#Revised Standard Bible

[officialyourdailyinspiration]

The Good Samaritan

25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" 27 And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." 28 And he said to him, "You have answered right; do this, and you will live." 29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 30 Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.' 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" 37 He said, "The one who showed mercy on him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." — Luke 10:25-37 | Revised Standard Version (RSV) Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, and 1971 the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. All rights reserved. Cross References: Deuteronomy 6:4-5; Deuteronomy 6:24; Leviticus 18:15; Leviticus 19:18; Isaiah 58:7; Matthew 10:5; Matthew 18:28; Matthew 19:16; Matthew 24:34; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:52; Luke 10:38; Luke 16:15; Luke 18:31; Luke 19:28

#Jesus #parables #the Good Samaritan #love #lesson #neighbor #Luke 10:25-37 #Gospel of Luke #New Testament #RSV #Revised Standard Bible #National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America

[quotesfromscripture]

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 NRSVA

"As to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we beg you, brothers and sisters, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as though from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord is already here. Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one destined for destruction."

Study questions:

(1) What does the author mean by "the coming of our Lord"?

(2) Why would the audience be alarmed or distressed?

(3) What would the assumptions be if the day of the Lord had already arrived? How would the world change?

(4) Who is "the lawless one" in this passage? Has he been revealed?

(5) The author mentions "by letter, as though from us". Were people spreading forgeries or misinformation in the name of Paul? How could the audience know what was genuine?

#the bible #bible verse #2 thessalonians 2 #new revised standard version anglicised #jesus' second coming #prophecy #the future #deception #the wicked #adelphoi #reunion #gathering #fear not #do not be afraid

[breathofgod]

#psalm 26 #matthew 27 #bible: new revised standard version #desperation to please (the father/the patriarch) #coupled w resignation of action & refusal of guilt (paternal in nature) - the helplessness that comes w responsibility #purity as a pillar of holiness - what is more pure than that which gives or refuses life #i am innocent father i swear i am innocent; absolve me of myself

[christianity-crucible]

Hoping to find an article I had but lost track of talking about how messed up the evangelical-favored English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible is, especially compared to the version it was cribbed from, the Revised Standard Version (RSV), which at least according to one telling tried to make it translation as accurate as possible. By contrast, the changes made in the English Standard Version were very political and were LESS linguistically accurate, though more political convenient for evangelicalism.

If I can find that article again, I'll post a link here.

#Christianity #evangelicalism #Bible #Revised Standard Version #RSV #English Standard Version

[blogquantumreality]

Isaiah 29:13

A fine description of hypocrisy:

And the Lord said: "Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by rote"

Sound like anybody we know these days?

#hypocrisy #bible #revised standard version

[bluecatwriter]

Jonathan: Do I have to read it, oh my dear one?

Me: (cries)

Jonathan: "I will keep my mouth as it were in a bridle: while the ungodly is in my sight. I held my tongue, and spake nothing: I kept silence, yea, even from good words; but it was pain and grief to me. My heart was hot within me; and while I was thus musing the fire kindled."

Me: (cries harder) Do you have to remind me!

OKAY BUT THE INCLUSION OF THIS LINE HAS ME GOING FERAL

(Theological ramble incoming. You have been warned.)

Jonathan is reading from the Book of Common Prayer, but the scripture is Psalm 39. (I originally thought that this was a quote from Jeremiah 20:9, which uses similar language to show the prophet's frustration with burning up inside if he refuses his call to prophesy, but this is even better.)

The psalmist here is a great example of how people's responses to God in the Bible do not fit neatly into the "unquestioning obedience and reverence" framework any more than Jonathan's actions do. The narrator of this psalm speaks despairingly about the vanity of life, begs God to stop heaping hardship on him ("Remove thy stroke away from me: I am consumed by the blow of thine hand"), and while he expresses near the middle that his ultimate hope is in God ("And now, Lord, what wait I for? my hope is in thee"), he also flat-out asks God to leave him alone (the last line of the psalm in King James Version says "O spare me, that I may recover strength/before I go hence, and be no more," though I love the more modern translations such as the New Revised Standard version, which reads, "Turn your gaze away from me, that I may smile again/before I depart and am no more").

