Customer Reviews

Judith Christ of Nazareth, the Gospels of the Bible, Corrected to Reflect That Christ Was a Woman, E

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(60)

 

 

A friend with a Hebrew doctorate noted to me: "There is no feminine form of the name 'Jesus' (or 'Joshua'). 'Judith' is the feminine form of the name 'Juda' - or 'Judas.'"
How perfectly fitting!

Being a guy who collects books, I picked up this book from a friend of mine who just got it. I wanted to see the hubbub over what this was.

First things first: I own a copy of the Jefferson Bible. This book, the supposed next step in this series, goes a far ways from the Jeffersonian tradition...which in itself is steeped heavily in Unitarianism (as that is what Jefferson was).

Next: Judith? The name means: "Woman from Judah". However, Jesus (if one remembers correctly) was raised in (and is considered from) Gallilee, which is in the north. Talk about a bad step in the wrong direction.

Finally: Switching from male to female causes a hell of a lot of translation errors. Trust the greek, it's much more ACCURATE.

If 0 stars were available, I would give it. But since there are not...I give it one star with a hole underneath it.

I am honestly trying to figure out if this is a joke or not. God's word is not a political statement that can have a new spin made on it. And what's the reason? Jesus Christ was radical in his treatment of women (such as talking to the Samaritan woman in John 4:7-30, who the Jewish people of the day would not talk to due to sexism and racism, and allowing the unclean woman with a flow of blood to touch him in Matthew 9:20-22). Even the apostles treated woman as equals, as Paul wrote in Galatians 3:27-29. The idea that a new Bible is needed to promote women's rights and empowerment is built on the false assumption that the Bible keeps women down. God is no respecter of persons.

Those who published and sent out this book should realize that they will be held responsible for anyone who is led astray by this book, as will anyone who uses it to teach others a lie about God. Please take some time to read even just those three passages cited above (in the New International Version, or New King James Version, or New American Standard Bible). God's truth is that he accepts all who come to him and seek him, granting eternal life to those who trust in the name of his only son Jesus Christ. God wants to be reunited with you and has his arms open to accept you. Please don't wait until it is too late.

"We can't know for sure." That's the dogma of our postmodern society. Even if we have external historical and archeological evidence for something...we can't really know.

Lots of historical documents prove that there was a man named Jesus who created quite a following in the days of Herod, and was put to death on a Roman cross. Never anywhere in history has there ever been speculation about His gender.

This is just another proof that people would rather have what "feels" right to them and helps the "feel" better than have facts.

One star because there is nothing lower.
May the Lord have mercy on the writers!

If I didn't know any better--specifically if this book didn't carry a 2003 publishing date--I would have assumed that the un-worthies at LBI Institute had cribbed from either (a) the NIV Committee ("Committee on Bible Translation") or (b) Shane Johnson's /A Form of Godliness/. This cannot empower anyone, for one can derive no legitimate power from lies. When St. Paul told the Galatians that he was positively gawping at the spectacle of their turning to follow a gospel so far off the road that it wasn't the same road (Galatians 1:6), even he would never have thought of this. He would not have merely gawped; he would have had a heart attack. (Or maybe not. He finally told his apprentice, Timothy, that a time would come when men and women would tell one another whatever their itching ears wanted to hear. This would probably have been merely the most shocking example.)

Come on guys, these people are obviously cuckoo for cocoa puffs and just looking to make a buck. Don't buy this peice of trash, vote with your wallet, and let them all collect dust. They're just trying to attract attention by doing something they all know darn well is as goofy as a $3.00 bill, don't let it get to you.

However, if they really want my input may I say suggest they try the same thing with the Qur'an and see what happens next. They'd be the brave ones should they change 'Mohammad' to 'Marylin,' no...?

;^)

Dave...

What, we write a new Bible to fit with the times?!!?!
I don't think so. Now what are they going to do, rewrite history and say George Washington was a woman!?!?!?
Good grief, I'm a woman, and I find this book disgusting!
I'd give it NEGATIVE 10 rating!!!

I am really surprised that Amazon would put a comedic spoof like this in the religion section. I had to laugh when I read an article about this book being touted as a serious scholarly work, but I suppose humorous fiction can have its serious side.

The tragic side of this farce is that people wasted years of their lives trying to figure out ways to bend the truth to serve their own political agendas. My suggestion to the autors and publishers of this thinly veiled political propaganda piece is that they simply go back to the original text and believe what's there. Don't turn a silk purse into a sow's ear and then try to convince us that we are better off with the sow's ear.

The premise of such a revision is so ridiculous, it reminds me of The Life of Brian, and makes me wonder if this is even for real. Sadly, I suspect it is.