Bookoka

Bookoka

Alkitab: Versi King James

Alkitab: Versi King James

Anonymous

4.45
319,684 rating·9,824 ulasan

Versi King James adalah terjemahan Alkitab Kristen dalam Bahasa Inggris Modern Awal untuk Gereja Inggris, yang ditugaskan pada tahun 1604 dan diterbitkan pada tahun 1611. 80 kitab Versi King James mencakup 39 kitab Perjanjian Lama, 14 kitab Apokrifa, dan 27 kitab Perjanjian Baru.

halaman
1590
Format
Hardcover
Terbit
2008-01-15

Rating dan Ulasan

What do you think?

Ulasan Komunitas

9,824 ulasan
4.5
319,684 rating
5
45%
4
30%
3
15%
2
7%
1
3%
A
André·12 years ago
For anyone looking for a more realistic plot, there is Greek Mythology.
Worthless Bum
Worthless Bum·17 years ago
Use as toilet paper if you run out.
D
Dina·17 years ago
If you're a fan of Greek mythology, this one's for you. A penchant for fiery places, gnashing of teeth, the number 666, miracle-working zombies, and utter disdain for homosexuals and feminism are helpful, but not required.

**Spoiler alert**
He dies in the end.
E
Eugene·17 years ago
"by Anonymous"

i wouldn't want to take credit for this either.
Wesson Renick
Wesson Renick·17 years ago
Certainly not life changing or anything. The plot was hard to follow and the editing was horrible. The characters were painfully one-dimensional and this Jesus guy delivered some of the worst dialogue I've ever read. All in all I found it too long and it took itself way too seriously. The fact that it sells so well is beyond me and the way people hold it up you'd think God himself had written the damn thing.
Jeff Menter
Jeff Menter·17 years ago
God's first foray into the world of literature has made quite a splash. People the world over are talking about this book (or series of books if you want to get pedantic) and for good reason; It makes some grandiose claims, it purports to be the complete authority on almost all areas of human endeavor (aside from how to choose an internet service provider), and even makes threats to the reader.Of course, English is not God's native tongue and this book has been translated from the original arama...
Max
Max·18 years ago
As a work of fiction it's laughably bad and poorly conceived. Giant logical fallacies, poor character development, and all the plots are scuttled by a magical, invisible entity that's petty, cruel, tyrannical, and amoral. There is no central narrative that is worthwhile (or even believable), and each of the chapters seem written by committee rather than a singular voice. Clearly the book was so bad to begin with a team of editors had to step in and make major changes - which means no part of thi...
Jessica
Jessica·18 years ago
The Holy, Inspired and inerrant word of God! I can say no more than READ IT! I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was inc...
Dennis
Dennis·18 years ago
Badly edited, poor continuity and internal consistency. Authors seem to change between books. Plot is cliched and thin, with virtually no character development save for Judas Iscariot. The main characters of Jesus and Moses are entirely one dimensional messianic figures. The novel opens with Adam and Eve, and then ignores them for the next thousand pages or so. The built-in bookmark was a nice touch, but a little pretentious.

Oddly, it wasn't shelved with the other fiction books.
J.G. Keely
J.G. Keely·18 years ago
I usually like historical fiction, but this particular example has been so mitigated by the poorly-hidden didactic tautology of its too-many-cooks legion of anonymous authors and editors that it was rather difficult to enjoy. It also fell into a similar trap to the somewhat similar 'Da Vinci Code', in that it utilized a lot of poorly-researched materials and claimed them as fact. A lot of the data matched up poorly with other historical accounts, especially when it came to numerical data. It see...