It's a gut-wrenching psalm that doesn't flinch from the realities of life: things feel meaningless, hardships are heaped on those who are faithful, humans are fragile, riches cannot safeguard against death— and the right to rage and weep before God is a given. It ends not with the line of hope from the middle but with a challenge to God, and the main conflict of the psalm is not resolved or neatly tied up. Like all the Wisdom literature in the Bible, it invites the readers to sit in the tension and the confusion and the pain, rather than hastening on to a "correct answer" or even a sense of resolution.

I assume this is why it's included in the Book of Common Prayer's burial service: death cannot be tied up with a bow, or smoothed over with platitudes. This psalm expresses solidarity with people from every generation who have tried to make sense of their hardships and pain and the devastating reality of mortality.

Anyway, inclusion of this line in this scene was absolutely stunning. I suspect that many of Bram Stoker's original readers would have familiarity with the burial service since it would be read at every funeral, so adding in the words was wonderful to enhance the experience for the modern non-Anglican reader. This passage helped drive home how thematically resonant these words are with what's happening in the story in the moment. Very cool.

#re: dracula #dracula daily #christianity cw #answered #jonathan harker

[transhuman-priestess]

“None of these words are in the Bible”

Really? Which translation are you comparing to?

There are hundreds, if not thousands of translations of the Bible available from everybody and their grandma.

I’m not even talking about French vs English vs Arabic etc I’m talking about just within the English language.

You’ve got King James, Revised King James, New International, English Standard, New Living, and those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head. Some of those absolutely have the word penis in them. Quit lying, you uncultured buffoons.

[babyangelsky]

*sits at a lighted vanity mirror with clown makeup half on and a multicolored wig on a stand beside me*

I would like to share with you all a little fact about me: I have an incurable case of Fluke Pusit Heart Eyes. All I asked for Christmas was more Fluke, then all I asked for New Year's was more Fluke, then all I asked for my birthday was more Fluke.

So while that may admittedly be coloring my judgement, I'm gonna ask ya'll to let me cook here for a second.

A few days ago I ran my lil self over to Petty to share a bit of news I came across, which was that Fluke stated in a recent interview that he had a project coming up and that it was maybe a BL.

THEN, a couple of days later, Be on Cloud announced that Ta, Copper, Bible, and Bas would be at the One D press conference and it began to be speculated by some that Bas would be paired with Bible in the upcoming series 4 Minutes. Nothing was announced or confirmed at the press con...

BUT!

In an interview with The Standard, the relevant portion of which has been kindly translated here, Pond Krisda stated that the script for 4 Minutes had just finished being revised and:

THAT AN ACTOR HAS BEEN CAST TO STAR ALONGSIDE BIBLE.

Now! I love Bas. I'm very excited to see him in Man Suang when it gets released on Netflix at the end of the month because by all accounts he gave a fantastic performance. If he is paired with Bible in 4 Minutes, I'll be seated for it. I'll be seated regardless.

But! I HAVE FLUKE PUSIT HEART EYES! AND NOT ONLY DO I HAVE THEM, A MONTH AGO FELLOW FLUKE PUSIT ENJOYER CHICA PUT THIS IN MY HEAD:

DO YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS? DO YOU SEE?

Fluke shares that he has a project coming soon but can't share any details and then TWO DAYS LATER Pond gives an interview and says that they have a co-star for Bible! Is the co-star Bas or one of the other BOC boys? Very possible! Probable even! Is this all just coincidental timing and Fluke's new project is something else entirely? Maybe!

BUT WHAT IF IT ISN'T? WHAT IF IT REALLY IS FLUKE WHO HAS BEEN CAST TO STAR WITH BIBLE?

