So exactly what was going on with Donald Trump's extremely uncomfortable meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister yesterday?

Did you see the Prime Minister pull away at the end of that handshake and then roll his eyes?

Shinzō Abe looked like a college girl who had finally managed to get away from a groping frat boy at a kegger.

And that was not the only bizarre moment from the meeting.

Trump does not appear to be wearing an earpiece to translate Prime Minister Abe's remarks. pic.twitter.com/zcN21DuXgm

— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) February 10, 2017

A number of other attendees pointed this out on Twitter, while also noting that Trump was trying to respond and even laugh at the appropriate moments by watching the reactions of those who WERE wearing their translation earpieces.

This confused at least one reporter enough to wonder if perhaps Trump knew how to speak Japanese.

Pres Trump doesn't appear to be wearing the translation earpiece during PM Abe's remarks. Wait, does POTUS speak Japanese? pic.twitter.com/MuHTDQjwhe

— Peter Alexander (@PeterAlexander) February 10, 2017

That of course is ridiculous since Trump has not even managed to master the English language after 70 years of trying to speak it.

.@jeffzeleny on Trump not wearing his earpiece for a portion of the press conference https://t.co/uW1WUyK2nP

— Daniella Diaz (@DaniellaMicaela) February 10, 2017

In the end a CNN reporter summed the whole thing up for a bewildered Wolf Blitzer.

Remember THIS is the guy that the Russians chose to represent America to the world.

Clearly they still hate us for the cold war.

The Emoji Bible is now a thing.

Courtesy of The Memo:  

A mysterious person, publicly known only as 😎 , has translated the Bible into emoji. You read that correctly: emoji. 

Launching on Apple iBooks this week, the move could be seen as a natural progression. 

Why read scripture in boring old Oxford English, or any of the other 531 bog-standard languages it comes in, when you can read it in jazzy picture symbols instead? 

Indeed, as we communicate more and more in emoji, perhaps it will become the universal language, the most accessible of all.

Okay well as someone who forced themselves to read the Bible cover to cover, I will simply say....it couldn't hurt. 

In my opinion the Bible is book of stories, anecdotes, and parables that often conflict with each other so aggressively that the entire experience seems a disjointed and jarring exercise designed to confuse the mind and impair logical thinking. 

In other words much like emojis.

Should sell quite well.

Bible scholar writes book pointing out that what you think the Bible says, it not at all what it says.

Bible scholar Dr. Joel M. Hoffman has written a new book entitled "The Bible Doesn't Say That: 40 Biblical Mistranslations, Misconceptions, and Other Misunderstandings" which reveals that what many people take as gospel, is anything but.

Here are a few examp0les courtesy of Chron:  

The Bible Doesn't Call Homosexuality A Sin 

Only three biblical passages address homosexuality directly. And while they frown on some male homosexual behavior, they do not condemn all of homosexuality, and they do not call it a sin. 

So it's a double mistake to say that "the Bible calls homosexuality a sin." 

The Ten Commandments Don't Prohibit Coveting 

The word "covet" in "thou shalt not covet" is a translation mistake. The original Hebrew verb here, CHAMAD, means "to take," a fact we learn by looking at how the word is used in context is that some things are not just illegal but also immoral. 

The mistranslation "thou shalt not covet" wrongly suggests that feelings might be immoral, while the original text only addresses actions. 

The Bible Doesn't Contradict Evolution 

Some modern critics of the Bible claim that you can't believe the Bible if you think evolution is right, and some modern Bible readers say that you can't believe evolution if you think the Bible is right. 

Both groups have misunderstood the Bible. What they don't grasp is that most of the stories in Genesis were not meant to be history. 

One of the ways we know is that there are, in fact, two creation stories --- one in which Eve is created from Adam's rib, the other in which Adam and Eve are created at the same time. They can't both be historically accurate, and they were not intended to be. 

Rather, evolution is a scientific truth and the creation stories in the Bible are religious truths. And sometimes "believing the Bible" means believing that a story in it didn't happen. 

"Biblical Marriage" Lets Men Marry More Than One Wife 

"Biblical marriage" is a hot topic, but even a quick look at biblical marriage shows that it's not what most people think. 

According to both the Old Testament and the New Testament, most men are allowed to have lots of wives at once -- the exceptions being kings (who according to Deuteronomy 17 can only have a few wives) and some religious leaders (who according to 1 Timothy can only have one). 

Biblical marriage does not have be between only one man and one woman. 

The Bible Doesn't Forbid Abortion 

There's one direct mention of losing a fetus in the Bible, and that's in Exodus 21. The Hebrew isn't entirely clear, but the question there seems to be: What happens if a man accidentally causes a woman's miscarriage? 

The normal eye-for-an-eye, tooth-for-a-tooth rule won't work, because the man doesn't have a fetus to match the woman's lost fetus. 

The answer is that the man has to pay a fine. Because a fine is never the penalty for murder, we learn that, according to the Bible, abortion is not murder. Other than that, the Bible offers no guidance about abortion. 

There is of course quite a lot more, but you get the gist.

One of my go to rules for understanding the Bible is to never ask for clarification from priests, ministers, nuns, or even Christians.

Most of them are salespeople trying to sell a product. They only care about a truth that helps them to achieve that goal, not actual truth itself.

It is hard to imagine that a book which has had such incredible impact on humanity is so poorly understood by the majority of humans.

But then again, we don't have to imagine it do we?

Such a good point.

And before all you Christians start getting all riled up, keep this in mind:

Paul, the earliest New Testament author, never mentions the virgin birth. For someone who we rely upon for much of Christian theology, it is an odd omission. Paul refers to Jesus’ birth twice (Rom 1:3; Gal 4:4) and never says he was born of a virgin or of different means than anyone else. You’d think that would be important. 

The virgin birth is also not in Mark, the earliest gospel, or in John, the only other gospel not based on Mark. Why is such an important story left out of all the early sources? Probably because it hadn’t been made up yet. 

Why would the story be made up? Perhaps to fulfill an old prophecy of a virgin birth, which the Gospel of Matthew cites: 

Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14) 

Some scholars say “virgin” was a mistranslation in the Septuagint (the Greek translation the gospel writers used), and should have been translated “young woman.” That means the story might have been based on a mistranslation! 

It seems likely the virgin birth was created to boost the authority of Christianity through prophecy and compete with rival gods who were born of virgins.

When I was younger I used to love to trot this out to my Christian pals just to see how red they got in the face.

I am a little less combative these days, but it is still something that I like to introduce into the conversation once in awhile. 

You know just to keep everybody on their toes.