I suppose it will be in the original Greek, not in English or other translation, which puts it out of range for most amateurs.

LONDON, England (CNN) -- The world's oldest known Christian Bible goes online Monday -- but the 1,600-year-old text doesn't match the one you'll find in churches today.

Discovered in a monastery in the Sinai desert in Egypt more than 160 years ago, the handwritten Codex Sinaiticus includes two books that are not part of the official New Testament and at least seven books that are not in the Old Testament.

The New Testament books are in a different order, and include numerous handwritten corrections -- some made as much as 800 years after the texts were written, according to scholars who worked on the project of putting the Bible online. The changes range from the alteration of a single letter to the insertion of whole sentences.

And some familiar -- very important -- passages are missing, including verses dealing with the resurrection of Jesus, they said.

One can only imagine how much original material was changed, or lost, simply due to copying errors accumulated over the centuries.

Juan Garces, the British Library project curator, said it should be no surprise that the ancient text is not quite the same as the modern one, since the Bible has developed and changed over the years.

"The Bible as an inspirational text has a history," he told CNN.

(...)

The Bible comes from the Monastery of St. Catherine in the Sinai desert, where a scholar named Constantine Tischendorf recognized its significance in 1844 -- and promptly took part of it, Garces explained.

"Constantine Tischendorf was in search for ancient manuscripts, so he appreciated the age and value of it," Garces said.

He took a handful of pages to Germany to publish them, then returned in 1853 and in 1859 for more. On that last trip, he took 694 pages, which ended up in St. Petersburg, Russia.

The Soviet government decided to sell them in 1933 -- to raise money to buy tractors and other agricultural equipment.

The British government bought the pages for £100,000, raising half the money from the public. Garces called that event one of the first fundraising campaigns in British history.

Film footage from the time shows crowds of people turning out to see the manuscript, which was considered a national treasure, he said.

Though the Bible has been reassembled online, in the real world it remains scattered.

Most of it is in London. Eighty-six pages are held at the University Library in Leipzig, Germany, parts of 12 pages are held at the National Library of Russia in St. Petersburg, and 24 pages and 40 fragments remain at St. Catherine's Monastery, recovered by the monks from the northern wall of the structure in June 1975.

The manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. (A copy held at the Vatican dates from about the same period.) Older copies of individual portions of the Christian Bible exist, but not as part of a complete text.

The Codex also includes much of the Old Testament that was adopted by early Greek-speaking Christians.

That portion includes books not found in the Hebrew Bible and regarded in the Protestant tradition as apocryphal, such as 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, 1 & 4 Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach.

The New Testament portion includes the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas.

As it survives today, Codex Sinaiticus comprises just over 400 large leaves of parchment -- prepared animal skin -- each of which measures 15 inches by 13.6 inches (380 mm by 345 mm).

This was an exclusive from The Sun yesterday which I have only just spotted this morning.
HATE preacher Abu Izzadeen has been sent back to jail - following a four-letter rant at cops. The former electrician, 34, swore at officers checking he was at an approved address and not associating with extremists - both conditions of hisrelease just seven weeks ago.
Izzadeen - who has called for the beheading of British soldiers - accused police of harassment and refused to let them in.
Prison Service chiefs then ordered his immediate recall.
Cops called at the temporary West London address of Izzadeen - real name Trevor Brooks - on June 25.
A source said: "He was extremely angry, yelling at the officers to get out of his face. Then he started swearing. They were only doing their job. He should never have been let out early - now he is back where he belongs."

