Ted Michael Morgan

I also find the New English Bible and the 20th Century NT excellent translations even given their age.

I also find the New English Bible and the 20th Century NT excellent translations even given their age.

Study Bibles seem popular At least, publishers introduce, revise, and re-introduce many editions of them and members of study groups or Sunday school classes to which I belong often have study Bibles with various translations and with commentaries from diverse points-of-view. Barnes and Noble and other book stores display them in large numbers. Some editions seem to me whimsical. Others include commentary by distinguished biblical scholars.

I have worn out several copies of succeeding editions of what is now The Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha Revised Standard Version, my old favorite study Bible that I first used in 1964 in classes at university. My parents gave me that first copy for Christmas, 1963. Today, I own and refer to several study Bibles, though they are sufficiently expensive that I recommend readers by only one or two study Bibles.

I do believe that study Bibles help me read and better understand scripture, even though I realize that they have limited application simply because the commentators largely have to gloss the texts, even in these large books. Nevertheless, I think that to a degree the annotations and introductions can help readers grasp important aspects of biblical texts. The Bibles are still small enough to take to services, groups, and classes. Sometimes a simple reference can deeply enrich reading a text in a group or class.

Many of the study Bibles I know use critical-historical methods to explore scriptures. Some others combine these with a canonical outlook that takes into account the way churches have historically understood the Bible. Further, other study Bibles interpret scripture from an evangelical viewpoint. I personally enjoy and frequently use Catholic study Bibles that uses a combination of critical-historical study methods with some general attention to Catholic doctrine and to what my mother names the plan of salvation. Members of the Disciple of Christ edited two of the best study Bibles.

As I indicated, all study Bible necessarily have limitations. One criticism as indicated involves limitations of historical-critical readings of scripture. I do not know one that satisfactorily explores my theological concerns though there are study Bibles that use the teachings of the Reformed tradition as a basis for notes.

A couple of study Bibles I use are devotional study Bibles. One The

Spiritual Formation Bible (NRSV), published by the conservative Christian

publisher Zondervan and edited by staff from The Upper Room publishers, uses

traditional ways of reading scripture as part of spiritual formation. Another, The Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible (NRSV), edited by Richard Foster does much the same thing but from a slightly different outlook with attention to a broad range of matters that concern Christians. A group of editors and commentators from a broad range of Christian points-of-view produced this helpful devotional Bible.

The texts for most of my study Bibles are the Revised Standard Version, its later revision the New Revised Standard Version, the New English Bible, and its later revision the Revised English Bible. These are translations from committees of scholar representatives from major Christian denominations, including the Roman Catholic and Orthodox denominations. I very much enjoy reading the Hebrew Bible in the Revised English Bible and I find the Oxford Study Bible: Revised English Bible (REB) with Apocrypha particularly helpful. The 23 articles in this edition are outstanding in their clarity and range for such short articles.

The first two translations are generally one-to-one word equivalent translations. The second two are thought -to-thought equivalent translations. There are formal or technical names for kinds of translations. Formal equivalent is roughly a word for word translation. Dynamic equivalent is roughly thought for thought. There are also paraphrase translations.

These divisions are not absolute. Translations tend to use all these forms because of difficulties transposing meaning from texts in biblical languages to other languages. Interestingly, early Christians, including the Apostle Paul, used Aramaic and Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible.

A Google web search reveals articles about translation and about versions of the Bible. There are also interesting blogs.

No translation is perfect and no Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek text is perfect or even original. All translations are in some sense interpretations. There are critics of all translations, including my favorite versions. Many critics offer alternative translations.

Apparently, the best selling modern translation is the New International Version, translated by a committee of conservative Christian scholars, including some Mennonite scholars. This translation is largely a word for word equivalent translation, though some commentators find it a freer translation than the Revised Standard Version and even the New Revised Standard Version. Many critics and

many members of groups and classes in which I take part highly regard the New

International Version. I know the NIV New Testament well. During the eighties, I

used it as my devotional New Testament. I do not know the Old Testament text. Zondervan, publisher of the NIV offers a wide range of study Bibles that use the NIV text. For myself, I find the NIV New Testament has a bias toward millennialism; however, The New Interpreter’s Bible uses it a one of its two texts and the Norton Critical Edition of the Writings of St. Paul also uses the NIV version.

Another excellent conservative translation is the English Standard Version, which the translators model on the Revised Standard Version with certain corrections and revisions they deem important. These often have to do with translating the Old Testament from the Greek Bible that the writers of the New Testament used rather than the received Hebrew text. Some commentators find some of its rendering unnecessarily stilted. The publisher of this translation will introduce a study edition in October 2008. You can sample sections of it online.