*secures my clown wig, completing the clown transformation, and takes deep breath*

There is absolutely no reason for this post to exist or be this long other than my profound desire to see Fluke star in something, and these may very well be the delusional ramblings of a freshly 30-year-old lady in a "-I've connected the dots/-You haven't connected shit" situation.

But I just want ya'll to consider that much like the chances of being attacked by a bear in everyday life, the chances of Fluke being in 4 Minutes with Bible are slim, but not zero.

And I would like to invite ya'll and @respectthepetty and @chicademartinica to join me in this clown car

#is she okay i hear some of ya'll asking #no! 🥰 #this is what happens when you deprive a girly of her fave for so long #the insanity settles in #fluke pusit #bible wichapas #4 minutes #4 minutes the series

[walkswithmyfather]

This is fascinating! By Stefan Hager (FB)

“We currently have 5,800 plus Greek New Testaments manuscripts, 10,000 plus Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 plus manuscripts in various languages). if we were to stack the manuscripts we have found today it would reach more than a mile high). Beating all other historical records of the ancient world. for example, no one doubts the historical person “Homer” as we have 1.800 plus manuscripts of his life, yet we have 25,000 plus manuscripts of the life of Jesus, and that doesn’t include secular sources). And considering that the earliest copies of the New Testament are written within 25 years after the death of Jesus, but the earliest copies of Homers works are written 400 years after the death of Homer. Jesus is the gold standard for historians. If we’re going to doubt Jesus. We might as well doubt all ancient history.

Comparing these manuscripts we find that the teaching, stories, doctrines of the bible are all surprisingly the same. reading a bible in English vs reading a bible in Russian. It may be worded differently but you get the same story/biblical doctrine).

Tho no one manuscript is perfect. Through the centuries, minor differences arose in the various copies of the Scriptures. The vast majority of these differences are simple spelling variants, inverted words (one manuscript says “Christ Jesus” while another says “Jesus Christ” or different ways people have spelled names). or an easily identified missing word. In short, over 99 percent of the biblical text is not questioned. Of the less than 1 percent of the text that is in question, no doctrinal teaching or command is jeopardized. In other words, the copies of the Bible we have today are pure. The Bible has not been corrupted, altered, edited, revised, or tampered with.

“The early books of the bible” were so vastly copied and wide spread that if one group in Africa wanted to change any part, believers in Israel, Rome, Alexandria would have easily identified the change to the wide spread text/message.

This is also evidenced by the Dead Sea scrolls (large portions of Old Testament) which were found in 1947. These scrolls are dated 200BC. So Jesus would have those as scripture during his earthly time, and the content of those scrolls match. If we look at any bible in any chapter and we look at the Hebrew and the same chapter it’s going to read the same way we have today, now it is true there are variations in reading/wording or translation. Every book prior to the printing press has variations. The Quran has variations, The point is, variations don’t give you a different text, a different theology, a different meaning.

Here’s a scaled down example. using textual criticism and cross checking manuscripts. We can pretty much reconstruct what the original said. How does this work?.

Consider the following example. Suppose we have four different manuscripts that have different errors in the same verse, such as Philippians 4:13:

1.I can do all t#ings through Christ

2.I can do all th#ngs through Christ

3.I can do all thi#gs through Christ

4.I can do all thin#s through Christ

Is there any mystery of what the original said?. None whatsoever. By comparing and cross checking manuscripts. the original can be reconstructed with great accuracy and the reconstruction of the New Testament is easier than this, because there are far fewer errors in the actual New Testament manuscripts than there are represented by this example. Plus a vast amount of material to work with.

Any unbiased document scholar will agree that the Bible has been remarkably well-preserved over the centuries. Even many hardened skeptics and critics of the Bible admit that the Bible has been transmitted over the centuries far more accurately than any other ancient document.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Bible has been revised, edited, or tampered with in any systematic manner. No one group has ever had control over the biblical text. The sheer volume of biblical manuscripts makes it simple to recognize any attempt to distort God’s Word. There is no major doctrine of the Bible that is put in doubt as a result of the inconsequential differences among the manuscripts.