Wanted: Old hag. Must like cats, have a convincing cackle, be prepared to wear rags and live in the dark.  My eyesight is bad enough now that even with reading glasses I need a good bright light. Otherwise I do fit the criteria.
No, it is not a lonely hearts advertisement from a dating agency for witches and wizards but the qualifications for a job which will earn the successful candidate £50,000 a year at one of Britain’s leading tourist attractions.
Wookey Hole, a complex of caves near Wells in Somerset, is looking for a resident witch. The advertisement placed in a Jobcentre and local papers states that it is open to men, women and transsexuals, in order to comply with sexual discrimination laws.
Local legend says the original Wookey witch was turned to stone when a Catholic monk, sent by the Abbot of Glastonbury, splashed her with holy water. A large, vaguely witch-shaped stalagmite in one of the caves is said to be her petrified remains. I have seen her! Very impressive lady.
Now Wookey wants an actor/guide to bring the character to life at weekends and in school holidays. The successful applicant should also expect to be busy at Hallowe’en.
Daniel Medley, general manager of Wookey Hole Caves, said:“The job is straightforward: live in the cave, be a witch, and do the things witches do.”
Applicants will have to work when required, which may also include tours to publicise the attraction. Auditions are being held this month when applicants’ costume and character, as well as the ability to perform witch-like tasks, will be assessed.
Mr Medley added: “Wookey Hole is advertising nationally and hopes to attract a strong field of candidates, with the £50,000 salary serving as a major incentive. Ambitious witches, looking for a key career move, should turn up dressed for work and bring any essential witch accoutrements. A limited range of potion ingredients will be available.
“We are witchless at the moment so we need to get the role filled as soon as possible. The successful applicant will need to like dark, enclosed spaces, be good around a cauldron, enjoy the company of cats and have a good cackle. We are looking for someone who is friendly, a little mischievous and with lots of character.”
The advert for the role goes on: “Wookey Hole HR has been advised that, under sexual discrimination law, unless it can provide documentary proof that the original witch was female, it can’t issue a gender-specific job description. Since Wookey Hole can’t furnish the required, legally binding proof, it has had to accept that the post might eventually be awarded to a man.”
In which case he would be the Warlock of Wookey Hole, which would not be the same thing at all. And we would have to turn him into a toad.

Rebecca posted a story about an early version of the Bible, and the differences it contains compared to modern Bibles.

Muslims claim that this proves the Bible is inaccurate and that it has changed over time, whereas the Qur'an is perfect, immutable, and has not changed "one dot" since it was first written down.

Here is a short clip of video about one of the earliest copies of the Qur'an, found in Yemen and dated to 705-715 A.D by Dr. Gerd R. Puin:

There are other early copies of the Qur'an, including one in Tashkent in Uzbekistan dated 651 A.D., and one in the Topkapi museum in Istanbul, Turkey.

Whereas Biblical scholars have a long tradition of documenting and studying the variations in the Bible, Islamic scholars display a curious lack of curiosity in studying textual comparisons between early versions of the Qur'an.  What studies have been done, apparently by kufirs, show that verses have been removed from the Qur'an, verses have been added, and words have been changed.  A good summary of the variants can be found at answering-islam.org.

answering-islam.org also asks this rhetorical question:

In particular, let us ask why some of the oldest manuscripts are not photographically reproduced and made available to the public and the scholars. Why not start with the Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul, the Taschkent manuscript, and the two old manuscripts in Cairo and Damascus. They are not Uthmanic manuscripts as some believe, but they are quite old. And then, publish them together in a format that makes it easy to compare them, or even better, listing all the differences between the texts, like it is done for the critical editions of the Bible text.

Ibn Warraq writes about the mutability of the Qur'an here and here.

It is clear that variations between different versions of the Qur'an cause much more of a problem for Islam than variations in the Bible cause Christianity.  They refute the claim that the Qur'an is the uncreated word of Allah, perfect and immutable, miraculously preserved for eternity.  Instead, they are subject to the same mistakes in transcription, errors in translation, and differing interpretations as any other historical written work.  Either Allah willed the different versions that were written down of His most important revelations, or mere humans were able to subvert the will of Allah by incorrectly writing down His words.

And of course, anyone who raises questions about the changes that have occurred in the Qur'an over time is guilty of "attacking Islam,"  whereas Christian scholars are merely doing research.  It is no coincidence that early editions of Qur'ans are not available online.

The news from the just concluded G-8 Summit in Italy may mean the wind has been taken out of the sails of the Obama push for a Climate Change bill pending in Congress.  On Friday the Senate is scheduled to take up its version of the narrowly House passed Waxman-Markey bill. 

As reported by the New York Times, the G-8 vacillated because of disputes between developed countries and developing ones over who bears the greater burden of possible CO2 reduction.

Negotiators for the world’s 17 leading polluters dropped a proposal to cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by midcentury, and emissions from the most advanced economies by 80 percent. But both the G-8 and the developing countries agreed to set a goal of stopping world temperatures from rising by more than 2 degrees Celsius from preindustrial levels.

Satellite data indicate that world average temperatures have been flat for more than a decade , suggesting that man made warming may be less significant than originally thought.  If that is a possibility then linking CO2 suppression to real climate warming makes a lot of sense.   Arbitrary CO2 reduction, on the other hand, may be a draconian expense for no real gain. 

The AP report on these G-8 declarations noted:

However, the two goals will not be included in a declaration from a broader group that includes poor and developing nations that are wary about the potential impact of such reductions on emerging economies.  Administration officials said they were hopeful of bringing along the developing nations in coming months.