Most study Bibles that I know do not use other translations I enjoy reading. An exception is The Jewish Study Bible, edited by Adele Berlin and March Zvi Brettler, and published by Oxford University Press. This study Bible uses the text of the Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translation. A positive aspect of this commentary is that it is Jewish and does not interpret the text in terms of the New Testament. Sometimes that is helpful even to Christians because it opens new readings to us and it helps us better and more fairly grasp Judaism for itself.

By the way, I enjoy reading the New Living Translation as well as both the Contemporary English Version, and Today’s English Version from the American Bible Society. My brother David gave me my now well worn copy of the CEV several years ago. Elsewhere I have written my take on various study Bibles. I no longer have a single favorite.

One reason that I use the Revised Standard Version, The New Revised Standard, the New English Bible, and the Revised English Version is that they include the Deuterocanonical (second canon) books. After all, they were part of the ancient Greek Bible in use at the time of Jesus and included in the

scriptures of the early church. Most Christian churches included these books in their canons of scripture and even many Protestants have found reading them worthwhile. They do not change doctrines but they do nurture spiritual formation. Some modern translations do not include them.

I do recommend, if you can afford to buy it, a one volume Bible

commentary. The scope of these volumes let the commentaries explore topics,

frequently addressed only in abbreviated ways in study Bibles, with sufficient

depth and range for lay readers. For over forty years, I profitably used an edition of Peake’s Bible Commentary as my single one volume commentary.

There are several excellent one-volume Bible commentaries. I use the most recent of them--The Oxford Bible Commentary, The order in this commentary follows Protestant Bibles, but it includes articles on books included in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles. I use this commentary rather than The Jerome Bible Commentary simply because it is more recent and up-to-date.

These one-volume commentaries are expensive but often not much more expensive than a study Bible and usually much less expensive than even one commentaries on an individual book of the Bible. The Baton Rouge Public Library offers all of these translations, study Bibles, and commentaries as well as major commentary series such as the Anchor Bible Commentaries.

In addition, I own a copy of The Cambridge Companion to the Bible, edited by several distinguished scholars and published by Cambridge University Press. The text of this work is lucid, the format easy to use, and the commentary scholarly and up-to-date. The bibliographies are evocative and valuable guides to further reading and study.

Study Bibles help me in my studies in small groups, classes, and in private study as well as even in my private devotions. Take a look at some of them the next time you are in the bookstore or library. There are many excellent choices.

Sometimes, living in any congregation resembles living in minefield. That happens whether the pervasive tone of the congregation is evangelical, fundamentalist, orthodox, liberal, or whatever. Code words and shibboleths define almost invisible barriers. I generally keep my mouth closed. That is one reason that I look so unpleasant in Sunday classes and prayer groups. It would be the same way but in a different form if I were taking part in groups at the Unitarian-Universalist Church.

The pervasive right-wing political ambience of our congregation is painful to endure, in part, because I am at base an old-fashioned Eastern Republican. The American flag, along with whatever that so-called Christian flag is, troubles me. I let that pass. Many denominations allow them. I suppose that we mean them to imply the subservience of the nations to God, but I suspect that they really say the opposite. The disdain for any open discussion of topics and theme in classes and groups does not really exclude conflict. It merely submerges discord.

I would that we could learn to be more pluralistic. Pluralism transcends tolerance; it promotes faithful acceptance that allows for irreconcilable differences.

I explore my own faith now in terms of materialist and rhetorical categories. I need companions in this journey.

A book on Islam that I would highly recommend is "No god but God" by Reza Aslan.

Thank you! I have seen the book at Barnes & Noble. Almost everything I have read about Islam is by Christian scholars, though ones knowledgable and sympathetic to the religion. I recently read Efraim Karsh’s Islamic Imperialism, which restores some balance about complaints about Western imperialism. However, it is a politcal work. I have several scholarly books on Islamic themes but nothing that is a simple introduction to the topic.

Willard G. Oxtoby edited a two volume set called "World Religions." One volume is subtitled "Western Traditions," and the other is subtitled, "Eastern Traditions."

 

He wrote one or two chapters and the introduction. There is a chapter for each religion he covers and most of them are written by individuals who practice the faith they write about. It's not the easiest book to read but it contains much information.

That sounds good. I find that reading something by a scholar from within a tradition or a specialist on some religion is good. I do like Huston Smith. I find Karen Armstrong wrong on some points. However, I enjoy reading her books. I don't think that I ever quite grasp other religions anymore than I grasp Christianity.

Recently, I have been looking at Islam, a religion that I did not like when I was younger. I would love recommendations from you folks about what to read.

The eight points do define my experience of Christian life and faith. Every time I read them, I respond with joy.

