PDA

View Full Version : Bible question in youtube debate was a trick




SeanEdwards
11-29-2007, 09:33 PM
The guy asking the question in the video says, "Do you believe everything printed in this book?" Then he holds up a black book in front of the camera with the words Holy Bible on it. Then the questioner says, "And I mean this specific book in my hands."

Based on his words, I'm beginning to think the whole question was a trick to expose the foolshiness of the candidates. These candidates were supposed to pledge that they believe everything printed within the covers of a book they've never examined? There was no evidence given that the specific book in that guy's hand's was a version of the Christian Holy text. It could have been a book of cooking recipes with "Holy Bible" printed on the outside.

When does the other shoe drop? When do we find out find out what was really inside that book that Romney and the others pledged they believed in without any scrutiny?

steph3n
11-29-2007, 09:39 PM
I think he was talking about the King James Version specifically....

Paulitician
11-29-2007, 09:40 PM
You're looking way too much into this non-issue... on that note, you may be right.

SeanEdwards
11-29-2007, 09:46 PM
This was really a revealing question in a way. It vividly shows the gullibility and credulity of the candidates. They let some youtube dork manipulate and fool them on national TV. It also shows that they really do judge a book by it's cover.

colecrowe
11-29-2007, 09:49 PM
He was referring to the extra books for Romney (Book of Mormon, D & C, and whatever that other one is--oh and all the stuff the living (some past now of course) prophets have said)

He probably didn't also think of the Catholic Apocrypha which are considered inspired (quite a few protestants believe them (some or all) to be inspired also, but it's not generally talked about that much)

billjarrett
11-29-2007, 09:49 PM
Could have been the King James Version he meant specifically. That could cause some discrepency on what was meant. I forget what they were, but there are some verses that are more "anti-gay" in some translations than others. I'm getting to tired to look up the differences tonight personally though.

billjarrett
11-29-2007, 09:50 PM
He was referring to the extra books for Romney (Book of Mormon, D & C, and whatever that other one is--oh and all the stuff the living (some past now of course) prophets have said)

I was kinda thinking that, but he didn't say "and only this book". Mormons do believe in the Bible, plus more (I believe, but I'm not a Mormon so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

colecrowe
11-29-2007, 09:53 PM
I was kinda thinking that, but he didn't say "and only this book". Mormons do believe in the Bible, plus more (I believe, but I'm not a Mormon so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

exactly what he meant--and exactly why Romney's answer was so awkward

1000-points-of-fright
11-29-2007, 09:54 PM
I think he was asking if they interpret the bible literally (ie: evolution vs creation) and believe that all non-believers are wrong. He could have been an devout Christian or an atheist. The question works either way.

Benaiah
11-29-2007, 10:09 PM
//

JaylieWoW
11-29-2007, 10:12 PM
He was referring to the extra books for Romney (Book of Mormon, D & C, and whatever that other one is--oh and all the stuff the living (some past now of course) prophets have said)

He probably didn't also think of the Catholic Apocrypha which are considered inspired (quite a few protestants believe them (some or all) to be inspired also, but it's not generally talked about that much)

The whatever other one is The Pearl of Great Price. Written by Joseph Smith the founder of the LDS church.

colecrowe
11-29-2007, 10:21 PM
I agree. My fiance and I are "King James Onlyist," so she thought he was referring to King James. I think he was referring to the "Bible" over the Book of Mormon and other Mormon texts.

Oh man, why do thee not liketh the NIV? It's the best translation there is. (I'm just being light, by the way....but it is an excellent translation in my humble opinion.

Check out what these people say, for fun:
http://www.zondervan.com/Cultures/en-US/Translations/Stats/New+International+Version+%28NIV%29.htm?QueryStrin gSite=Zondervan


I've heard people say they were onlys before--but I didn't have a chance to ask them about it. Why do you think it's the best?

Shii
11-29-2007, 10:41 PM
I agree. My fiance and I are "King James Onlyist," so she thought he was referring to King James. I think he was referring to the "Bible" over the Book of Mormon and other Mormon texts.

There is another reason he would specify KJV to Romney: Mormonism has a "corrected" version of parts of Genesis and Matthew in its canon and a "corrected" KJV in its total scriptures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Translation_of_the_Bible

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/jst/contents

MadTheologian
11-29-2007, 10:43 PM
Personally, there's nothin' like taking Hebrew and Koine Greek and reading the Writ in its original languages.

