Posted on 06/24/2004 7:21:03 AM PDT by take
New Bible translation promotes fornication Archbishop of Canterbury praises version for 'extraordinary power'
A brand-new translation of the Bible – praised by Britain's archbishop of Canterbury, that nation’s senior Christian voice – flatly contradicts traditional core Christian beliefs on sex and morality.
Titled "Good as New," the new Bible is translated by former Baptist minister John Henson for the "One" organization, to produce what the group calls a "new, fresh and adventurous" translation of the Christian scriptures.
Archbishop Rowan Williams
The 104th archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams – leader of the Church of England – describes it is a book of "extraordinary power," but admitted many would be startled by its content.
"Instead of condemning fornicators, adulterers and 'abusers of themselves with mankind'," says Ruth Gledhill, the London Times religious affairs correspondent, "the new version of his first letter to Corinth has St. Paul advising Christians not to go without sex for too long in case they get 'frustrated.'"
SPONSORED LINKS The New York Times - as Low as $2.90 Get world-class reporting and coverage you can't find anywhere else of local, national and world news for as little as $2.90 a week with The New York Times. Get started now. www.nytimes.com/sb-subscription
Free Trial Issue: Stocks & Commodities Magazine Stay informed with market news, information, resources, and expert advice from one of the top traders' magazines. Receive your first year's subscription for the low introductory rate of $49.95. www.traders.com
"The new version, which Dr. Williams says he hopes will spread 'in epidemic profusion through religious and irreligious alike', turns St. Paul's strictures against fornication on their head," adds the Times.
The One organization that produced the new Bible translation is dedicated to "establish[ing] peace, justice, dignity and rights for all." It is also focused on "sustainable use of the earth's resources," challenging "oppression, injustice, exclusion and discrimination" as well as accepting "one another, valuing their diversity and experience."
According to Ekklesia, a London-based "theological think tank" that supports the "One" translation:
The translation is pioneering in its accessibility, and changes the original Greek and Hebrew nomenclature into modern nicknames. St. Peter becomes "Rocky," Mary Magdalene becomes "Maggie," Aaron becomes "Ron," Andronicus becomes "Andy" and Barabbas becomes "Barry." In keeping with the times, translator Henson deftly translates "demon possession" as "mental illness" and "Son of Man," the expression Jesus frequently used to describe himself, as "the Complete Person." In addition, parables are rendered as "riddles," baptize is to "dip" in water, salvation becomes "healing" or "completeness" and Heaven becomes "the world beyond time and space."
Here's how Williams, the top Anglican archbishop, describes the new Bible: "Instead of being taken into a specialized religious frame of reference – as happens even with the most conscientious of formal modern translations – and being given a gospel addressed to specialized concerns … we have here a vehicle for thinking and worshipping that is fully earthed, recognizably about our humanity."
In addition, notes Ekklesia, the archbishop praises Henson's translation for eliminating "the stale, the technical, the unconsciously exclusive words and policies" in other translations.
Here, according to the London Times, are a few sample passages:
Mark 1:4
Authorized version: "John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."
New: "John, nicknamed 'The Dipper,' was 'The Voice.' He was in the desert, inviting people to be dipped, to show they were determined to change their ways and wanted to be forgiven."
Mark 1:10-11
Authorized version: "And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him. And there came a voice from the heaven saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."
New: "As he was climbing up the bank again, the sun shone through a gap in the clouds. At the same time a pigeon flew down and perched on him. Jesus took this as a sign that God's spirit was with him. A voice from overhead was heard saying, 'That's my boy! You're doing fine!'"
Matthew 23:25
Authorized version: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!"
New version: "Take a running jump, Holy Joes, humbugs!"
Matthew 26:69-70
Authorized version: "Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, 'Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.' But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest."
New: "Meanwhile Rocky was still sitting in the courtyard. A woman came up to him and said: 'Haven't I seen you with Jesus, the hero from Galilee?" Rocky shook his head and said: 'I don't know what the hell you're talking about!'"
1 Corinthians 7:1-2
KJV: "Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."
New: "Some of you think the best way to cope with sex is for men and women to keep right away from each other. That is more likely to lead to sexual offences. My advice is for everyone to have a regular partner."
1 Corinthians 7:8-7
KJV: "I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."
