Jump to content
IGNORED

Duggars by the Dozen 43: One in Jail, Another Made Bail, and a Senate Election Fail


HerNameIsBuffy

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Phyllis_Stein said:

The problem with Jessa is that, while she has native intelligence, she has not evolved in any way. She is stuck in place. I think the blanket training has been most effective on her. All of her grown sisters have, to some degree, branched out, and adjusted their lives and personas with the passing of time. Jessa is exactly where she always has been. Not even her hair and wardrobe has changed much over time. That makes her boring as he!!. 

The other 3 sisters have husbands who influenced their evolution ( for better or worse) while Ben has been absorbed into the Duggar borg. Jessa is driving that train towards the only direction she’s familiar with. 

  • Upvote 21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Italiangirl said:

What @AprilQuilt said is right, but I remember there was also some problem with the bible class/bible requirement that sprung from the fact that it wasn't KJV only. Plus the whole social problem, Tim probably come out pretty awkward regarding the other students since he never talked about meeting anyone there. He was suddenly back at home for Thanksgiving or Christmas (can't remember now) and the while college adventure was never talked again. 

Yeah I think Tim's college issue was probably a combo of things - lack of money (they could afford to take the whole family across country and back to drop him off, and to decorate his room with tchotchkes, but then he had to beg for $10 to buy a book once he was there), lack of preparation (educationally as well as having to live on and follow a schedule), being super tied to mama (didn't she speak to him on the phone for hours nightly?), being an awkward self-rightous difficult guy, and him being unable or unwilling to tolerate even the slightest challenge to the KJV only fundieness he was raised with.

I saw the Maxwells being mentioned as anti-college, but Anna and Mary are actually living away at college right now (and seem to be having loads of fun), and Sarah has moved out into her own place without the benefit of a husband! They are even wearing pants!

OK, so it's Appalachian Bible College. But still. They're away from home, hanging out with non-family members, and wearing clothes that while still modest, would have made Steve weep a couple years ago.

  • Upvote 20
  • I Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to a fairly conservative BIble college for a year out of high school. I remember one guy there talking about KJV only and laughing because I thought he was joking. Even at a conservative place like Moody this type of fundie is rare.

Edited by neuroticcat
  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw this on Reddit today and it made me happy...

As I asked in my comment over there, I thought non-profits had to publicly publish financials yearly, does anyone know why they've been able to get away with not doing it since 2018.

Going to try to post this in the main Bates thread before work consumes me again (corporate is here, and I am so sick of smiling at people I cannot tell you!)  

 

  • Upvote 10
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, neuroticcat said:

I went to a fairly conservative BIble college for a year out of high school. I remember one guy there talking about KJV only and laughing because I thought he was joking. Even at a conservative place like Moody this type of fundie is rare.

My fundy lite family has known a disproportionate amount of people who went to Moody and they were all the NIV or some kind of version with modern language.  

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/13/2022 at 8:51 AM, neuroticcat said:

I went to a fairly conservative BIble college for a year out of high school. I remember one guy there talking about KJV only and laughing because I thought he was joking. Even at a conservative place like Moody this type of fundie is rare.

A few years back I was living in a small town, attending my Baptist church twice on Sundays and hosting a weekly women’s bible study where we met at my house during the day while our husbands were at work and ate home baked snacks and read our bibles and prayed together while my then-toddler children were entertained by one of the other women’s homeschooled tweens. One week our pastor was sick and one of the elders ran the Sunday night service. A woman arrived who was passing through town and sat in on the service, then I chatted to her afterwards and she mentioned that she had met a man at the local KFC who said he was a pastor but she “didn’t think he had the word of God” and she was concerned he was leading people astray. He hadn’t said what church he led, but from her descriptions I figured out it was likely our pastor. One of the other women in the church invited her along to the bible study at my house that week, and she came with her KJV and objected to us reading NIV or other translations. When it had all finished and the rest of them went home, she sat in my living room and I was painfully polite and hospitable while she tried to convert me.