Otherwise, I grab the New King James, or the English Standard Version.

traitorist
11-29-2007, 10:46 PM
King James, or no King James, without the Holy Spirit, you are dead.

1000-points-of-fright
11-29-2007, 11:06 PM
King James, or no King James, without the Holy Spirit, you are dead.
Then how come I'm still walking around?

JaylieWoW
11-29-2007, 11:23 PM
There is another reason he would specify KJV to Romney: Mormonism has a "corrected" version of parts of Genesis and Matthew in its canon and a "corrected" KJV in its total scriptures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Translation_of_the_Bible

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/jst/contents

I attended the Mormon church from a wee little baby until my senior year in high school. I never recall any emphasis placed upon the JST of the KJV of the Bible. In fact the bible I used in seminary classes was purchased by me from a book store and was simply the KJV.

I know it exists but apparently was minor compared to bringing others to God and Christianity since little or no importance was placed on it in any of my seminary classes. You would think if it were something of ultimate importance or "cult-like" fanaticism it would have been pushed heavily ESPECIALLY in YOUTH seminary classes. Just goes to show how ridiculously out of proportion some things can become.

Its probably for the disagreements that many Christians blow out of proportion that I do not practice "religion" today. For whatever reason my mind has never been willing to accept that one is better than the other, nor that God prefers one over the other. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to me.

Revolution9
11-29-2007, 11:29 PM
Then how come I'm still walking around?

You have different nomenclature for the same thing. It is really the whole basis of denominational and religious, and atheistic/agnostic disputes about doctrine. People use different nomenclature based on cultural proclivities and symbolism. You might consider it to be that force which keep your DNA aligned and you projecting and sensing in the 3D laboratory Universe.

HTH
Randy

free.alive
11-29-2007, 11:42 PM
I think it was just an idiot liberal shill trying to play the "Repubs are all fundamentalist Christians" card and get these guys riled up while at the same time mocking them. To find out that the smearing, conspiratorial assumptions about the slimy liberal media paled in comparison to this total mockery of the presidency is quite depressing and disgusting.

yeah, it's fun to laugh at how the idiots on the stage used the stupid questions as cues to attack each other and make asses out of themselves. But this just shows total disrespect and contempt for any sort of integrity or values being put forth by the candidates on the part of CNN. No, this event was most contemptuous of the public; CNN mocked us by staging the questions, by not letting us vote and decide on the questions, and by gearing the entire debate to mock the opponent of the Democrats. Maybe the Democrats were mocked as well. If so, that just further shows the deep contempt the elitist networks have toward any concept of self-determination for the public.

I said it last night, I say it again - Our longterm aim should be putting them out of business and replacing them.

lucius
11-29-2007, 11:51 PM
More of that MSM trickery vectoring anything religious with insanity...

Fyretrohl
11-30-2007, 08:39 AM
There are a number of possible reasons for the question. Since it was at all candidates, it is hard to know. But, I can answer the question from the LDS perspective and, what I am posting is part of our Articles of Faith, written by Joseph Smith to the 'World' to explain our beliefs:



8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

So, as a Mormon, I definitely saw that question as a 'trap' question for Mitt.

philistineau
11-30-2007, 09:52 AM
Edit: I believe it was a question by an atheist, designed to provoke fawning by the candidates for the fundamentalist vote.


I am an atheist, so to hear Huckabee talk about the "literal word of god" sent a shiver down my spine.

If god exists (and I don't think he does), then given the option of believing the imperfect recordings of men over the evidence placed before me by the hand of god, I choose the hand of god every time.

I wish someone had challenged Huckabee on his 5000 year old earth beliefs - some references to TRex, woolly mammoths and Neanderthal tools should have done the trick.

Letís not get too high and mighty about religion - if Ron Paul did not believe in freedom of religion, I would not be voting for him.

1000-points-of-fright
11-30-2007, 11:44 AM
You have different nomenclature for the same thing. It is really the whole basis of denominational and religious, and atheistic/agnostic disputes about doctrine. People use different nomenclature based on cultural proclivities and symbolism. You might consider it to be that force which keep your DNA aligned and you projecting and sensing in the 3D laboratory Universe.

HTH
Randy

A simple LOL would have sufficed. Smarty-pants.

ashlux
11-30-2007, 12:19 PM
I think he was talking about the King James Version specifically....