+ Since Americans hear the story of the Palestinian plight so rarely, I thought I would post this letter from an anonymous European (I think) spending time in Palestine even though it is quite long. I don't agree with the belief expressed here that violence is justified but I do understand the rage and bitterness and I think all Americans need to deal with this.

 

I would certainly love to see the Palestinians use the non-violent methods of Gandhi & King but just because many have turned to violence does not mean that we should ignore their legitimate grievances.

 

Sorry that some of the interview material is not formatted as well as it could be.

 

+++

 

Letter from Palestine

Written by : anonymous

Last modified 2006-07-02 03:43

 

Somewhere in Palestine, July 1 — Morning came and we found that 90 of the nation's best men were captured by Israel from their homes in the night. Our mayor, who was released from four years in prison just a month ago. Someone for whom I have the utmost respect and admiration, as do his people here, political allies and opponents alike. And our vice mayor, too. The last time I talked with him, earlier this week, he was struggling a lot with chronic back pain. I wonder where they are now. If they have been fed today, or tortured. If they will sleep on beds tonight, or not at all. If they will be home tomorrow. If we will never see some of them again alive.

 

It's the first time Palestinians have captured an Israeli soldier in a long time; families of prisoners have begged the resistance not to release him until there is a prisoner exchange no matter what the consequences to the community—being well acquainted with the suffering that implies.

 

Everyone went about their business today, wedding processions in the streets, families eating icecream and watermelon in the sticky heat. Some with the heavy numb shock of loved ones vanished suddenly, shock without surprise; they expected that the price that has been paid, and paid, and paid, for keeping one's spirit from being broken, must be paid again. Myself, I couldn't keep from crying from time to time, although for me it is just a very small taste of the shock, seeing two good men that I know a little, powerful in their community with the power the community has entrusted them with, suddenly made helpless, pieces of meat for Israeli intelligence officers somewhere to enjoy, and knowing that if I knew them more, if I knew others, the sense of anger and sorrow and disbelief would be multiplied. I know that for the people around me these tears formed years and years ago. The anger and sorrow and loss and disbelief have happened too many times to count, but it does not diminish, to the world it is one more added to a large number, for each mother and sister and wife it is an unconsolable agony, an irreplaceable loss, an unimaginable theft, a violation of a family, a marriage, that might never be able to recover from the traumas and abuses that are being suffered, will be suffered in the days ahead.

 

Israel has over 10,000 Palestinian hostages, hundreds of them children, and slaughters Palestinians of any age on a daily basis. When Palestinians take 2 Israeli hostages and kill two soldiers, Israeli bombs Gaza. Bombs out the power stations, the water reticulation; no electricity, no water, bridges blasted severing cities from each other. Gaza Strip, the most densely populated area on earth on account of Israel using it as a specially designed human garbage can where refugees are disposed off and hermetically sealed off from the rest of the world. Brilliant, but unsuccessful. If you treat humans as garbage and they know that they are humans and not garbage, they will not quietly disappear. You will never sleep safe at night. You will never have the right to sleep safe at night. May you never sleep safe at night. A young woman in my neighborhood asked, can you believe Israel kidnapped most of our government last night? Imagine waking up to hear that Palestinian forces had kidnapped 90 Israeli government leaders. It's hard to imagine that Israel would leave one house standing, one person uninjured.

 

Imagine if Palestinians had the military capacity to punish Israel on a comparable scale for every two hostages it takes and two it kills. Imagine if Americans, and Europeans, valued the blood of Palestinians and Iraqis as much as their own blood. Imagine if the nations of the world used their armies to protect the lives of the innocent and bring to justice thieving, raping, murdering states.

 

A couple days ago I sat with someone I know, who was taken hostage last night. He explained part of Hamas' interpretation of the Qur'an as follows: there are three kinds of people that Muslims have to deal with. 1) Those who treat you with respect. In this case, it is a crime against God to treat them with anything but respect, kindness, and hospitality. In other words, if a Jew wanted to immigrate to Palestine with full respect for the people here, wishing to become a member of Palestinian society, he should be welcomed. 2) Then there are those who do not respect you, and oppose you. You have no obligation to extend hospitality to them. 3) Then there are those who have no respect for your humanity, your property or your religion, they take power over your land and your lives, destroy your land and kill your people. In this case you have an obligation to fight against them to protect your land and your people. If they kill your people, you can kill their people.

