Your address will show here +12 34 56 78

Wal-Mart Sells Bible Helping Planned Parenthood-Funding Komen

This is the perfect headline to grab a wide readership of a good section of the Christian conservative community. Woe to Walmart (for selling Bibles) Woe to the Susan G. Komen Foundation (for supposedly giving money to Planned Parenthood) Throw in a mention of Planned Parenthood and you’ve got yourself a story. Throw in how Lifeway is not selling the Bibles anymore, and it’s a homerun. OK… let me throw out some names as well. The copyright owner of the NIV version of the Bible is Zondervan… owned by HarperCollins, owned by Rupert Murdoch. Zondervan publishes Rob Bell and Shane Clairborne.  (Should be case closed there for many). The same company that owns the NIV also owns the Simpsons and Family Guy. In today’s world… it’s nearly impossible to buy something from someone who doesn’t condone something you’re against. And all the lines are blurred.  Why the Susan G. Komen Foundation is selling Bibles (when they’re an organization about breast cancer) is beyond me.  My guess is that it’s purely a fund-raiser for them. So… do these things affect your buying decisions? Would you buy a Susan Komen Bible? Who would you NOT purchase from because of their political or religious beliefs? Todd  

Houston’s First Baptist Church pastor Gregg Matte announced at the start of this year that he will no longer be preaching from the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. The NIV has been the most familiar, best-selling Bible for decades; however, some Baptist pastors like Matte now say the NIV is no longer accurate after updates were made to the translation last year, including the adoption of gender-neutral language. The Southern Baptist Convention denounced the updated NIV last summer and asked its popular bookstore affiliate, LifeWay, to stop selling the 2011 version. Individual Southern Baptist congregations operate autonomously and may use whatever Bible translation they would like. The biggest issue with the new NIV was its incorporation of gender-neutral pronouns in places where the word-for-word translation would render a male pronoun. That was part of Matte’s concerns over accuracy, said Steven Murray, spokesman for Houston’s First. The pastor believes the updated translation has gotten further away from the original biblical texts in other examples, including using “servants” instead of “slaves” in the New Testament. Starting in 2012, Houston’s First will use the lesser-known and fairly new Holman Christian Standard Bible instead of the NIV during lessons from the pulpit and Bible studies. Members and guests are still welcome to use whatever Bible version they’d like. More here. What do you think? A bunch of hoopla about nothing, or a good decision based on truth? Would love to hear your thoughts.

In the old translation of the world’s most popular Bible, John the Evangelist declares: “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar.” Make that “brother or sister” in a new translation that includes more gender-neutral language and is drawing criticism from some conservatives who argue the changes can alter the theological message. The 2011 translation of the New International Version Bible, or NIV, does not change pronouns referring to God, who remains “He” and “the Father.” But it does aim to avoid using “he” or “him” as the default reference to an unspecified person. The NIV Bible is used by many of the largest Protestant faiths. The translation comes from an independent group of biblical scholars that has been meeting yearly since 1965 to discuss advances in biblical scholarship and changes in English usage. Before the new translation even hit stores, it drew opposition from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, an organization that believes women should submit to their husbands in the home and only men can hold some leadership roles in the church. The council decided it would not endorse the new version because the changes alter “the theological direction and meaning of the text,” according to a statement. Similar concerns led the Southern Baptist Convention to reject the NIV’s previous translation in 2005. At issue is how to translate pronouns that apply to both genders in the ancient Greek and Hebrew texts but have traditionally been translated using masculine forms in English. via New Bible draws critics of gender-neutral language. So… do YOU have a beef with the NIV2011?  I haven’t heard as much about it this time as last.  Maybe Rob Bell took all the fight out of people on this one.  What do you think?  Will you use the NIV2011 in YOUR church?