Bible retranslated---is nothing sacred?

[treesinger]

This should be a real eye opener!

New Bible translation
promotes fornication
Archbishop of Canterbury praises
version for 'extraordinary power'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 24, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


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.'"

"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."

I think the article speaks for itself. That is flat out wrong. If you have the viewpoint that the Bible is the inspired Word from God, than this is nothing short of perversion. And even if you don't believe one whit of the Bible, it's still easy to understand that this type of editing and translation is WAY off base.

And endorsed by the ARCH-friggin-BISHOP of CANTERBURY?

Just when I thought I'd seen everything!

 

[N.Bailey]

It doesn't sound like it's been retranslated to me, it sounds like they're rewriting it! It certainly doesn't do anything for the cause of Christians when we say that God protects his word, does it? It sounds like a bunch of rubbish to me. I have to ask, is this for real, or is it a joke?

 

[LScot]

I agree with N.Bailey. It sounds like a joke to me. If it isn't than shame on them.

 

[Pin Wizard]

 

[Miss Jasmine]

Isn't there something in the Holy Bible about rewriting God's word? They will have to answer one day.

 

[Sirius]

You can order it from Amazon

Good as New

 

[tastelikecandy]

Originally posted by N.Bailey
It doesn't sound like it's been retranslated to me, it sounds like they're rewriting it! It certainly doesn't do anything for the cause of Christians when we say that God protects his word, does it? It sounds like a bunch of rubbish to me. I have to ask, is this for real, or is it a joke?

Not surprising. Today, when people are living lives that christians convict them of they just make up excuses and say"Oh, I don't think that is a sin, God is not going to send me to hell for that."

If you think about it, most people have rewritten the word of God to suit their own lives anyway. If they don't want to give something up they just pretend it is ok. It always helps to have all your buddies telling you it is ok too.

The word of God is the same yesterday, today and forever. If you are a true christian and you have real faith, you can't live any old way you want to because you feel bad about it. You just don't want to live the way you use to.

 

[DawnCt1]

It sounds like the apostate church is alive and well. Who says this isn't the end times.

 

[tastelikecandy]

Originally posted by DawnCt1
It sounds like the apostate church is alive and well. Who says this isn't the end times.

Oh it is getting very close. :space:

 

[vernon]

You presume the original translation was correct and irrefutable.

The Bible, as translated by the Romans, was adjusted to fit in with the confines of Roman society, it's customs and it's history. The King James version was one that suited the societies of that time, whether those versions are cast in stone or available for a translation that is easier to understand to todays society is a point for debate but IMHO translating any document into another language is always at best a rather subjective exercise.

 

[tastelikecandy]

That is why it is called faith. I did not see anyone write the bible, but I believe it is the word of God. I did not see Jesus walk on water or feed the multitudes, or heal the sick, but I believe he did. If you have to see it 100% in front of you then that is not faith which therefore does not please God.

 

[HollyJoy]

disgusting.

 

[olena]

That's one of the reasons I've always wanted to learn Latin and Greek. Even the English version is just a translation. When anything is translated, it ultimately is subject to differences in interpretation.

 

[dizny4us]

that's just so SAD..

 

[vernon]

That's one of the reasons I've always wanted to learn Latin and Greek

You'd be better served learning Aramaic

 

[Lanshark]

Sounds like a new age membership drive to me

 

[Maleficent13]

Leaving all thoughts of right or wrong as far as "word of God" or the religious applications of the translation, can I just say, as one with a degree in English and a lover of words:

What the hell is that crap?

 

[gometros]

Originally posted by olena
That's one of the reasons I've always wanted to learn Latin and Greek. Even the English version is just a translation. When anything is translated, it ultimately is subject to differences in interpretation.

Then you need to learn Aramaic as well, since anything written in Latin or Greek are just translataions as well.

 

[LScot]

Olena,
You'd probably find a Beth Moore study quite good. She digs deep into words used and some of the words that we read today mean something different in the original than what we are used to them meaning. Always a good study.

And yes, the Bible warns about taking away and adding to. It is in Revelation. This does both, I'm afraid. Translating is one thing. Changing things around is quite different.

 

[acepepper]

Originally posted by vernon
You presume the original translation was correct and irrefutable.

The Bible, as translated by the Romans, was adjusted to fit in with the confines of Roman society, it's customs and it's history. The King James version was one that suited the societies of that time, whether those versions are cast in stone or available for a translation that is easier to understand to todays society is a point for debate but IMHO translating any document into another language is always at best a rather subjective exercise.

Exactly right.