New: "If you know you have strong needs, get yourself a partner. Better than being frustrated
What's wrong with reading the original Hebrew, Greek, and Latin texts and making an honest interpretation as we would talk? Not that this is it, because it clearly isn't.
Still, this has got to be a spoof. I was prepared to believe that the Anglicans had mistranslated the passages concerning sexual morality in the way indicated in the article, but those translations of the other passages are just too ridiculous to believe anyone would actually have seriously produced them.
Not as scripture, of course, but as pure stupid goofiness this can't be beat.
I like "John the Dipper".
I'm prepared to believe the Biblical authors are frank. If the Bible were translated completely into modern idiom, some people would consider it unfit to be read to children. All those "begats" and "knew" passages begin to acquire a whole new meaning.
That's just silly.
My Latin is awfully rusty and I never learned Ancient Greek or Aramaic. My high school Latin teacher DID learn all three languages (in addition to the four modern ones he spoke) so he could read the original Scriptures. Unfortunately, most of us do not have the time or linguistic talent my teacher did, so we must depend on translators. When a new translation sharply contradicts the previous ones, that raises serious questions about the motives and/or agenda of the translator.
That's why there will never be a universal translation as long as different religions and different denominations within Christianity exist. Their canons are different as well as what they leave in and leave out and the way they approach the Scriptures.
Is WorldNetDaily looking to take on the Onion as the worlds "finest new source?"
"As he was climbing up the bank again, the sun shone through a gap in the clouds. At the same time a pigeon flew down and perched on him. Jesus took this as a sign that God's spirit was with him. A voice from overhead was heard saying, 'That's my boy! You're doing fine!'"
is, well, just plain silly. And funny!
"That's my boy! You're doing fine!"
Sounds like an old Anglican cleric, waiting on his slippers, encouraging his new puppy.
On the other hand, I like the term "begat." It conveys a meaning that no modern word can. I wish the modern transaltions would continue using this term, but unfortunately they don't. Instead you get the very bland phrases like "_____ was the father of _____." "Begat" is just so much more concise and direct.
You know, I was outraged by this travesty until I read that verse!
That's a great translation! ;^)
From what I've seen and for the most part, I don't think it's that bad of a translation and I expected worse from the headline. There's some good, modern phrases in this translation and we need translations that speak today's language. But if they're going to start calling "partner" any sex partner, then they've gone too far in that verse, rendering the entire translation something I could never recommend because it's a poor translation from what the manuscripts actually say.
LOL!
Narrowly avoided coffee through the nose on the keyboard again.
The language used to explain the purpose of this re-write sounds suspiciously just like all other gay advocacy garb. They are determined to re-write the Bible and God for themselves.
Is this from the onion or have the mind sciences people gone over a cliff finally?
London Times on July 19, 2002:
As the sun rises over a circle of Pembrokeshire bluestones, the Archbishop of Wales, the Most Rev Dr Rowan Williams, will don a long white cloak while druids chant a prayer to the ancient god and goddess of the land. After a trumpet fanfare and the thrice partial sheathing and unsheathing of a 6ft 6in sword, a citation will be read. Dr Williams will close his hands in prayer while the archdruid, wearing a crown and shield over his bardic robes, will enfold them in his own and utter words of welcome. That will be the moment that Dr Williams, who will adopt a new, bardic name, is accepted into the white druidic order, the highest of three orders of the Gorsedd of Bards, the Welsh body of poets, musicians, writers and artists. The Mistress of the Robes, Sian Aman, will then clothe him in a druidic white headdress, and a steward will lead him to join the other assembled druids inside a sacred circle. The ceremony will take place 'in the face of the sun, in the eye of the light' at the start of the Welsh National Eisteddfod at St David's, Pembrokeshire, in early August
This is the result of letting philosophy rule the roost. People mess around editing God thinking themselves more clever or more wise and then you end up with doctrines that are proclaimed, having nothing to do with scripture, because it seems ok to someone. The funny thing is you still call them "Christian". I would ask on what basis.
The "dipping" translation was only part of why I called it Baptist. He has an interpretive translation for "baptizm for the remission of sins" that suggests baptism is symbolic only. That's not exclusively Baptist, but combined with the dipping it lines up squarely with the Baptist tradition.
I'm not commenting on the theology of baptism one way or another, but I think the translation is too interpretive.
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.