NO! I Agree With The Bayly Brothers!

[debrand]

I need to wash my brain with bleach.

The brothers make the point that the word, slave in the bible should not be translated servant. Apparently, someone doesn't like the negative connotations that come with the word, slave so they want to update the bible.

Here are a couple responses to questions asked under the post of the ESV committee's video. First the question, then my response. (TB)

Is every use of the word "slave" now going to be changed to "servant"?

No, they are doing this gradually. Words indicating the ownership of men will be removed from Scripture at about the same rate as words indicating the federal headship of Adam (male inclusives such as 'adam' and 'adelphoi'). As mentioned above, footnotes often show...

where the decay is setting in.

...it sounds to me not that they're trying to change the meaning of the Bible, but trying to use words that will best bring to mind in the modern reader, what the original reader would have thought of.

Actually, not. Here are the money quotes.Those opposed to removing the Greek 'doulos' from their English text say:

"It you look at the dictionaries, it's quite clear that the person is owned... I think we're getting confused and reluctant to use the word 'slave' because we think that because there is the word 'slaves,' that the Old Testament approves of slavery. And I think it's very much better to say that the Old Testament is trying to improve the life of slaves, rather than pretending they're not slaves.'

Wayne then argues in favor of removing the Greek 'doulos' from their English text because:

"The word 'slave' has irredeemably negative associatons and connotations."

Wayne follows his foundational reason for deleting God's word with a bunch of stuff like slavery wasn't racial way back then, but all the stuff amounts to nothing more than feathers in the air in an effort to obscure the central fact of slavery's "irredeemably negative associations and connotations." Until wise men see this ordering principle of modern Bible mistranslation, they won't understand anything about the Bible business. Scholars flown around the world and paid to produce new Bible products have great motivation to...what?

The Baylys think that this is done to prevent readers from getting offended. I think that it is done to whitewash the negative aspects of the bible so that people can't condemn certain passages in the bible.

http://www.baylyblog.com/2011/12/here-a ... .html#more

[formergothardite]

I agree with them too! It is stupid to try and remove the mention of slavery from the Bible

[Austin]

The Baylys think that this is done to prevent readers from getting offended. I think that it is done to whitewash the negative aspects of the bible so that people can't condemn certain passages in the bible.

I agree with your assessment. People who want to do this want to make the Bible into something palatable and nice. It's just not.

[genericJname]

Oh no! I agree too

[DomWackTroll]

Yep, me too. I also find myself agreeing with David Seppi on a disturbingly regular basis (always about foreign policy).

[ladypuglover]

:shock: I never thought the day would happen I would agree with these people.

**Looking outside to see if Hell froze over too.** :?

[dairyfreelife]

:shock: I never thought the day would happen I would agree with these people.

**Looking outside to see if Hell froze over too.** :?

Must have missed the pigs flying because I agree as well.