Ancient scribes often copied books letter by letter (one by one). not sentence by sentence. It was a long process but they assured Accuracy. And they would count the letters of the copies and count the letters of the original. if the original had 500 letters and the copy had 497 letters, they would destroy the copy and restart.”

[wolfythewitch]

Maybe try "The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version"?

Ooo I like the sound of that title

#wolfy tedtalks #anon #wolfy religious tedtalks

[bible-word-counter]

I'm super-new to this, how many english translations are there? Which one should I read as a first-time reader? I'm sorry if people've already asked you this

There are over a hundred translations of the Bible into English and over three thousand total for all languages.

The most common ones used are

King James Version (The one I use)

New International Version

New Revised Standard Version

As far as which one to start with? I would say the one that you can understand the best. Though it is fun to read KJV out loud because you sound like a Shakespearean actor

#not a bible word count #ask #clerk427

[officialyourdailyinspiration]

Jesus Brought before Pilate

1 When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people conferred together against Jesus in order to bring about his death. 2 They bound him, led him away, and handed him over to Pilate the governor.

The Suicide of Judas

3 When Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. 4 He said, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” But they said, “What is that to us? See to it yourself.” 5 Throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed, and he went and hanged himself. 6 But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money.” 7 After conferring together, they used them to buy the potter’s field as a place to bury foreigners. 8 For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of the one on whom a price had been set, on whom some of the people of Israel had set a price, 10 and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”

Pilate Questions Jesus

11 Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus said, “You say so.” 12 But when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he did not answer. 13 Then Pilate said to him, “Do you not hear how many accusations they make against you?” 14 But he gave him no answer, not even to a single charge, so that the governor was greatly amazed.

Barabbas or Jesus?

15 Now at the festival the governor was accustomed to release a prisoner for the crowd, anyone whom they wanted. 16 At that time they had a notorious prisoner called Jesus Barabbas. 17 So after they had gathered, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release for you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” 18 For he realized that it was out of jealousy that they had handed him over. 19 While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent word to him, “Have nothing to do with that innocent man, for today I have suffered a great deal because of a dream about him.” 20 Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus killed. 21 The governor again said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release for you?” And they said, “Barabbas.” 22 Pilate said to them, “Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” All of them said, “Let him be crucified!” 23 Then he asked, “Why, what evil has he done?” But they shouted all the more, “Let him be crucified!”

Pilate Hands Jesus Over to Be Crucified

24 So when Pilate saw that he could do nothing but rather that a riot was beginning, he took some water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, “I am innocent of this man’s blood; see to it yourselves.” 25 Then the people as a whole answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!” 26 So he released Barabbas for them, and after flogging Jesus he handed him over to be crucified.

The Soldiers Mock Jesus

27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the governor’s headquarters, and they gathered the whole cohort around him. 28 They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, 29 and after twisting some thorns into a crown they put it on his head. They put a reed in his right hand and knelt before him and mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 30 They spat on him and took the reed and struck him on the head. 31 After mocking him, they stripped him of the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.

The Crucifixion of Jesus

32 As they went out, they came upon a man from Cyrene named Simon; they compelled this man to carry his cross. 33 And when they came to a place called Golgotha (which means Place of a Skull), 34 they offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall, but when he tasted it, he would not drink it. 35 And when they had crucified him, they divided his clothes among themselves by casting lots; 36 then they sat down there and kept watch over him. 37 Over his head they put the charge against him, which read, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.”

38 Then two rebels were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left. 39 Those who passed by derided him, shaking their heads 40 and saying, “You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.” 41 In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes and elders, were mocking him, saying, 42 “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he wants to, for he said, ‘I am God’s Son.’ ” 44 The rebels who were crucified with him also taunted him in the same way.

