Posted on 10/07/2005 8:38:02 AM PDT by Caleb1411
As evangelicals debate the inclusive-language Today's New International Version (TNIV), many liberal mainline churches have slipped far down the slippery slope in what they have done to the Bible.
In 1990, the National Council of Churches published the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), an inclusive-language rendition of the well-accepted Revised Standard Version (RSV). This translation keeps masculine references to God and to Jesus, but changes them for human beings, getting rid of the generic "man," putting "brothers and sisters" where the original just has "brothers," and using awkward plurals and repetitions to avoid the generic "he." Never mind that the messianic title "Son of Man" is now "a human being." What the NRSV did to the RSV is pretty much what the TNIV did to the NIV.
But that much inclusive language was not enough for many mainline churches. An Inclusive Language Lectionary, a rendition of Scripture texts read during the worship service, takes the next step of changing the gendered language for God. Today, the congregations who use this lectionary in Sunday worship pray to "our Father-Mother." Jesus is not the Son of God, but the "child of God." The pronoun "he" is not even used for the man Jesus, replaced with ungrammatical constructions: "Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us" becomes "Jesus Christ, who gave self for us" (Titus 2:13-14).
But that much tinkering proved not to be enough either. In 1995, Oxford University Press published the New Testament and Psalms: An Inclusive Version. This revision of the NRSV not only uses gender-inclusive language for God and Jesus ("God our father-mother"), it also eliminates, in the words of the introduction, "all pejorative references to race, color, or religion, and all identifications of persons by their physical disability." In avoiding all "offensive language," "darkness" is changed to "night," lest it offend black people, and "the right hand of God" is changed to "the mighty hand of God," lest it offend left-handed people.
But that does not go far enough. The liberal Catholic group Priests for Equality published in 2004 the Inclusive Bible. "Kingdom" is both sexist and authoritarian, so the priests made up a new word, "kindom." Adam is not a "man," he is an "earth creature." And to avoid offending homosexuals or others in nontraditional relationships, the words "husband" and "wife" are changed to "partner."
But since radical theology depends on demonizing the "patriarchy" of the Bible, the Inclusive Bible includes footnotes admitting that "the actual Hebrew is even more brutal" and chastising the apostle Paul for his retrograde attitudes. Then the translators just change the text to something more suitable.
But the Inclusive Bible does not go far enough either. The Bible version Good as New: A Radical Retelling of the Scriptures uses what its introduction calls "cultural translation." Not only is it inclusive, it translates ancient terms into their modern-day equivalent. Thus, "demon possession" becomes "mental illness." Even names are changed: Peter, Nicodemus, and Bethsaida become "Rocky," "Ray," and "Fishtown." Religious terminology is eliminated, as not being in accord with our culture: "Baptize" is changed to "dip"; "salvation" is changed to "completeness."
The translation describes itself as "women, gay and sinner friendly." Thus, when Paul says that it is better to marry than to burn, the Inclusive Bible says, "If you know you have strong needs, get yourself a partner. Better than being frustrated." The Inclusive Bible follows the higher critics in leaving out the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation, and it follows The Da Vinci Code in including instead the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas. This translation is endorsed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and the evangelical leader Tony Campolo.
But does any of this matter, as long as people are exposed to the Bible? Yes, it does. The bisexual deity "Father-Mother" is not the true God, nor is this made-up religion Christianity. These translations are not the Word of God. Just the Word of Man.
Or since Nicodemus was a tree hugger, maybe his PC name should be Rainbow or Moonbeam.
We call Michigan, "that cesspool to the north". Go Bucks!
Actually, that's what surprised me... Bisexual IS the correct term. It's just been twisted to mean, "so sexually perverted as to not care what it is."
First, the people depose their vigilant king out of spite; then they taunt him and torment him; when he still will not confess, they kill him; unsatisfied still, they abuse the mocking corpse and scatter the remains, covering them thinly in their avenging haste; tired at last of hearing the grieving creaks each time they step upon a shattered bone, they send out the ghouls to rob the graves and burn the last and every fragment in one frantic flaming pyre; then fall to sob on the once-sacred soil laid waste by their madness.
It surely is, but it is so laughable and they make themselves look so ridiculous, it's hard to get too worked up.
Kinda makes you want to become a KJV Only'er, eh?
I wonder if they include the last verse in some versions of the G of T, namely: 114 Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
In light of that verse and some others (22, for starts), I have never understood the idea that the Gospel of Thomas is more "pro-woman" than the traditional Bible.
Well, in fairness, it meant "house of fish" in the same language that they spoke; Colorado, Utah, and Michigan are all from other languages.
ping a ling
>> Or since Nicodemus was a tree hugger, maybe his PC name should be Rainbow or Moonbeam. <<
Nicodemus was no tree-hugger! He brutally used that tree for his own selfish purposes, with absolutely no consideration for the trees self-actualization!
Seriesly, you HAVE to learn how to speak liberal. :^D
I think I will stick with the King James Version.
Slight correction needed:
If you're a protestant, get a King James and get yourself into a Presbyterian Church of America, Missouri Synod Lutheran, or (non-American Baptist Convention) Baptist church. If you're a Catholic, get a Douay or King James + Apocrypha and find a parish that's not corrupted by the left. get a King James and get yourself into a Presbyterian Church of America, Missouri Synod Lutheran, or (non-American Baptist Convention) Baptist church.
Don flame suit.
>> First, the people depose their vigilant king out of spite; then they taunt him and torment him; when he still will not confess, they kill him; unsatisfied still, they abuse the mocking corpse and scatter the remains, covering them thinly in their avenging haste; tired at last of hearing the grieving creaks each time they step upon a shattered bone, they send out the ghouls to rob the graves and burn the last and every fragment in one frantic flaming pyre; then fall to sob on the once-sacred soil laid waste by their madness. <<
Hmmmm.... How can I be appropriately politically incorrect? O, yeah:
Frickin' homos.
>> Kinda makes you want to become a KJV Only'er, eh? <<
Yeah, if you're going to distort the bible to serve your own political purposes, you might as well keep a 500-year-old grudge alive, right?
Sorry, but Mayor Jerry Brown has earned the title/name "Moonbeam" many, many years ago.
Nam Vet
Granted, but I was thinking in terms of looking on a map. Calling Bethsaida "Fishtown" removes the events from reality, in a sense, unless they've got maps in the back of their Bible with these place names.
The gospel of Thomas is out of line with the canon of scripture - was written much later (in the Gnostic period) - that's why is was NOT included in the canon of Scripture - which was established long before Aquinas ever lived.
Get thee to a nunnery.
Well, I figure at least we can name it so it sounds like a place. Hence, my suggestion, "Fish Harbor."
Fish House sounds like a knockoff of Long John Silver's
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.