 

Today I visited with another friend who thinks he may be captured tonight; so many of his friends were captured last night. He said, Israel doesn't care too much about the lives of the Israeli hostages, in the past there were cases of them killing the hostages themselves by indiscriminate bombing of communities. But Israel has been waiting since Hamas' election for Hamas' first military operation, and so they knew this massive attack on the community would come, sooner or later. Even though different groups have participated in the Palestinian military operations in the past few days, all of Israel's targets are Hamas leaders. Israel wants to see Hamas destroyed, Europe and America want to see Hamas destroyed, and Abu Mazen seems to be trying his best to join them. Many of those arrested were among the Hamas members that Israel exiled to the no mans land between Israel and Lebanon, a decade ago.

 

He told me some of his friend's stories from those three terrible years, living in tents through snowy winters. He talked about the warm spirit that thrived in the tents during freezing months. He told of how hungry men went to an apricot orchard and couldn't find the owner, so they took some fruit and then tied some money in a handkerchief to the tree. When the owner found it, he tracked them down, and said to them, with tears coming down his face, what kind of men are you, starving and rejected by the world, who have such principles that you will not even take fruit that you find on a tree. I give you my fruit, I give you my orchards!

 

I felt the poverty of being from the West, where the media can say nothing about these men except to endlessly regurgitate simpleminded slander… of those captured I know just a few names, and little of their stories. For anyone here, each of these names represents a rich story, decades of struggles, of suffering, heroism, years of prison, of pain, of courage, of trying again, of hopes betrayed, of disappointment and endurance that continues forward to find new hope. We had this conversation over lunch in his daughter's home. She and her husband were active with Hamas and he was seized by Israel and killed in prison, leaving her with their three small children. Don't forget, it is America that gives Israel everything it needs to do this to us, she said. When we left, she and her three boys kissed him over and over, not knowing if tomorrow they will wake up to hear that her dad, their grandpa, has become a prisoner.

 

This week I spent with a French student, an orphan of war in Bangladesh, who is doing research on women's views of dignity. Dignity is a word thrown around a lot in international law but without definition; people have a "right to dignity" but since no one knows what it is, when it comes right down to it violations of this right cannot be prosecuted. I helped her interview dozens of women this week, from Fatah, Hamas, PFLP, poor and wealthy, educated and illiterate, young and old. We would sit down with strangers and as soon as dignity, al karame, was mentioned, the room burst into life with passionate opinions, terrible stories, and incredibly brave and inspiring statements.

 

Here are some of the things I heard about dignity.

 

There is no dignity in Palestine; we face humiliation at checkpoints, restriction from visiting our families or going to school, soldiers in our homes during the night, prison… Israel's war is first of all against our dignity which Israel attacks from every angle and with every means possible, because if it can succeed in destroying our dignity, we will not be able to resist anymore. There is tremendous dignity in Palestine; perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, because the occupation with all its mechanisms for humiliation makes us aware of our dignity; the more they try to destroy our dignity the stronger our dignity becomes; they are getting the opposite results that they want. There are two kinds of dignity: one that you get from others, when you are treated with dignity, the other comes from inside of you, from what you know about who you really are before God, and no one has the power to take this away from you unless you let them. Even if as women we are captured by Israel, stripped naked and raped in the prisons, if we resist every attack upon our dignity it will not be lost. A woman was told at a checkpoint to remove her scarf. She refused, and the soldier showed her a metal rod and said he would drive it through her eyes if she did not take it off. You can have your eyes, or you can have your dignity. She refused. He drove it through her eyes. She survived, but she is blind. And she did not lose her dignity. A friend of the Prophet Mohammad, a woman, was tied to the ground by a man who made her choose between her dignity or her life. The only thing she was able to do was to spit in his face, and she did. He killed her. But he did not destroy her dignity.

 

Arab people have a great source of dignity from the rich and deep history of our culture. But now all Arab lands are captive and only in Iraq and Palestine are we free within ourselves, because we do not accept the enslavement that is forced upon us; our resistance gives us great dignity.

 

We get our dignity from our land. It is our life. As long as we are in our land, no matter how much we suffer, we will have our dignity. If they succeed in expelling us to Jordan, our dignity will be lost forever. I have my family's olive trees. Every year I used to have precious olive oil from my own trees that I could give generously to my friends and neighbors. Now Israel has killed half of my trees and imprisoned the rest. These trees are like my own children. It is a terrible, terrible sorrow and shame for me each day to know that I am powerless to help them. Now, when we need olive oil for ourselves, we have to go to the store and buy it. But I was one who could generously give olive oil to my friends and relatives.

 

We get our dignity from Islam, as women, and as human beings. In our culture, before Islam, women were just seen as property, baby girls could be buried alive. We see women in many parts of the world who have no dignity. Islam has given us our full rights as women in every sense, and full equality with every other human being. In the Qur'an God says that he has given the same dignity to every human being—it does not depend on whether you are male or female, or whether you are Muslim or from another religion, each of us has the same worth.

 

What do you expect and hope for in the future?