It seems that on the spectrum of fundamentalism, fundies will try to convert people close but not close *enough* to their end of the spectrum, rather than just non-Christians. My Baptist pastor who had won theology awards at bible college did not have the word of God because he used different translations 🙄🙄

  • Upvote 13
  • Rufus Bless 1
  • WTF 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Smee said:

A few years back I was living in a small town, attending my Baptist church twice on Sundays and hosting a weekly women’s bible study where we met at my house during the day while our husbands were at work and ate home baked snacks and read our bibles and prayed together while my then-toddler children were entertained by one of the other women’s homeschooled tweens. One week our pastor was sick and one of the elders ran the Sunday night service. A woman arrived who was passing through town and sat in on the service, then I chatted to her afterwards and she mentioned that she had met a man at the local KFC who said he was a pastor but she “didn’t think he had the word of God” and she was concerned he was leading people astray. He hadn’t said what church he led, but from her descriptions I figured out it was likely our pastor. One of the other women in the church invited her along to the bible study at my house that week, and she came with her KJV and objected to us reading NIV or other translations. When it had all finished and the rest of them went home, she sat in my living room and I was painfully polite and hospitable while she tried to convert me.

It seems that on the spectrum of fundamentalism, fundies will try to convert people close but not close *enough* to their end of the spectrum, rather than just non-Christians. My Baptist pastor who had won theology awards at bible college did not have the word of God because he used different translations 🙄🙄

I love the KJV as literature, but I find it hilarious that it is considered to be the “God-inspired” translation.

How do they know that this is the right translation?  Whose idea was it, and why? 

Did an angel come down from above and tell some religious leader that the KJV was the “chosen text”? 😇   

  • Upvote 2
  • I Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

Did an angel come down from above and tell some religious leader that the KJV was the “chosen text”? 😇   

Especially in the light of what is known about King James, that would genuinely surprise me 😂.

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
  • I Agree 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so this may be really stupid, but…how do these KJV only people think Bibles in other languages work? Like, I get the “translate from KJV version”, but, um, they know it’s not a word for word translation, right? Cause that’s not how translation works. So a Spanish translated Bible isn’t just KJV in Spanish. Or is it? Is that even grammatically possible?

Honestly, this KJV only thing blows my mind because the idea that it’s literally the only correct wording of the concepts they believe it to purport is so flimsy. They certainly don’t speak in KJV English, they don’t preach in KJV English. Odds are they don’t even really understand KJV English, so they’re just getting concepts, anyway, that they’re understanding by translating them into thoughts in modern English …which would seem to be the same thing that's going on in other translations, but just skipping the “pretending to understand the intricacies of Elizabethan English” part by a bunch of people who would probably admit they can’t understand Shakespeare.

  • Upvote 27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hera said:

Okay, so this may be really stupid, but…how do these KJV only people think Bibles in other languages work? Like, I get the “translate from KJV version”, but, um, they know it’s not a word for word translation, right? Cause that’s not how translation works. So a Spanish translated Bible isn’t just KJV in Spanish. Or is it? Is that even grammatically possible?

Honestly, this KJV only thing blows my mind because the idea that it’s literally the only correct wording of the concepts they believe it to purport is so flimsy. They certainly don’t speak in KJV English, they don’t preach in KJV English. Odds are they don’t even really understand KJV English, so they’re just getting concepts, anyway, that they’re understanding by translating them into thoughts in modern English …which would seem to be the same thing that's going on in other translations, but just skipping the “pretending to understand the intricacies of Elizabethan English” part by a bunch of people who would probably admit they can’t understand Shakespeare.

Some fundies claim that the KJV was divinely inspired and other translations weren’t.  If any of them were sufficiently literate, I wouldn’t put it past them to translate the KJV into Spanish and any other language they have potential converts in. It boggles the mind.

If you remember that protestantism has an important part of its roots in the push to make the bible available in the vernacular (rather than Latin) their attachment to the KJV is particularly ironic.
 

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The KJV only fundie who tried to convert me more or less said because it was the first and divinely inspired translation we didn’t need any more after that and it was wrong for modern translators to change it because of that verse at the end of Revelation about not adding to or taking away from God’s word. Presumably she would have been ok with Spanish speakers using the first Spanish translation? But she also had some convoluted reasoning as to why the Geneva bible and Bishops bible didn’t “count” and KJV was the “original” English translation.

This gives an overview of the reasoning behind KJV-only churches in America: https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/flanders-whykjv.html

  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Smee said:

The KJV only fundie who tried to convert me more or less said because it was the first and divinely inspired translation we didn’t need any more after that and it was wrong for modern translators to change it because of that verse at the end of Revelation about not adding to or taking away from God’s word. Presumably she would have been ok with Spanish speakers using the first Spanish translation? But she also had some convoluted reasoning as to why the Geneva bible and Bishops bible didn’t “count” and KJV was the “original” English translation.