The Death of Jesus

45 From noon on, darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon. 46 And about three o’clock Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” 47 When some of the bystanders heard it, they said, “This man is calling for Elijah.” 48 At once one of them ran and got a sponge, filled it with sour wine, put it on a stick, and gave it to him to drink. 49 But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him.” 50 Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last. 51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split. 52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. 54 Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, “Truly this man was God’s Son!”

55 Many women were also there, looking on from a distance; they had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him. 56 Among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

The Burial of Jesus

57 When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea named Joseph, who also was himself a disciple of Jesus. 58 He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus; then Pilate ordered it to be given to him. 59 So Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth 60 and laid it in his new tomb, which he had hewn in the rock. He then rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and went away. 61 Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were there, sitting opposite the tomb.

The Guard at the Tomb

62 The next day, that is, after the day of Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered before Pilate 63 and said, “Sir, we remember what that impostor said while he was still alive, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ 64 Therefore command the tomb to be made secure until the third day; otherwise, his disciples may go and steal him away and tell the people, ‘He has been raised from the dead,’ and the last deception would be worse than the first.” 65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard of soldiers; go, make it as secure as you can.” 66 So they went with the guard and made the tomb secure by sealing the stone. — Matthew 27 | New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (NRSVUE) New Revised Standard Version, Updated Edition. Copyright © 2021 National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America. All rights reserved worldwide. Cross References: Genesis 20:6; Genesis 31:11; Genesis 50:5; Exodus 21:32; Exodus 26:31; Numbers 4:5; Deuteronomy 21:6; Joshua 2:19; 1 Samuel 19:5; 1 Samuel 20:32; 2 Samuel 17:23; 2 Kings 13:21; 2 Kings 19:21; Psalm 22:8; Psalm 22:16; Psalm 31:13; Psalm 69:21; Psalm 71:10; Psalm 94:21; Isaiah 22:16; Isaiah 25:7; Isaiah 50:6; Isaiah 53:7; Isaiah 53:9; Jeremiah 1:1; Jeremiah 26:8; Daniel 6:17; Zechariah 11:12-13; Matthew 1:16; Matthew 2:2; Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:23; Matthew 20:19; Matthew 26:61; Matthew 26:63; Matthew 28:1; Matthew 28:11; Matthew 28:14-5; Mark 7:11; Mark 15:2; Mark 15:5-6; Mark 15:15; 15:42-43; Luke 23:5; Luke 23:9; Luke 23:53-54; John 19:9; John 19:14; John 20:1; Acts 1:19; Acts 3:14; Acts 5:28; Acts 13:28; Romans 16:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:3; James 1:5; Hebrews 5:7

#Jesus Brought before Pilate #Judas hangs himself #Pilate Questions Jesus #the Crowd shouts for Barabbas #Jesus crucified #soldiers mock Jesus #death and burial of Jesus #the guard at the tomb #Gospel of Matthew #Matthew 27 #New Testament #NRSVUE #New Revised Standard Version Bible Updated Edition #National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America

[quotesfromscripture]

My foot stands on level ground; in the great congregation I will bless the LORD.

Psalm 26:12 RSV (1971)

#bible verse #blessings #worship #confidence #courage #foundation #protection #straight paths #community #crowds #psalm 26 #revised standard version #psalms of david

[tajcox]

“How art thou fallen from heauen (o Lucifer) thou faire mornige childe? hast thou gotten a fall euen to the grounde, thou that (notwithstondinge) dyddest subdue the people?”

-The Coverdale Bible 1535

“How art thou fallen from heauen (O Lucifer) thou faire mornynge childe? how hast thou gotten a fall euen to the grounde, and art become weaker then the people?”

- The Great Bible 1539

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning? and cut down to the ground, which didst cast lots upon the nations?”

-Geneva Bible 1560

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

- King James Version 1611

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low”

-English Revised Version 1885

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, that didst lay low the nations!”

-American Standard Version 1971

“How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!”

-New International Version 1973

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, You who weakened the nations!”

- New King James 1982

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!”

