Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Testament translation: Thou shalt have sex
Boston Herald (print edition) | June 23, 2004 | Unattributed

Posted on 06/23/2004 7:55:02 AM PDT by maryz

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
When I saw this in today's Herald, I couldn't believe it wasn't picked up from the Onion or something. I did go to the London Times website: the story is apparently there, under the title "St. Paul Urges More Copulation for Couples." (I couldn't get into it: since I got ZoneAlarm, I have some trouble with sites that insist you leave cookies. I added the Times URL to the ZoneAlarm list to accept cookies and to the IE list; sometimes this works, and sometimes it doesn't. It didn't.)
1 posted on 06/23/2004 7:55:05 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: maryz

This is a joke, right?


2 posted on 06/23/2004 7:57:18 AM PDT by mlmr (Tag-less - Tag-free, anti-tag, in-tag-able, without tag, under-tagged, tag-deprived...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlmr
Unfortunately, doesn't seem to be:

As Good as New: a Radical Retelling of the Scriptures

3 posted on 06/23/2004 8:02:04 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; Askel5; livius; Cicero; Gophack; eastsider; ...

You won't believe this! . . . or maybe you will!


4 posted on 06/23/2004 8:03:29 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz

YIKES!


5 posted on 06/23/2004 8:11:45 AM PDT by Darksheare (Never play croquet with a coquette.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz
St. Paul’s condemnations of homosexual sodomy are deleted.
Sodomy's good, this I know;
Henson's bible tells me so ...
6 posted on 06/23/2004 8:21:18 AM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All
From the review at the link in Post 3:

Perhaps the most controversial departure from all other translations is a return to the selection of books which were held in the highest esteem by the early Church in the first two centuries. So, for instance, Revelation is out, the Gospel of Thomas is in.

I see from the review, too, that the Archbishop of Canterbury not only "backs" the translation, but wrote the Foreword:

From the Foreword by Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury

"What would Christianity look like, what would Christian language sound like, if we really tried to screen out the stale, the technical, the unconsciously exclusive words and policies, and to hear for the first time what the Christian Scriptures were saying? John Henson has devoted much of his life to wrestling with this challenge, and has for many people made those scriptures speak as never before-indeed, as for the first time. Patiently and boldly, he has teased out implications, gone back to roots, linguistic and theological, and re-imagined the process in which a genuinely new language was brought to birth by those who had listened to Jesus because they knew they were in a genuinely new world.

John's presentation of the Christian gospel is of extraordinary power simply because it is so close to the prose and poetry of ordinary life. Instead of being taken into a specialised religious frame of reference-as happens with the most conscientious of formal modern translations-and being given a gospel addressed to specialised concerns-as happens with even the most careful of modern "devotional" books-we have here a vehicle for thinking and worshipping that is fully earthed, reconisably about our humanity. I hope that this book will help the secret to be shared, and to spread in epidemic profusion through religious and irreligious alike."

Wasn't there some controversy about this AofC when he got the post? (So hard to keep all the controversies straight nowadays . . .)

7 posted on 06/23/2004 8:28:48 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz; xzins; P-Marlowe

Somehow the crowd crying "Give us Barry" just doesn't have the same ring.


8 posted on 06/23/2004 8:29:43 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz

Please tell me this isn't for real. Please tell me this is just a bad dream....


9 posted on 06/23/2004 8:38:32 AM PDT by redgolum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz

>> But in the new version, he says, “My advice is for everyone to have a regular partner.

>>Husbands and wives should strive to meet each other’s sexual needs. . . . <<

An odd way of putting it, but this is a biblical concept. (I Cor 7)

>>It’s not good to refuse a partner.” <<

Husbands and wives are told not to withhold sex from one another, except with consent for short times for fasting and prayer.

But um, not refusing a "partner?" THe use of the word, "Partner" makes this just plain sick, even using "partner" as a euphemism for sex mate, because absent the specific reference to marriage, what does "partner" mean? "Thou shall be date raped?" (Let's not kid ourselves that the use of the word "partner" is used to include gay "sex.")


10 posted on 06/23/2004 8:54:26 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maryz

Thank Tony Blair for this monster.


11 posted on 06/23/2004 8:55:03 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dangus; maryz

Before I get reamed out, I made an editting error. This is NOT a biblical concept: " But in the new version, he says, “My advice is for everyone to have a regular partner." In fact, it does plainly and directly contradict Paul's admonition to attempt a celibacy lifestyle.

I meant only this:

>>Husbands and wives should strive to meet each other’s sexual needs. . . . <<


12 posted on 06/23/2004 8:57:00 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Am I to understand that you don't share John Rackley's enthusiasm?

John Henson has the exciting capacity to awaken fresh interest in material that seems familiar. He is never dull, sometimes provocative and occasionally inspirational. I recommend his work to anyone who enjoys an unpredictable reading of Scripture.’ - John Rackley, President of the Baptist Union of Great Britain.

Me neither!

13 posted on 06/23/2004 8:59:16 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dangus

LOL! I realized that was what you probably meant.


14 posted on 06/23/2004 9:01:07 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: maryz

The A of C is a lunatic.


15 posted on 06/23/2004 9:58:17 AM PDT by Ex-Episcopalian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: seamole

As a Roman Catholic it is tempting to say something smart, but I know that this version of the Bible will quickly be praised and adopted by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. This type of translation will be heard at Mass within the next 10 years.

The Satanic Sodomites have nearly wiped out Christianity. The Church of England is toast, my Church is reeling....the indie born-agains hanging out in their 40-member Bible churches will be no match...and they are next.


17 posted on 06/23/2004 10:22:54 AM PDT by Pio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Thank Tony Blair for this monster.

A small reminder of the problem with the idea of a state church.

18 posted on 06/23/2004 10:30:43 AM PDT by megatherium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: seamole

My head's gonna explode. Revelation is out?

"Rocky?"

OMG...


19 posted on 06/23/2004 10:31:35 AM PDT by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ahadams2; sionnsar; Grampa Dave; AnAmericanMother; N. Theknow; Ray'sBeth; hellinahandcart; ...

Rowan the fuzzy does it again ping.


20 posted on 06/23/2004 10:32:14 AM PDT by ahadams2 (http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com is the url for the Anglican Freeper Resource Page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson