Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

355

I heard there is also a "modernized layman / english version of the bible". Do you if this is true and it's good to also have? You might say, it's not the original translation therefor it's 'fake / untrue'. Ya but if I can't understand the Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish version of english in the bible then I ain't getting the 'right translation' there either.

Thanks!

I heard there is also a "modernized layman / english version of the bible". Do you if this is true and it's good to also have? You might say, it's not the original translation therefor it's 'fake / untrue'. Ya but if I can't understand the Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish version of english in the bible then I ain't getting the 'right translation' there either. Thanks!

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (76).
[–] • 1 pt

For purposes of worship I agree, but a picture of Christ for educational purposes isn't sacrilege. It could be, but it's generally not. It can lead to arguments on what he actually looked like which is irrelevant and distracts from the meaning but otherwise I don't see much harm

[–] • 0 pt

Definitely for purposes of worship as you say, but personally, and in our church, we would go further (farther?), just best to avoid any pics of deity at all.

But I certainly get what you're saying, certainly there's a difference.

[–] • 1 pt

That's cool, I can respect that. I wouldn't condemn anyone for doing it but I wouldn't promote doing it either.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes, pretty much the same for me.