Opponents say such sharp reductions in carbon emissions would hamper businesses and industries.

The Department of Energy in 2008 completed a study for the Bush White House that showed if industrialized countries slashed their emissions by 80 percent, that would require developing countries to cut their future emissions by 65 percent to meet the worldwide target.

In a post," Is Waxman-Markey a ‘Clean’ Energy Act?" one of the authors noted the economic cost benefit implications of these non-binding G-8 declarations:

Your utility costs will increase each year until 2050 when we may get an 80 percent reduction in carbon dioxide levels for less than a 0.05 degree Celsius drop in average temperatures at a cost of over $7.4 trillion according to a Heritage Foundation Study cited by Investors Business Daily.

Further, an internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report, surfaced by the Competitive Enterprise Institute indicated that: “Given the downward trend in temperatures since 1998 (which some think will continue until at least 2030), there is no particular reason to rush into decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data.” The Heritage Foundation Study notes that human activity generates less than 3.4% of carbon dioxide which in turn accounts for less than 3.6 % of all greenhouse gases, the bugaboo of global warming. Moreover, there will not be a net gain in employment from the greening of America, quite the reverse; millions of jobs will be diminished.

In the wake of these G-8 declarations, both the Obama Administration and the Senate managers of the “Christmas treed” climate change legislation will be hard pressed to justify its rapid passage. 

But there was a parallel development here in the US by one of the big advocates of renewable energy, T. Boone Pickens, fabled oil speculator and wind farm advocate. Pickens announced scaling back his ambitious plan for a giant wind farm in the Texas panhandle for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is tough financing.

Note this New York Times Business Day report:

Mr. Pickens’s situation is of particular interest because he has spent much of the last year advocating an energy plan that includes increasing to 20 percent the amount of the nation’s electricity that is supplied by wind power. In his vision, that would free up natural gas now used to generate power so that it could be used in cars, reducing the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. (Currently, wind accounts for just 1 percent of the nation’s electricity.)

For the huge wind farm he had planned in Texas, Mr. Pickens had already ordered 687 large wind turbines from General Electric, to be delivered starting in 2011. But transmission lines being built by the state were unlikely to reach the location he has leased until 2013, so he needed to put the turbines elsewhere. Mr. Pickens had once planned to build his own transmission lines, but difficulty in finding financing amid the credit crisis forced him to shelve that plan.

Possible locations for the 687 turbines include Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas and Alberta, Canada, Mr. Pickens said. Collectively, at a capacity of 1,000 megawatts — about the size of a nuclear plant — his project would still amount to a substantial investment in wind power. He had planned his Panhandle wind farm at 4,000 megawatts.

A nuclear plant  typically  generates about a thousand megawatts of power running day and night. The new designs can generate more than 1,500 megawatts. So for  687  windmills to equate to a nuclear plant they would have to each produce 1-2 megawatts, continuously. Of course they can't produce power when the wind dies down, but forget that for the moment. A megawatt of power is a pretty big windmill. Now we've neglected the issue of continuous power, but let's ask about land use. How much land has to be dedicated to these  687  windmills? How much noise do they make? How many birds do they kill? Now we need at least another 100 nuclear plants, so that would be the equivalent of 70,000 of these large wind turbines. Further, you need backup power for still days.

Pickens is clearly wrong about wind mills. In fact he is cynical because he wants to receive some of the federal largesse that would come from the cap and tax proposal in the proposed climate change bills.  The targets declared by the G8 will not have any impact on Obama's energy plans. Rather, his proposal for cap and tax would generate more than enough money to make the windmill promoters like Pickens rich. GE and Pickens will love that. The rest of us will unfortunately have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for inherently uneconomical renewable energy technologies.  

It is the opinion of these authors that the government should encourage investment in the most cost effective, domestic energy systems. This would mean nuclear electric power for the electrification of our transportation system. One obvious step the government could take would be to provide the facilities for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, as it is done in France and Japan. They could also arrange secure lines of credit for the capital investment required. On the other hand, what our government has chosen to do is to tax all present forms of energy generation (remember solar and wind combined are less than 1%), and to use the hundreds of billions of dollars to be raised by the tax to fund inherently uneconomical technologies that cannot compete on an equal footing with existing energy systems. The decisions are being taken out of the market place and put into the hands of a few Washington insiders, and the US taxpayer will be left holding the bag. We need serious Congressional legislation , not the mish-mash  ‘Christmas tree’  give away that is the Waxman-Markey bill. As we have said, it is a failure aborning and loaded with billions of dollars in a feeding trough for special interests like Pickens and GE’s Inmelt.