4. "It's the King James version, or else it's PERVERSION!"
Favouriite saying of one Dr. Greg Dixon, former pastor of the former (until it was seized by the IRS) Indianapolis Baptist Temple...and Paul was a tormented man, knowhuttamean?
King Jamie had a translation done of the bible that favored Kings and Rulers. Its basically the same works as the Catholic Bible (minus the apocropha). The primary difference is translation. There was even another translation done during his time called the Bishop's bible. It of course favored the Church and clergy as heads of society.
Translation can account for a lot of leeway but it does not create individuals. The King James does put a rather patriarchal spin on things and this may be where the issue is coming from. Perhaps the article in question is suggesting that the Paul the King James introduced is far more sexist that the original.
Keep in mind that for the bulk of history the bible was considered a banned book. Only the clergy were allowed ownership and translation was a blasphomey. It wasn't until Martin Luther nailed his hissy fit to the door that the bible became available to others.
For an interesting translation of the bible try to find the Queen Jane's Bible. Difficult to find (out of print IIRC). But it was translated by an angry atheist. Complete with comments and side comments pointing out errors, horrors, and just plain nasty bits.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.