*****Cell phone vs. Bible*****

someday Bible ownership will be illegal, then that Precious Word will be considered as more valuable than mere rubies, watch.

someday Bible ownership will be illegal, then that Precious Word will be considered as more valuable than mere rubies, watch.

While this is a valid possibility, I'm not sure if I see that happening in America. What I observed when I lived there was actually a bit of the reverse phenomena, being that MANY people had a Bible and would read it, but would interpret by their own desires, vises, and lusts, instead of being willing to accept what it actually says.

Notice groups like homosexuals who want to live the "Christian life" will not turn from their sin but instead try to justify their lifestyle with the Bible. I'm not sure if many saw the Larry King interview with Jennifer Knapp, but during the interview she used the same tactic that I see being used often by people who fall into the aforementioned category.
She was willing to accept the Bible, however she was not willing to accept what it actually said. When they brought up the issue of homosexuality she didn't call for the Bible to be banned for rejecting her, instead she had to twist it and deviate from the true meaning of the text to justify her sin. And that's what's becoming increasingly popular in America. They're not trying to get rid of it, they're trying to get it to say something it doesn't.

I mean, what would suit the seat of Antichrist better (a man who Christ said could deceive even the elect if possible); a nation where the Bibles are banned, where revival lays hold of a nation like in China, where Bibles are treasured and the faith is growing out of control, OR
a nation where Bible's are everywhere, and it's become just as common as a cell phone, everyone has one, and every man like in Judges does what is right in his own eyes, using a completely perverted interpretation of the Scriptures to justify their sin.

Remember the pattern Satan uses throughout the Bible. He didn't seek to destroy the Word of God, he sought to pervert it. When he was tempting Christ, he presented the Word of God, but what he did was abuse and pervert the meaning. That's always been his tactic. He would quote something out of context to Christ, and Christ would retort in context. Even the first temptation with Eve, he challenged her thoughts by trying to confuse what God said, "Did God really say that?". He didn't try to eliminate God from the picture, he didn't try to make her doubt that God had spoken, what he sought to do was twist God's Words.

That being said though, this is just an observation, and an opinion. Bibles being banned could well be a possibility, these are only my thoughts. -Grant

I'm going to preface this next part by saying this. I love my Bible and I bring it everywhere with me. I probably have it on my person or at least within a few feet of me about 90 percent of the time, however I tend to lean away from some of the "good old proper way to read the Word" thinking.

In America maybe some find it a testimony to have an actual copy of the Bible in their hands for people to see them reading, and it to serve as a sort of conversational starter or something like that, but to me honestly that whole train of thinking is just 100% opinion (I should clarify that this is not a rule, going either way, it might happen to witness to some, but to others it means nothing).

Here in Japan, I'll break out the Bible and start reading it in public, but the reality is no one really gives two cents about the book I'm reading. It's just a leather cover, with strange English words they can't understand, and for most of America it seemed to be the same. They've all seen one, and they probably all have one (In America I mean). I would have my Bible with me everywhere, but I can't recall even one circumstance where that sparked any conversation.

What will spark conversation and draw people in is how the words are written on your heart. THAT I've experienced.

To me the argument of "the virtual Bibles can never match the good old words on paper", is a bit of a straw man argument. Is it the wrapping paper of a present that we're interested in, or is it the core?

Now this might seem a silly thought, but when the printing press came along, do you think there were those who said, "those new books are all well and fine, but nothing will stand up to the good old parchments."

What did the first century Christians have? Most of them had nothing. They'd have to go to the temple or know someone very rich to have any access to the Scripture, and if you wanna talk about convenience being any sort of factor, the scrolls were anything but convenient when compared to how quickly we can flip through the pages of a book. Yet these are the Christians that shook the world, and that we look to for an example. His Words had become written on their hearts, and must be on ours to have any use.

Now, I personally prefer to use a paper copy of the Bible, because that's what I'm used to, but I also use blueletterbible.org when I'm on the internet. And honestly, to the guy who wants to have the Bible on his iphone with him, there is ZERO, repeat ZERO difference of what he's getting out of it than if he were to read a leather bound hard copy. Now there's nothing wrong with preference, but when we state that there is actually some sort of difference, that's when we're in a little bit of a sketchy area.

Before the Bible was digital it was on paper; before it was on paper it was on parchments; before parchments it was on scrolls; before scrolls it was on stone; and before stone it was on men's hearts', which is the only place that it does any good to begin with.

Hmmhmm had it correct with;

anyway, using a mobile or a hard copy, it does not matter if it goes through us and do what it is intended for...

PS: I don't seek to judge or point out anyone, I'm speaking to a bit of myself here too. Just hoping that someone might be able to take something out of it.