- English Standard Version 2002

Be careful!! God had made the Bible to be understood plainly. Overtime men had changed words and or phrases thinking that it’s a necessity to be more plain, while in reality their mystifying that which is plain due to traditions. Gods word as a whole, is a perfect chain, one portion linking into and explaining another. True seekers for truth need not err, for not only is the Word of God plain and simple in declaring the way of life, but the Holy Spirit is given as a guide in understanding the way to life therein revealed.

#seventhdayadventist #jesus christ #bible verse #christianity #christians #god #religion #scripture #biblical #god's love #love #faith in the lord #faith in jesus #faith in god #keep the faith #christian faith #faith #faithinchrist #bibleverse #bible reading #biblestudy #the bible #bible scripture #bible quote #bible study #bible #bibleprophecy #10 commandments #holy bible #christian bible

[tanadrin]

The KJV is a bad translation?

the kjv is, as i understand it, a particularly poor translation for the modern english speaker. and probably not a great translation even for its day.

some of this is a historical problem. the kjv is a lightly edited revision of the bishop's bible; by the time it was put into print its language was already a hundred years out of date.

some of this is a time marches on problem: our understanding of the source texts and the number of manuscripts available to us to analyze is simply much better now than it was back when the kjv/bishop's bible/other early vernacular bibles were printed. not to mention our understanding of the historical context of those texts as furnished by, e.g., archeology.

some of this is a language marches on problem: "tabernacle" is from a Latin word meaning "small hut," which was probably a fine way to translate the hebrew word used for the dwelling place of god back in the sixteenth century, but now, thanks in part to its use in translations of the bible, basically only has a specialized religious meaning that obscures more than it illuminates when used in conservative translations of the bible. there are english-language turns of phrase in the kjv that are now consistently misunderstood just because standard english usage has changed sufficiently in the intervening centuries to alter the fundamental meaning of some passages.

and some of this is a dogma problem: there are passages in the bible that religious publishers with an agenda will insist on mistranslating because the plain meaning of the text is awkward for their particular dogmas. because of the role of the kjv in the second great awakening and american protestantism's fixation on this version of the text, there is the particular pathology of the "kjv-only" movement in american protestantism which insists that the kjv is not only fine, but is actually the best and only good translation of the bible and all the other english translations are corrupted by the devil or something, idk.

what translation of the bible is best probably depends on what you want to use the bible for (devotional purposes vs critical understanding of hte new testament vs critical understanding of the hebrew bible, etc.), but one can definitely do better than a translation published in the seventeenth century.

[vital-information]

"In 1946, the term 'homosexuals' appeared for the first time in an English Bible. This new figure appeared in a list of sinners barred--according to a verse in the Apostles Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians--from inheriting the kingdom of God. The word change was made by leading Bible scholars, members of the translation committee that labored for over a decade to produce the Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible. With an approach inspired by text-critical scholarship, many of their choices upset readers of the older King James Version, the favored Bible of Protestant America since the colonial era. Amid the outrage over other changes--to the red-letter words of Jesus and the old Shakespearean idiom--another modernizing innovation went virtual unremarked. Two enigmatic Greek nouns, referenced in the King James as 'effeminate' and 'abusers of themselves with mankind,' now appeared as a single, streamlined 'homosexual.' Subsequent Bible commentaries approached the new term as age-old tradition...