 

Things will get much, much worse. It is written that we will suffer like this until near the end.

 

Our hope comes from knowing that Jesus will come back and will remove all injustice from the earth, and at last the race of mankind will be free to live in peace and equality.

 

What do you believe should be the political outcome for Palestine?

 

If only they would all go back where they came from, we could live in peace in our homes and land again.

 

We can never live with them; if someone has killed your children, can you accept them as a neighbor?

 

We already live with them, of course we can in the future.

 

We cannot live with them, we must have a state, and they must have a state. About all the refugees who have their homes and lands in Israel, I don't know……..

 

We can live with them in one state, the refugees must be given back their homes and their land.

 

If we have an Islamic state on all of Palestine, it is the only way we will be able to live together, us and them, because Islam is the only system where equality between people of different religions is protected.

 

Do you think negotiations or armed struggle is the best strategy at this time?

 

Of course, if we could get our rights back without violence, that would be the best way. If negotiations ever worked, then we should use that instead of armed struggle, but they have never produced anything. We have to keep fighting to protect our land and our community. How could it be right to do nothing when daily they are attacking our lives and our land?

 

As a woman would you participate in armed struggle?

 

I admire women who do, but I myself don't think I'm capable of it. My contribution is to study and be a good mother to my children.

 

No, I don't think women should carry weapons.

 

Yes! It would be a great honor to fight for my country!

 

Yes! How I wish we had the chance to be trained as soldiers like all the Israeli women are. I am not married yet, but I hope that one day I will have a son who will give his life for our country to be free. The Americans, Europeans and Israelis place more value on the blood of their dogs and cats than they do on the blood of Palestinians. None of us can ever forget the sight of little Huda screaming for her father on the beach of Gaza, throwing herself on the sand next to his dead body over and over. No one in the world has expressed their outrage, or even sorrow, to us about these atrocities against us. They care deeply about the Mundial, and Huda's agony is an interruption, a distraction, from the soccer score. Our blood is so, so cheap to the world, and Israeli blood is so valuable. They do not see our humanity at all.

 

How do you find your sense of your own humanity, when all the world is telling you your life, your death, your blood is worthless?

 

When it comes down to that, we know that God sees us, even if we are suffering in an Israeli torture chamber and no one in our family knows if where we are or if we are alive or dead, we know that God sees us and knows our value, our humanity. We belong to him, and in that is our worth, and our hope, our fates are in his hands and our lives are very precious to him, no matter how worthless they are to our brothers and sisters in the human race, and in the end, that is what matters. We know who we are. Our lives, our deaths, our suffering, our hopes, our disappointment, are not insignificant. Yesterday I met a new appointee from the German government in Jerusalem, a young guy with an American accent. He was happy that Hamas and Fatah had agreed on the Prisoners' Document. Great, we've gotten Hamas to recognize Israel, he said. Now we just have to get them to renounce armed struggle, and then get rid of these ideas of an Islamic state. The problem is when we bring democracy to the middle east, we always have to deal with the challenge of making sure there is a secular state when so many people want an Islamic state. (Jewish states, apparently, are just dandy.) What these Palestinians just don't understand, he said, is that armed struggle won't get them anywhere. Haven't they learned anything, after all these years? It's really hurting their image in the international community. Well, I said sarcastically, since you understand this so well, and none of the Palestinians have been able to grasp it, maybe you should explain it to them then. Oh, I am, every Palestinian I meet, he said with sincerity.

 

And what is that dazzling offer that Europe will extend, if Palestinians promise to sit on their hands and open their mouths? In exchange for your dignity, what? Maybe longlife, lifelong food rations? Maybe the chance to clean toilets in Israel, and the dream that your grandchildren could do the same?

 

I have not been here too long, but it is long enough to be sure of one thing: It is the Europeans, the Israelis, and the Americans who fail to grasp the central truth, after all these decades of trying to finetune the catastrophe they have engineered in Palestine: these women and men and children, who carry their heads so high, know who they are. They are prepared to sacrifice their lives, but they are not prepared to sacrifice their dignity. While the world discusses the moral or strategic aspects of armed resistance, there is no confusion about these issues here. Undefended, dignity—and the land—would be lost, and death would be better. With or without your permission, they will continue to fight.

 

(This letter was received by NECDP, New England Committee to Defend Palestine)

Roots of conflict with Europeans are older than the existence of modern Israel. If we think only short term without referral to the past, we miss the resonances that inflame Islamic resentment. The immediate problem, however, comes from the refusal of powerful people in the Islamic world to accord the right of Israel to its existence. Israel's national identity is no more precarious than is the existence of many modern Islamic states. We are all living the aftermath of European colonialism.

I do not accept that the response of Israel to the attacks on its soldiers is excessive or inappropriate. The enemies of Israel provoked the violence. They are responsible for what Israel has had to do to protect its interests. One has to realize that the so-called innocent objects of Israeli attacks live among the monsters that attack Israel. Those people need to bring the matter to the source of their problem--extremists who will not accept the fact of Israel.

Part of what is happening involves a shift in the relationships of different branches of Islam. Some Islamic groups need to realize that they are much closer to Israel than to their Muslim brothers. It is in the interest of most Muslims to accord Israel a right to exist.

However, excellent arguments that might undermine some of what I advocate exist. For example, I highly recommend that one read The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk. (Knopf, 2005). Clearly, we must resolve the just complaints of the Palestinians.

At this moment, that is beside the point. This is a chance to eliminate a terrorist organization and a chance to call the bluff of the thugs in Iran.

Israel has always sought to negotiate with Palestinians. Remember Israel's founders bought property in Palestine. They sought to create a state that tolerated Jewish, Christian, and Muslim people. The reaction of Palestinian extremists against this aim ignited the problems that have inflamed the region. The Arab League rejected the United Nations 1947 Partition Plan that Israel tentatively accepted. The problem today stems from that fateful rejection by Arab leaders.

In the current matter, Hezbollah's Sheik Nasrallah deliberately provoked the crisis. Ehud Olmert may or may not be a damm fool for responding as he has. Regardless, Israel has every right to react to kidnappings and missile attacks. As for Israel attacking civilians, remember that Hezbollah places its thousands of missiles in unmarked homes and garages.

Resolution of the immediate and current problems in Lebanon depends entirely upon the disarming of Hezbollah and the elimination of Sheik Nasrallah. Hezbollah nurtures the likes of Ehud Olmert.

Syria has recently massacred some 10,000 to 20,000 of its people in Hama. I believe that most of those people were civilians. That is something any humane and just person does abhor and condemn. Syria supports the thug Sheik Nasrallah and his gang of thugs Nezbollah.

I am concerned that Israel might over react to provocations. However, thus far, Israel has acted moderately in response to missile attacks and kidnappings.

I doubt you'll find many here who agree with you. The NIV is a conservative translation that actually manipulates the text of the Holy Scriptures to say what they want. For example, you know all those parts of the NT where Paul talks about sexual practices and it says Homosexual or gay in the NIV? Turns out there's no word that is anything close to gay or homosexual in the origianl languages the NT was written in, so how did they pull that off? As for the KJV, I read it primarily for the Psalms, most of the Psalms I memorize are the KJV version simply because they sound more beautiful to me than any other translation. However I can't make heads nor tales of most of it, so it is not my primary Bible. Not to mention the fact that it has similar problems to the NIV, except in the case of the KJV, verses appear in the english that don't exist anywhere in the original texts.

My purely lay opinion accords with your assessment of the New International Version. I think that it has a deliberate evangelical bias. It seems to be the favorite translation of many people in my church. At least, many of them seem to use it. However, they also use other popular translations such as the New Living Translation, which is quite easy to read, and various translations from the American Bible Society. I think that I am the only member of my congregation who uses the Revised English Version, though I most often read the New Revised Standard Version at church. Some members use the New American Bible. I was surprised in a class I attended at the local Unitarian-Universalist congregation that many students in the group I attended used the old Living Translation and the King James Version. The students seemed to have used these in their past church experiences. The pastor used an Oxford Study Bible Revised Study Version. The English Standard Version is an evangelical version based upon the Revised Standard Version but it is a modified version of that translation. I am not certain how closely it follows the RSV. I have not made a verse by verse comparison. It is a good version to use when you talk with evangelicals. Some very conservative folks endorse it. I think that the differences have to do with reading the Old Testament backwards from the New Testament. The Complete Gospels edited by Robert Miller from the Westar Institute is an excellent resource that I am not certain anyone here has mentioned. There are several study editions of the Revised Standard Version. One recent one is the New Intepreter's Study Bible. A new edition of The Harper Collins Study Bible is due for release in August. The Oxford Study Bible New Revised Standard Version remains an excellent choice for lay readers (in my humble lay opinion).

I can increase size for avatars... will do...

Thank you.

Excellent modern translations of scripture are the individual translations of Torah and other Hebrew scripture by both Robert Alter and Everett Fox. Cynthia Ozick's excellent essay in The Din in the Head explores and describes the power of Alter's translation.

Yes, that is the format I use. The size is smaller than the posted limit.

This topic intrigues me.I have feelings about it, but I want to listen.

Hi,

 

I consider myself a very liberal Christian who believes there is more than one spiritual pathway.

 

I was brought up to attend a Pentecostalist church as a child where I was spiritually abused by the hell-fire and end times scenarios, which gave me constant nightmares! When I left home to marry, aged 19, I kicked God out of my life until I hit 50 six years ago. I am now exploring my spirituality once more. I have many more doubts than certainties!

I hope to hear more from you about your explorations.

I want to comment on this matter and I will. However, I am not up to doing that this evening. I believe one can be conservative politically and progressive in faith, but I say that with conditions.

I have no problem with being called a liberal Christian, though I am not certain what that means. I am still a political conservative in some ways—I considered myself a liberal Republican for 40 years. That put me in the two percent minority of that party. I left the Republican Party after they stole to United States presidential election in 2001.

 

I mention this because some people confuse the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as we use them in different contexts. Any general abstract nouns can cause problems. The same applied to “postmodern.”

 

I really like the notion of redeeming the Enlightenment. I take the critiques of critics such as Horkheimer and Adorno or many Catholic commentators seriously. I am simply not all that impressed that postmodernism is yet that much of a change. Foucault’s work does impress me.

Liberal connotes modernism to me. Progressive connotes postmodernims.

I really am radical in my politics and religion. I think about them in terms of domination and subjection—in economic terms. Many of those who talk the way I do had Marxist backgrounds. The only problem is that Marxists build their theories on a logical fallacy. You cannot assume as they do that something and its negation are simultaneously true.

The argument against that objection is that things are rarely as clearly distinctive as we assume that they are. There are ranges of gray. However, if you say that A and not A are simultaneously true, you can logically prove anything is true from those propositions. That is, of course, nonsense. That is the foundation of Marxism.

Here's another word in"Christianese" that is problematic . That word is"Lord". Lord ,is actually an English word that refers to the Baron of a feudal manor. This creates the image of Jesus as a benevolent dictator.

 

In the synoptic gospels Jesus only refers to himself as "the son of man" which (I guess ) simply means " the human one".

MOW

I think of Christianity in terms of important symbols. We are in an interval where we have to create symbols adequate for the problems we face. I think of religion more now in terms of domination and liberation. The theologian Paula Cooey has a new book coming in August that focuses on these matters. Gordon Kaufman writes about them as he has over a long and fruitful career.

I like what you have to say-- I especially like your closing, "Christ in you, may s/he fill thy spirit"

 

ebloomer

I have no problem with being called a liberal Christian, though I am not certain what that means. I am still a political conservative in some ways—I considered myself a liberal Republican for 40 years. That put me in the two percent minority of that party. I left the Republican Party after they stole to United States presidential election in 2001.

I mention this because some people confuse the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as we use them in different contexts. Any general abstract nouns can cause problems. The same applied to “postmodern.”

I really like the notion of redeeming the Enlightenment. I take the critiques of critics such as Horkheimer and Adorno or many Catholic commentators seriously. I am simply not all that impressed that postmodernism is yet that much of a change. Foucault’s work does impress me.

I have no problem with being called a liberal Christian, though I am not certain what that means. I am still a political conservative in some ways—I considered myself a liberal Republican for 40 years. That put me in the two percent minority of that party. I left the Republican Party after they stole to United States presidential election in 2001.

 

I mention this because some people confuse the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as we use them in different contexts. Any general abstract nouns can cause problems. The same applied to “postmodern.”

 

I really like the notion of redeeming the Enlightenment. I take the critiques of critics such as Horkheimer and Adorno or many Catholic commentators seriously. I am simply not all that impressed that postmodernism is yet that much of a change. Foucault’s work does impress me.

Liberal connotes modernism to me. Progressive connotes postmodernims.

Welcome Ted -

 

CTS is my favorite seminary here in the Hoosier State - hope you enjoyed ur time there.

Welcome to the board!

Carl

The interval when I was at CTS was a difficult moment. That was 1976-68. The school was excellent. I was out-of-place there. I have an immensely high regard for the professors and classmates I enjoyed in the city. For a short time, I worked as an observer in then Mayor Lugar's office. He was (and is) a fine man.

Thank you for the welcome.

.

The interval when I was at CTS was a difficult moment. That was 1976-68. The school was excellent. I was out-of-place there. I have an immensely high regard for the professors and classmates I enjoyed in the city. For a short time, I worked as an observer in then Mayor Lugar's office. He was (and is) a fine man.

 

Thank you for the welcome.

.

Image of me about a month after I left Indianapolis in 1968:

Ted:

 

REALLY like your avatar ! Welcome !

 

flow....

Thank you! It is an old image. I stopped letting anyone photograph me a few years ago!

http://tedmichaelmorgan.blogspot.com/

Thank you! It is an old image. I stopped letting anyone photograph me a few years ago!

