The B-I-B-L-E: That's the book for me...

We had an interesting Theology 101 class this morning. It started with a good discussion concerning the symbolism of The Magician's Nephew, but eventually turned to a more controversial topic. How should we view the different translations of the Bible? People take this very seriously - especially protestants. After all, the Bible is the final authority on all things. We use words like "infallible" and "inerrant", and usually qualify that with "in the original manuscripts"...which we no longer conveniently posses. Most Christians know the Bible was written in ancient languages - Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic - but for some reason when we start to discuss translation we forget.

Study the history of the Bible and I think you will find some interesting surprises. How was the Bible put together? When? What should we make of the fact that we no longer have the "original manuscripts"? Frankly, after looking into this a bit myself, we have nothing to worry about. I am confident we can trust the Bible as we have it today - in spite of the issues. What does strike me about the Bible is how cultural it is. The Bible involves language, worldviews, and ideas rooted in human experience. We need to take John seriously - "the Word became flesh". Of course, for those who believe it is God's Word, there is more to the Bible then human culture. But we must be careful to not emphasize the divine element of scripture at the expense of the human. The best theologians throughout Church history have understood this. Yet...many Christians today want to dispense with the human part - the culture - of the Bible. Instead, they understand it as a book of abstract doctrinal propositions and rules, which ironically end up justifying the preservation of specific manifestations of human culture (the 1950's for many in American forms of Christianity).

All of this leads to the issue of gender inclusive language. Is it ok to provide new translations that seek to move Biblical interpretation out of patriarchal categories? Or are we simply exchanging one form of cultural baggage, patriarchy, with another, feminism? To dig deeper, what should be the primary focus of interpretation? The meaning of individual words, or the wider story? Maybe it is impossible to separate the two.....