There have been a number of subtle attacks on the divinity of Christ throughout the ages, however, in recent times it seems that the best way to undermine Jesus is just to invent ones' own cushy version of the Bible. Few instances better illustrate the point than a recent translation offered by the Oxford University Press's release of a "culturally sensitive" version of the Bible. This comes to me from a back issue of "Neewsweek," that cleverly quips such poignant comments as:
"Readers who find the Bible sexist, racist, elitist and insensitive to the physically challened, take heart. Oxford University Press's new "inclusive language version" of the New Testament and Pslams has cleaned up God's act. In this version, God is no longer "Father" and Jesus is no longer the "Son." The hierarchical title of "Lord" is excised as an archaic wy to address God. Nor does God (male pronouns for the deity have been abolished) rulle a "kingdom"; as the editors explain, the word has a "blatant androcentric and patriachal character." Even God's "right hand" has been amputated in deference to the left-handed. Some examples:
In the majestic opening of John's Gospel, "the glory he has from the Father as the only Son of the Father becomes "the glory as of a parents only child." (John 1:14)
The Lord's Prayer now begins like this: "Father-Mother, hallowed be your name. May your dominion come." (Luke 11:2)
Jesus' own self-understanding as God's only son is generalized to: "No one knows the Child except the Father-Mother; and no one knows the Father-Mother except the Child." (Matthew 11:27
Avoiding another traditional phrase, "Son of Man," the Oxford text reads: "Then they will see 'the Human One' coming out of the clouds with great power and glory." (Mark 13:26) -Kenneth L. Woodward, "Religion: God Gets the Ho-Ho," Newsweek, Sept 11, 1995
The editors don't claim that Jesus spoke in a gender-neutral language, but they obviously feel as though He should. You know, one is tempted to ask the Oxford University Press if they would dare tamper with or so implicitly demean the Qur'an in this way. Perhaps they know they only backlash they will recieve with Christians is a stern talking to as opposed to some of the more color actions taken by certain Muslims.
Does anyone think that it is appropriate to change the meaning of the text in order to be 'sensitive' to the readers feelings or should anyone wanting to read the Bible take it for its face value?
“"All science, even the divine science, is a sublime detective story. Only it is not set to detect why a man is dead; but the darker secret of why he is alive." ”G. K. Chesterton