<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bible Illuminated: A fresh look at the Bible?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cleverdude.com/content/bible-illuminated-a-fresh-look-at-the-bible/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cleverdude.com/content/bible-illuminated-a-fresh-look-at-the-bible/</link>
	<description>Family, Marriage, Finances &#38; Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:09:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.cleverdude.com/content/bible-illuminated-a-fresh-look-at-the-bible/comment-page-1/#comment-31423</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleverdude.com/?p=1488#comment-31423</guid>
		<description>There are quite a few other, more appropriate (I think) photos at bibleilluminated.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are quite a few other, more appropriate (I think) photos at bibleilluminated.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zh</title>
		<link>http://www.cleverdude.com/content/bible-illuminated-a-fresh-look-at-the-bible/comment-page-1/#comment-31006</link>
		<dc:creator>zh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 04:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleverdude.com/?p=1488#comment-31006</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s so interesting.  Our church uses the King James version &amp; I love its beautiful, courtly language.  I would be sorry to lose it, but this version&#039;s language is certainly much easier to follow.  I don&#039;t like the photos, though (at least the ones that I see here).  I don&#039;t think showing a photo of a person on fire is really appropriate to the text.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s so interesting.  Our church uses the King James version &amp; I love its beautiful, courtly language.  I would be sorry to lose it, but this version&#8217;s language is certainly much easier to follow.  I don&#8217;t like the photos, though (at least the ones that I see here).  I don&#8217;t think showing a photo of a person on fire is really appropriate to the text.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

