Dream on. What we have is your attempt to use "your" to refer to your mystery church versus the RCC, and assertions, and contrived contradictions versus what is documented, and what constitutes what Rome teaches, in avoiding the fact that Rome sanctioned and sanctions liberal scholarship in its approved NAB, and revisions.
It even avoids rendering “porneia” “ as “sexual immorality” or anything sexual in places such as 1Cor. 5:1 ; 6:13 ; 7:2 ; 10:8 ; 2Cor. 12:21 ; Eph. 5:3 ; Gal. 5:19 ; Col. 3:5 ; 1Thes. 4:3 ; but simply has “immorality,” even though in most cases it is in a sexual context. You and the RCC lost. See the Get over it.
“Dream on. What we have is your attempt to use “your” to refer to your mystery church versus the RCC, and assertions, and contrived contradictions versus what is documented, and what constitutes what Rome teaches, in avoiding the fact that Rome sanctioned and sanctions liberal scholarship in its approved NAB, and revisions.”
No, what we have is “you were wrong about the NAB, what is read in most parishes, the NABRE, the plans for a new lectionary, what is read at my parish, who gives approval for Bibles, the Vatican’s involvement, the fact that notes had been changed in the NABRE, and numerous other errors. I, on the other hand, made no such errors. None.” That’s all true. No amount of complaining on your part will change any of that.
“It even avoids rendering “porneia” “ as “sexual immorality” or anything sexual in places such as 1Cor. 5:1;”
The word used is “immorality” in the NABRE. The NIV uses “sexual immorality”. The context is clear that incest is the problem. The NABRE says: “It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans—a man living with his father’s wife.” So?
By the way, the RSV - and I mean the Protestant version - says simply “immorality”.
By the way, the Ignatius Study Bible, translates the verse the same way as the RSV, but has a footnote about “porneia”.
“6:13 ;”
NABRE: “The body, however, is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body;” Quite frankly it is obvious that sexual immorality is meant. So? Did you know that the paragraph heading there is “Sexual Immorality”? No, apparently not.
By the way, the RSV - and I mean the Protestant version - says simply “immorality”.
“7:2 ;”
NABRE: “but because of cases of immorality every man should have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.” Again it is clear sexual immorality is meant. What else could it be after, “Now in regard to the matters about which you wrote: “It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman,””?
By the way, the RSV - and I mean the Protestant version - says simply “immorality”.
10:8 ;
“Let us not indulge in immorality as some of them did...” refers to the Hebrews who “rose up to revel”. We know they engaged in sexual immorality, so what’s your point?
By the way, the RSV - and I mean the Protestant version - says simply “immorality”.
2Cor. 12:21 ;
Since the phrase used is “impurity, immorality, and licentiousness” the meaning is obvious. The footnote says, “The sexual sins recall 1 Cor 5-7.” So?
By the way, the RSV - and I mean the Protestant version - says simply “immorality”.
Eph. 5:3 ;
“Immorality of any impurity...no obscenity or suggestive talk...immoral or impure...” Seems obvious what immorality means if it is repeatedly linked to impurity.
Here the Protestant RSV says: “fornication and all impurity”.
Gal. 5:19 ;
NABRE: “Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity, licentiousness...” The meaning there seems obvious. So?
The Protestant RSV says: “Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness.”
Col. 3:5 ;
NABRE paragraph heading = “Renunciation of Vice”. Then the very first verse is verse 5: “Put to death, then the parts of you that are earthly, immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and the greed that is idolatry.” Seems obvious what is condemned there.
Protestant RSV says: “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.”
1 Thes. 4:3 ;
NABRE paragraph heading = “Holiness in Sexual Conduct”. First verse after that is verse 3: “This is the will of God, your holiness: that you refrain from immorality, 4that each of you know how to acquire a wife for himself in holiness and honor, 5not in lustful passion as do the Gentiles who do not know God; a 6 not to take advantage of or exploit a brother in this matter, for the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we told you before and solemnly affirmed. 7For God did not call us to impurity but to holiness.” So, “immorality”, “lustful passion”, “impurity”. You really don’t know what is being condemned there?
The Protestant RSV says: “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from unchastity.”
“but simply has “immorality,” even though in most cases it is in a sexual context. You and the RCC lost. See the Get over it.”
And you completely failed to tell even remotely close to the whole story about how those verses appear in the NABRE. No surprise there.
So, a term that could be translated, and is perhaps best translated as “sexual immorality” is translated as “immorality” within the context of sexual immorality and you’re upset about it?