This gives an overview of the reasoning behind KJV-only churches in America: https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/flanders-whykjv.html

They use it because the language is far less intuitive to the average parishioner and so they just accept the interpretation of the one in authority.

Works in tech, too.  If you want someone to just sign off on what you want them to do you use higher level jargon they don't understand.  If you want them to understand the concepts you're talking about you communicate at the level of your audience.

Edited by HerNameIsBuffy
  • Upvote 18
  • I Agree 2
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in my severely evangelical period, I heard Dr. Harold Rawlings speak, and have read his book, Trial by Fire (on the history of getting the Bible translated to English).  He also had a collection of rare/antiquated Bibles. 

 

These dingbat fundies could stand learning this stuff and get off the KJV only kick.
 

http://www.haroldrawlings.com/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/13/2022 at 9:32 AM, HerNameIsBuffy said:

My fundy lite family has known a disproportionate amount of people who went to Moody and they were all the NIV or some kind of version with modern language.  

I went to a Nazarene college in the 80's abd one of my professors had been a translator on the NIV. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m going to post these two memes which I believe contain truths. As a child, I remember hearing about the Dead Sea Scrolls and thinking, well, those were written by people, not God. It was very confusing to me why they were considered the word of God. I never asked anyone about it, but thus began the seeds of doubt in my mind. Decades later, I had an epiphany and realized that my thoughts as a child were not wrong.

 

 

DBD2FE09-9E82-4DFF-98D4-BF1EFCE8BDCD.jpeg

54B98447-98CF-44CB-97B1-1B4160A43F55.jpeg

Edited by Cam
  • Upvote 24
  • Thank You 4
  • Love 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Bible is remarkably consistent given the massive numbers of texts collected over the years with relatively minor inconsistencies. But any sort of conversation about translating anything requires a frank discussion about the interpretive nature of translation and the way vast cultural and linguistic differences impact understanding. It’s why good seminary training should also include linguistic and historical studies and honest discussion about things that are unclear.
 

It’s interesting to me that most cults will insist they have the “right” translation (JW’s, KJV only, the “Local Church,” etc) and everyone else is essentially apostate heretics. It’s a very effective method of ideological control. 

  • Upvote 16
  • Love 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@neuroticcat I can’t upvote you enough.

One 1631 KJV told people to commit adultery. It’s full of mistranslations (satyrs and unicorns, anyone?). I won’t reinvent the wheel but this is a good article from a Christian POV:

https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today
 

and this is good too: 

https://www.ranker.com/list/ways-the-king-james-bible-is-wrong/genevieve-carlton

Edited by adidas
Autocorrect
  • Upvote 3
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my literature professors in college said translation is just as much of an art as writing the original text. 

It doesn't really have anything to do with one translation of the Bible being better than the other but does indicate that the person doing the translation will definitely put their personal touches in a translated text.

  • Upvote 5
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Translataion is difficult. You'll know this if you are bilingual and people ask you to 'say this in x language'. Simple factual text is hard, becuase nuance is easily lost, or accidentally added in, literary test full of metaphor and allegory is very difficult, so no wonder translating from lots of texts and documents and other translations can be done in lots of different ways. 

  • Upvote 9
  • I Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, medimus said:

Translataion is difficult. You'll know this if you are bilingual and people ask you to 'say this in x language'. Simple factual text is hard, becuase nuance is easily lost, or accidentally added in, literary test full of metaphor and allegory is very difficult, so no wonder translating from lots of texts and documents and other translations can be done in lots of different ways. 

Yes! Whenever I speak with a JW or someone who is sure they have the exact right understanding, I wonder if they’ve just never studied another language or haven’t been able to make the connection. No translation can really ever be one-to-one.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

Of course Hannah Wissmann and her sisters are at Renee’s bridal today. Fundies are so predictable. 

She bet she gets a huge discount.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually took some classes in both biblical Hebrew and Koiné (the old Greek that the New Testament is originally written in) when I went to university way back the. (I'm a teacher, religion is my main subject). I just learned some basics, but it was enough to make me laugh so hard at the "KJV was good enough for Jesus, so it's what I'll stick to" crowd. 

