Continuing on from yesterday…

…will the Bible of the year 3016 be different from the Bible in the year 2016?

I personally think so.

I believe that one of the more liberal translations that edits out verses referring in the negative to homosexuality and other left-wing issues will become the accepted version. We might even have some people considering it a revelation from God, as do many of the extreme King James readers. I’m not kidding. There are people in the “King James Only” movement of fundamentalist Christianity that believe the KJV is a God-given translation. But I digress. Society has evolved quickly in the last hundred years, rendering said verses unacceptable to many, and we now have feminist and LGBT translations of the Bible. While targeted largely at a niche audience, their influence has been felt in mainstream modern translations. The use of gender-neutral language is common (“people” as opposed to “men” in the KJV), as well as toning down the abovementioned verses considered homophobic.

Perhaps the best-known translation in this mould is the New International Version, which featured open lesbian Virginia Molenkott on its critic team. The NIV is beginning to be widely used and is a candidate for the “standard” Bible translation as the KJV was, and is to an extent today. But as the left shifts more to the left (and the right more to the right), people may complain that the NIV doesn’t do enough to affirm egalitarianism. While I am a strong supporter of egalitarianism, I believe that a truly egalitarian Bible translation would be impossible without making major textual edits. Much of Leviticus would have to go, as not only is gay okay for most of us, many of us have tattoos, and many of us eat pork and shellfish. Even Jews, who the laws are traditionally considered to be aimed at. But I don’t see it stopping people from trying to edit it in a modern framework.

So I believe the Bible of 3016 will be very different from the Bible of 2016. Adam and Steve? Probably not, as the creation of complimentary woman is a vital part of the Genesis story, but I can see large chunks of text that exist in our versions gone whereas KJVs and even NIVs are museum pieces only read by scholars and critics.

Aur Anglic wil probubly bi: verry diffrun tu:.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s