 

http://tedmichaelmorgan.blogspot.com/

My Webpage

I like the funnel and the steps leading to a deeper and deeper spiritual experience.

 

I can also see a progressive TV show that is fast paced, stimulating and entertaining, very eclectic to arouse interest.

I do not see the depth developing from the theatrics. I have not experienced that happening.

This is starting to feel like church…we had a sermon, a hymn and now Bible study.

 

Again I would like to think big. A large church can do what a small church can not. If we want to learn from those evangelical churches that are growing up around us we can look at a common formula that they use. They use the main Sunday service to attract people and fund the organization. In addition some use the TV to attract and fund. The formula is very organized but the idea is to bring people through the door and once they are there you find a filtering process that leads to where the “real” Church meets in much smaller groups. It is in these smaller groups that religious transformation usually takes place (not that many people are not “moved” some by the Sunday service). There is an “umbrella” group that sponsors these new church starts and they obviously help with the funding and organization. Much of the draw is to “meet needs” and then later talk about saving souls. They really think that they are doing good on Sunday by “meeting needs” as well as doing “true” Church during the week by saving souls.

 

Can we transfer this model to the Progressive Christian Church? It may go like this. The large Sunday service could be “centered” by the music. You could alternate Sundays by the type of music or mix the music in one service. The music has to be excellent in quality. Yes this is entertainment but at the same time you build into the service what it means to “religiously know”. You add some ritual, some silent contemplation practices and other languages designed to show what it means to “religiously know” but really, if truth be told, the congregant comes away being mostly entertained. However, while there the congregant sees the opportunity “to go deeper” within in small groups that meet throughout the week.

 

Here is an example of one such small group:

Mission Statement: To meet in small groups and share music that speaks to our souls.

Practice: Listen for and identify those songs and artists that speak to your soul and then have weekly get togethers for wine/cheese and share. Leadership would rotate as each person is given a chance to share an artist or a collage of music with a theme.

Method: Start the gathering with lighting a common candle that is passed from meeting to meeting. Repeat the same blessing each time which would bless the group and invite grace to happen. Then ask that people prepare themselves to listen to music. Do an exercise to quiet the mind, concentrate on breathing,etc. Then music is played. A few minutes of silence follows each piece. People can jot notes about what struck them. Someone may ask that one piece be repeated. Then share what is “religious” about the music. Share what metaphors are raised by the music and where those metaphors take you. If there is a story in the music try to see if you are a character in the story and see where that takes you. Play the next piece and repeat the process. Then share some wine and cheese (or home made bread and juice) (or if you are really sinful strawberry shortcake). Gather to close with a song that can be easily sung by all and has the potential for being your group’s theme song.

 

This would be an “entry” small group. Other groups would go “deeper” and pick up what people here have been talking within this message board about what leads to real religious transformation.

 

I think that some version of my idea with music can make you large so that you can organize and fund while at the same time making you small so you can be effective. The point is that throughout the Church program there has to be some Primary message that ties the group together both in large and small groups. My suggestion is the “Religious Knowing” is that common thread.

In my current congregation, I am already where you point. There has to be depth. Otherwise, we are just into the next fad.

No, I don't necessarily mean Bibles rewritten in PC lingo per se, but I have seen numerous study Bibles out there but none of them ever seem to be put together by liberal Chrisitians. (I currently have 3, the student Bible, The Women's Bible II, and the Couples' Bible)

 

Do any of the more liberal denominations put out their own study Bibles, or are there any generic non-denominational liberal study Bibles in existence?

 

Thanks!

Hmm... I'd say that the most "liberal" study Bible that I'm aware of is the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) Study Bible. It's really more academic than anything, but it clearly stands against a more literalistic/fundamentalist reading of the Good Book. Another excellent resource, albeit far larger and more extensive, to consider is the New Interpreter's Bible Commentary series. This is available in either 12 books (like an encyclopedia) or on CD. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure that they've just come out with a 1 volume New Interpreter's Study Bible. Can anybody verify this?

The Access Bible is an excellent beginning study Bible. You made an excellent choice.

The Oxford Study Bible NRSV and The Oxford Study Bible REB are excellent English language study Bibles. I am not aware of them being progressive. They usually take a middle-of-the road view that is a consensus of scholarship. Some of the commentators are progressive—Richard Horsley in the NRSV. The old Oxford Study Bible RSV is a great resource. I very much like the Oxford Study Bible JPS. I use the Oxford Study NAB. The New Interpreters Study Bible NRSV helps pastors avoid making faux pas.

I am enjoying this tread. Again, I recall this line of thinking from the experimental congregation of which I was a part in 1970-71. I find my current congregation moving in directions akin to what you envision.