascended to heaven.
      9. Both emphasized purification through baptism, Mithraists by washing themselves in the blood of sacrificial oxen. While dying oxen bled to death on lattice floors built over their heads, initiates both drank and washed themselves with the blood that dripped on them.
      10. Both featured secret temples located underground. For Christians it was a temporary expedient to avoid persecution, but for Mithraists it became a permanent insti-tution, each small chapel, called a Mithraeum, having seated no more than fifty worshippers and having been constructed to point from east to west. Rounded ceilings were painted blue and imbedded with gemstones. There were no windows except for a few chapels in which tiny holes in the ceiling that had been bored to let in the light of certain stars at particular times of the year.
      11. Both held Sunday to be sacred.
      12. Both encouraged asceticism. Mithraists were expected to resist sensuality and to abstain from eating certain foods.
      13. Both emphasized charity. Mithra was identified as the god of help who protected his worshippers, whatever their tribulations in life.
      14. Last and probably least, both emphasized a rock, Mithra having been born from one and the Vatican having been built on one.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  15. AsayaYeahyas

    Just curious to how much KJ has changed since the original.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
  16. Joe

    apparently X X X isn't allowed by cnn.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      you're right. I'll add it to the list.

      March 28, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  17. ...

    Who gives a crap?

    March 28, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
  18. MikeR

    In Psalm 14:1, God says "The fool says in his heart there is no God...". I will not try to argue anyone into accepting Christ. It is fruitless. Only the Holy Spirit can accomplish the miracle of taking a fool and bring him to new life in Christ.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
    • Joe

      beats you over they head with your make believe book.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • Observer

      What about fools who believe every word of the Bible?

      March 28, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
    • well

      this book has a mistake in it. i thought the bible had no mistakes... oops

      March 28, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
    • FormerChristian

      Of course you probably realize that the opposite is statistically true.

      The more education and understanding of science you have, the less likely you are to be religious.

      It is easier to convince someone about magical things if they have less understanding of science.

      March 28, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @MikeR – I'm sorry to hear that you don't want to argue. I have lots of fun arguing your Christian belief with Christians.

      Love is still spoken in atheist hearts. You are assuming there is nothing to be done. You have given up. I'd rather argue.

      March 28, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
    • freewords

      And the fool says there is no God, science and DNA created by the Creator, and if you have wisdom draw the first psalm describes the DNA, so God created man in His own image.

      March 28, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
    • Linda WP

      To you Mike and to all who are blessed with belief in God our Creator, Jesus our Saviour and the Holy Spirit who sustains us, let us pray for all who deny this glorious gift of faith. As one of the respondents noted, even some of the best scientific minds are now admitting the universe, our earth and mankind had to have been divinely created by a superior intelligence.
      They should read Lee Strobel's 'Case for a Creator' and let Him remove the blinders from their eyes.

      March 29, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  19. RobA

    This part reminds me of something:

    "Smith identified it thanks to a printing error – a place in the Gospel of Matthew that should say Jesus entered the Garden of Gethsemane and spoke to his disciples instead says that Judas, who betrayed Jesus to the Romans, entered the garden."

    Reminds me of this:

    "Hey on page 375 it says the word jebus.....it's supposed to be jesus right?"

    March 28, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
  20. Mike Pincher

    I love the part where they trimmed it down to fit the case. If the bible does not fit what we want it to fit into we just trim it down like much of what it says inside it. If it does not fit our lifestyle needs...we just trim it down.

    March 28, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
    • JCit'sPolitical

      I noticed that too. I cant believe how blatant this is! They just change something that they dont agree with, and refer to the original text as a "mistake". How sad is that?

      March 28, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
    • mb2010a

      The Bible, Including the KJ version, is only a very small edited sampling of the original group of books. In the 1400's, Pope Gregory and the other heads of Christianity, threw out over 500 books they deemed inconsequential and rewrote what was left. What we read today, including this new "find", are edited vastly from the original texts. Google the missing books of the Bible...

      March 28, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.