Yah, he emphasized the binding and made sure KJV could be seen.

I thought it must have been an undercover attack on Romney and/or Giuliani. The guy who asked the question was creeeeepy too.

Edit: And since the KJV doesn't have the deuterocanonical books or any of the texts from the Book of Mormon, I think it was a hit on Romney and Giuliani.

ashlux
11-30-2007, 12:25 PM
I am an atheist, so to hear Huckabee talk about the "literal word of god" sent a shiver down my spine.

You too, huh? :(

The amusing thing is, the some people who bitch about Muslims creating a Islamic theocracy are the same ones who want to create a Christian theocracy in America.

awigo50
11-30-2007, 12:35 PM
I wish someone had challenged Huckabee on his 5000 year old earth beliefs - some references to TRex, woolly mammoths and Neanderthal tools should have done the trick.



God has a good sense of humor:)

Edit: Woolly mammoths had tools?!

ashlux
11-30-2007, 12:40 PM
8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

So, as a Mormon, I definitely saw that question as a 'trap' question for Mitt.

I agree. Also a "trap" question for Giuliani. That quote - excluding the Book of Mormon - is an acceptable Catholic answer too.

I don't think fundamentalist Christians would get it or accept that answer, but it's the answer both candidates should have given. This was hardly the place for apologetics.

Fox McCloud
11-30-2007, 12:45 PM
I agree. My fiance and I are "King James Onlyist," so she thought he was referring to King James. I think he was referring to the "Bible" over the Book of Mormon and other Mormon texts.

Yes, you hit it on the head; If you watch the guy's other videos (I have, they're hard to find) you'll find he's a staunch supporter of the King James Version (I took this stance a little while ago after doing research on the other versions).

Either way, he stated he asked the question in the tone and manner so that he would come off as neutral.

Either way, I was immensely disappointed that they pigeon-holed candidates in the election; they only asked Romney, Huckabee, and Giuliani.

I became very upset with Huckabee (never had much respect for him, but I pretty much lost all of it after he made the comments he did); his comment to Giuliani was incredibly prideful "uh, do you need a little help there?" Later he went on to brag he was the only one with a theological degree! I'm sorry Huckabee, but clearly you haven't been reading your own Bible, for it says in James 4:6 "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.".

I was really looking forward to hear all the candidates answers on this...and I also thought "yes! this will give some 'Christian conservatives' to see Ron's stance on this". (as Ron has stated he thinks the Bible is the inspired Word of God)....instead they cut out most of the candidates on that question...which was total BS.

the whole debate was rigged last night to make certain candidates look good (especially Huckabee) and others look like nutcases/dissenters/fringe candidates (Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo).

I'm just glad there are a few believers in Christ out there that know the truth and don't support Mike Huckabee, merely because he says he's a Christian.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin415.htm

Go Chuck Baldwin!

RedLightning
11-30-2007, 02:00 PM
Personally I think the Bible questions were put in just to help Hucky.

Arek
11-30-2007, 02:02 PM
The LDS generally accepts the KJV bible, but within their complete scripture book it includes Joseph Smith's re-translation of Mathew. I'm not really an expert on the LDS church but I do research various religions.

If you want a good translation of the bible read either the original Greek New Testament or Vulgate. And if you want a good Old Testament, I'd say the Hebrew text would be the most accurate. Then again most Americans don't know Latin Greek or Hebrew. (I do know Latin but not the other two, my goal is to know Greek and Hebrew before I die though).

For an English version the Douay-Rheims would be the most accurate (too bad it is very rare as subsequent versions were re-written as the Douay-Chandler and mirror the KJV except for the added Catholic Books).

Shii
11-30-2007, 03:08 PM
Here is the guy who asked the question

http://www.youtube.com/user/calciumboy

It looks like he is absolutely crazy for KJV, he might not have even thought about Romney when he was asking it.

Midnight77
11-30-2007, 03:15 PM
This was really a revealing question in a way. It vividly shows the gullibility and credulity of the candidates. They let some youtube dork manipulate and fool them on national TV. It also shows that they really do judge a book by it's cover.

Couldn't agree more.

I know a lot of people are disputing the fact that this question was picked, but this question revealed everything we needed to know about the credibility of the candidates.

Giuliani did okay with his answer ... but nothing great. And he definitely doesn't read it regularly like he claimed. I hope everyone saw through that.