Two examples: 

Biblical Hebrew doesn't have any vowels, for the most part. That's the simple explanation why the word JHWH is interpreted as both Jahve, Jehova, and several other versions. And it makes some words impossible to understand for us, several thousand years later. How do you know if HT means hat, hot, hut or hit? 

There also is no word in Koiné for "homosexual". That's just a modern translation. The word arsenokoitai is made up of two other words: arsen (man) and koites (to lie down). Martin Luther, who most of todays evangelicals respect, translated it as "Knabenschänder"  - a pedophile. 

Those who are really serious about studying biblical texts - and those that I actually listen to - are people who take the time and effort to learn the language. They also learn about the political and social situation around that time, to understand the context that these parts of the Bible were written in. I have zero respect for KJV-only, American Bible humping pastors. 

  • Upvote 16
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 8
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2022 at 10:14 PM, HerNameIsBuffy said:

They use it because the language is far less intuitive to the average parishioner and so they just accept the interpretation of the one in authority.

Works in tech, too.  If you want someone to just sign off on what you want them to do you use higher level jargon they don't understand.  If you want them to understand the concepts you're talking about you communicate at the level of your audience.

totally. And it's ironic because translating the Bible into English was done specifically to sidestep this mystification, to give the common (literate) person the means of accessing and understanding the holy text themselves. But nowadays the insistence on KJV only is DEFINITELY a way of obfuscating, and shutting out people who don't have big vocabularies or sophisticated reading habits from comprehending and questioning.

I say all this, I think the KJV Bible has many beautiful and evocative passages. My work at the moment is to do with 1400s England and it's really bringing home how much the KJV defines the Bible for me, so to work in a period where they don't have that same cultural touchstone on a word level is really interesting. We do however have the Wycliffe/Wycliffite Bible which predates the KJV by over 200 years - at its time when the translation was regarded as heretical. It was associated with Lollardy/class rebellion (especially bc law was so rooted in the Bible, that if a man could read the Bible for himself he could start to understand the law of the land too, and perhaps weaponise it) but actually most of the ruling classes owned it, read it, and appreciated it. I've started doing side-by-side readings of KJV and Wycliffe's Bible and in fact many of the phrases and concepts we know from KJV also feature in Wycliffe's, and KJV owes it a huge debt... although of course Wycliffe's Bible was condemned by the church, and the KJV somehow ordained by God?

  • Upvote 6
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AprilQuilt said:

totally. And it's ironic because translating the Bible into English was done specifically to sidestep this mystification, to give the common (literate) person the means of accessing and understanding the holy text themselves. But nowadays the insistence on KJV only is DEFINITELY a way of obfuscating, and shutting out people who don't have big vocabularies or sophisticated reading habits from comprehending and questioning.

I say all this, I think the KJV Bible has many beautiful and evocative passages. My work at the moment is to do with 1400s England and it's really bringing home how much the KJV defines the Bible for me, so to work in a period where they don't have that same cultural touchstone on a word level is really interesting. We do however have the Wycliffe/Wycliffite Bible which predates the KJV by over 200 years - at its time when the translation was regarded as heretical. It was associated with Lollardy/class rebellion (especially bc law was so rooted in the Bible, that if a man could read the Bible for himself he could start to understand the law of the land too, and perhaps weaponise it) but actually most of the ruling classes owned it, read it, and appreciated it. I've started doing side-by-side readings of KJV and Wycliffe's Bible and in fact many of the phrases and concepts we know from KJV also feature in Wycliffe's, and KJV owes it a huge debt... although of course Wycliffe's Bible was condemned by the church, and the KJV somehow ordained by God?

Well, the Wycliffe Bible, as you know, was condemned by the Roman Catholic Church, while the King James Bible was commissioned by the head of the Church of England after the Reformation.  The Roman Catholics almost certainly condemned the KJV (if not specifically, then generically).

If any fundie happens to have heard of the Wycliffe Bible, I daresay they figure the Wycliffe Bible, though not divinely inspired like the KJV, was nevertheless a Good Thing since the RCs condemned it. 😉

My impression, however, is that most fundies in the US think that the KJV is the “first English translation.”  That is nonsense, of course.   It overlooks the Coverdale Bible and the  Matthews-Tyndale and finally the so-called “Great Bible.”  All of these came before. 

  • Upvote 7
  • Thank You 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HerNameIsBuffy locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.