Some Bible readers, however, responded with surprise to this textual change. In everyday use, the verse in I Corinthians had other meanings. The author of a 1956 advice book on how to write sermons recounted the embarrassing tale of one minister's well-loved sermon. That sermon, delivered on various occasions, expanded on the 'general meaning' of the Apostle Paul's reference to the 'effeminate,' which the pastor took as warning against 'the soft, the pliable, those who take the easy road.' The take-away point was that Christians must undertake the difficult path of faith. It was a fine sermon, or so the pastor thought, until he read the RSV. He discovered 'to his amazement and chagrin; that 'effeminate' was translated 'homosexuals.' The confusion was a lesson, the author of this advice book chided, on the need to use recent translations. A check through earlier Bible commentaries confirms that outdated reference tools may indeed have contributed to this pastor's error. An eariler edition of The Interpreter's Bible, published in 1929, said nothing at all about homosexuality in its commentary on the same verse in I Corinthians. It noted that the Apostle Paul was keenly aware of the 'idolatry and immorality' of the pagan world. However, the named vice that so perturbed the apostle was 'self indulgence of appetite and speech,' an interpretation that more readily fit with the pastor's call to a disciplined faith. If Christianity did indeed set itself against homosexuality from the first, then this popular Christian reference text neglected to make that prohibition clear.

Several scholars of American religion have puzzled over the peculiar silences of early twentieth-century Christian texts on the topic of same-sex sexuality. After surveying the published Christian literature of that time, Randall Balmer and Lauren Winner concluded that during those decades, 'the safest thing to say about homosexuality was nothing.' They note that even the published commentary on 'sodomy,' which would seem to be the clearest antecedent to later talk about homosexuality, yielded little that would illumine a long tradition of same-sex regulation. Although many Bible reference tools mentioned that damnable 'sin of Sodom,' the muddled and circular commentary on this 'loathsome vice' offered little that clarified its nature. Historian Rebecca Davis, on her own hunt to find Christian teachings about homosexuality, similarly notes the profound absence in early and mid-twentieth century Protestant literature--and especially in the writing by conservative fundamentalists. 'The extant printed record,' she observes, 'suggests that they avoided discussions of homosexuality almost entirely.' Adding further substance to this void are the findings from Alfred Kinsey's study of the sexual behavior of white American men, conducted between 1936 and 1946. The study suggested that Christians, although well acquainted with the sinfulness of masturbation and premarital intercourse, knew very little about what their churches had to say about same-sex acts. 'There has not been so frequent or so free discussion of the sinfulness of the homosexual in religious literature,' Kinsey wrote. 'Consequently, it is not unusual to find even devoutly religious persons who become involved in the homosexual without any clear understanding of the church's attitude on the subject.' Before the 1940s, the Bible's seemingly plain condemnation of homosexuality was not plain at all.

...

What this book [Reforming Sodom] shows is that the broad common sense about the Bible's specifically same-sex meaning was an invention of the twentieth century. Today's antihomosexual animus, that is, is not the singular residue of an ancient damnation. Rather, it is the product of a more complex modern synthesis. To find the influential generators of that synthesis, moreover, we should look not to fundamentalist preachers but to their counterparts. Religious liberals, urbane modernizers of the twentieth century, studiously un-muddled the confused category of 'sodomitical sin' and assigned to it a singular same-sex meaning. The ideas informing this shift germinated out of the therapeutic sciences of psychiatry and psychology, an emerging field of the late nineteenth century that promised scientific frameworks for measuring and studying human sexual behavior. Liberal Protestants were early adopters of these scientific insights, which percolated through various early twentieth-century projects of moral reform. Among the yield from the convivial pairing of medicine and morality was the midcentury translation of the RSV. The newly focused homosexual prohibitions evidenced the grafting of new therapeutic terms onto ancient roots. The scores of subsequent Bible translations produced in later decades adopted and sharpened the RSV's durable precedent. In the shelves of late twentieth-century translations and commentaries--none more influential than the 1978 New International Version, which quickly displaced the King James as America's best-selling Bible--American Christians read what might be called a 'homosexualized' Bible. Instead of the archaic sinners and enigmatic sodomy talk found in the King James, these modern Bibles spoke clearly and plainly about the tradition's prohibition against same-sex behavior. The subsequent debate about the implications of these self-evident meanings overlooked a nearly invisible truth: the Bible's plain speech about homosexuality issued from a newly implanted therapeutic tongue."

Heather R. White, Reforming Sodom: Protestants and the Rise of Gay Rights

#queer history #did you ask to be made holy