Romney totally tanked when put on the spot by Anderson Cooper. That may cost him big time in Iowa. Stumbling when asking if he believed every word of it. Then shouting out "Yes, yes I do." LOL!! Crowd was dead silent.

Huckabee once again knocked it out of the park. I'm not very religious myself, but he answered the question very honestly, per his beliefs. And the crowd applauded.

SeanEdwards
11-30-2007, 04:46 PM
I still think the book the guy held up was an instruction guide for goat sodomy, or an equivalent, with a misleading cover. I can't believe every single person at the debate, and most in this thread will pledge allegiance and belief in a book that they have not personally examined.

If you say you believe in the bible, that's fine, but it does not answer the question from the debate. Which was, "do you believe in the book I'm holding?"

JohnM
11-30-2007, 05:05 PM
I am an atheist, so to hear Huckabee talk about the "literal word of god" sent a shiver down my spine.

If god exists (and I don't think he does),

You're an atheist, and you don't think God exists? :D



Letís not get too high and mighty about religion - if Ron Paul did not believe in freedom of religion, I would not be voting for him.

I don't guess any of us would. But I think you would have real difficulty finding any candidate who did not believe in freedom of religion.

Fox McCloud
12-01-2007, 12:00 AM
If you want a good translation of the bible read either the original Greek New Testament or Vulgate. And if you want a good Old Testament, I'd say the Hebrew text would be the most accurate. Then again most Americans don't know Latin Greek or Hebrew. (I do know Latin but not the other two, my goal is to know Greek and Hebrew before I die though).

For an English version the Douay-Rheims would be the most accurate (too bad it is very rare as subsequent versions were re-written as the Douay-Chandler and mirror the KJV except for the added Catholic Books).

um no, just no; the Latin Vulgate was born from the Alexandrian texts, which have omissions and corruptions. Either way, this is off topic (feel free to PM me if you want to know why I said what I did).

anyway, trust me, if you've watched the guy's videos you definitely wouldn't be saying that he was trying to hide some book with the Bible's cover...he meant it as a sincere, yet direct question...no more, no less.

idiom
12-01-2007, 07:05 AM
The KJV has some of the best renderings of the poetry around. Its technically pretty sound but the poetry is the key bit translated at the at time some consider to be the height of the english language.

Mark Mosconi
12-01-2007, 12:57 PM
Here is the guy who asked the question

http://www.youtube.com/user/calciumboy

It looks like he is absolutely crazy for KJV, he might not have even thought about Romney when he was asking it.

That guy has many Ron Paul videos in his favorites and Ron Paul and Tancredo in his subscriptions.

fortilite
12-01-2007, 01:17 PM
I just assumed he was an ass. :p

That question bugged me as much as the loaded (and idiotic) abortion question.

adpierce
12-01-2007, 02:27 PM
That guy has many Ron Paul videos in his favorites and Ron Paul and Tancredo in his subscriptions.

True, he does have favorites from Ron Paul stuff... but it is obvious he's a KJV only guy. I'm a bigger fan of having the earliest documents define what the scriptures are due to closer accuracy to the original texts, which of course are probably dust by now. However, I'm struck by how staunchly atheist some people here are, and how devoutly religious others are. We should recognize how rare this kind of combination of different types of people from all sorts of backgrounds really is. It's something Ron Paul brings up quite a bit but sometimes we get so caught up in debating various topics here we don't sit back and actually think about how at the end of the day we're all united behind Ron Paul. This is pretty cool actually.

braumstr
12-03-2007, 08:09 PM
It was obvious he was drawing out candidates who did not know what the KJV even is. He got a few.


The bigger problem that I have with it, is that this type of question has no place in the political campaign....as far as I know we are not a theocracy, although some would obviously love to see that changed.

The candidates should have collectively kicked him and the CNN moderators in the rear.

Fox McCloud
12-07-2007, 06:01 PM
Well, I talked to this guy personally, and I showed him a few links and told him a few things--to make a long story short, I won him over to Ron Paul; as a matter of fact, he said "Thanks for the links; it really helped me decide who I'm going to vote for, and that'll be Ron Paul."

Hey, it was a lot of work for that one vote, but I don't care; it's still 1 extra vote!

Hook
12-08-2007, 01:51 PM
God has a good sense of humor:)

Edit: Woolly mammoths had tools?!

No, he is saying that the Neanderthals were tools. :D