Who would God discriminate against?

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act would protect gay, lesbian and transgender Americans from workplace discrimination.

The vote on S. 815, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), will take place soon. ENDA would protect gay, lesbian and transgender Americans from discrimination in the workplace. Seventeen years ago, the Senate voted on the same bill and was one vote shy. Today with a number of senators still undecided, we hope to muster the votes we need to pass ENDA in the Senate this time.

While the political momentum is not what it should be, the faith community has a more positive story to tell. An array of denominations, faith organizations and faith leaders with differing views on same-sex marriage and civil unions have joined to say employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is wrong and ENDA should be passed. Many senators are probably not aware that there is a letter of support for ENDA from sixty faith groups, including ten national faith denominations. The letter explicitly states:

“Our faith traditions hold different and sometimes evolving beliefs about the nature of human sexuality and marriage as well as gender identity and gender expression, but we can all agree on the fundamental premise that every human being is entitled to be treated with dignity and respect in the workplace.”

This group spans the gamut from Dr. Martin Luther King’s denomination- the Progressive National Baptist Convention- to the evangelical group Sojourners, to the Islamic Society of North America, to mainline Christian denominations like the Methodists and Presbyterians to the Reform and Conservative Jewish Movement.

Image courtesy of Matt Baume.

In supporting ENDA, these faith leaders are in sync with their members. A Public Religion Research Institute poll shows that 61 percent of minority Protestants, 59 percent of white evangelical Protestants, 75 percent of white mainline Protestants, 76 percent of Catholics and 84 percent of religiously unaffiliated Americans support workplace nondiscrimination for gays and lesbians. Although the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is now in opposition to the bill (and thus not aligned with American Catholics on this issue), in 2007 they were explicitly neutral on ENDA (and in support of the exact same religious exemption it now contains). Also noteworthy is that the Church of Latter Day Saints and the National Association of Evangelicals are quiet on the bill this time. Other groups that take a robust interpretation of religious liberty, such as the Orthodox Jews and Seventh Day Adventists, have, while not supporting the bill, maintained that the religious exemption meets their needs and stayed neutral on it.

Many faith groups feel comfortable supporting ENDA because it has a broad religious exemption. Specifically, ENDA has a religious exemption that is wider in scope than that of Title VII or the Americans with Disabilities Act, and is thought to be one of the broadest religious exemptions in federal law. This is why some gay rights groups and the ACLU have complained vociferously about the exemption. A New York Times editorial explains their critique this way: “It is one thing for religious groups to further their religious mission by favoring people of their own faith in hiring, as Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act permits. It is quite another to allow the firing of a lesbian physician or transgender nurse when a hospital that is not affiliated with a religious group happens to merge with an institution that is.” Many of the more progressive religious denominations and some gay rights groups who are sympathetic to this critique are willing to accept the broad religious exemption as a compromise because we want the bill to be enacted into law and thereby protect the civil rights of millions of Americans currently vulnerable to discrimination. This exact same religious exemption was in the bill and passed muster in 2007, when 35 Republicans including Paul Ryan and now-Senator Jeff Flake voted for the bill on the House floor and it passed.

Other religious institutional leaders are newly announcing their support for ENDA too. Recently, Seminary Presidents of the Chicago Theological Seminary, the Andover Newtown Theological School, the Episcopal Divinity School, the Graduate Theological Union and Vanderbilt Divinity School stated in a letter backing ENDA: “Fairness and protection from discrimination in secular employment should be a fundamental protection and value that all should affirm.”

Evangelical megachurch pastors are coming along too. Pastor Joel Hunter, Senior Pastor of a 20,000 congregant white Evangelical church in Northland Florida, who has opposed same-sex marriage, recently expressed his support for ENDA this way: “There is no need to bring sexuality into the workplace where it does not apply to one’s job performance.  I can support the spirit of fairness in this bill as well as its exemptions for religious organizations.”

The bill can be a blessing to our nation if the Senate leads the way in saying no to employment discrimination.

About

  • rphelps13

    God would (and does) discriminate those who do not obey his commandments. There is a line and those who cross it are judged by his laws, not man’s laws.

  • rphelps13

    God would (and does) discriminate those who do not obey his commandments. There is a line and those who cross it are judged by his laws, not man’s laws.

  • leibowde84

    Do you mean “don’t judge others” and “never use the Word to condemn?”

    Also, it seems clear that Paul added the parts of the New Testament regarding homosexuality … Jesus never spoke about it.

  • leibowde84

    Do you mean “don’t judge others” and “never use the Word to condemn?”

    Also, it seems clear that Paul added the parts of the New Testament regarding homosexuality … Jesus never spoke about it.

  • leibowde84

    Anyone who is OK with the discrimination of anyone for something that, to the best of human knowledge, they have absolutely no control over (as sexual orientation exists well-before sexual acts do) is “living in sin.” Just my opinion though … but I bet the big JC would agree. Obviously Paul wouldn’t, but, last time I checked, he wasn’t divine.

  • leibowde84

    Anyone who is OK with the discrimination of anyone for something that, to the best of human knowledge, they have absolutely no control over (as sexual orientation exists well-before sexual acts do) is “living in sin.” Just my opinion though … but I bet the big JC would agree. Obviously Paul wouldn’t, but, last time I checked, he wasn’t divine.

  • leibowde84

    I just don’t understand how any moral person could be against ending discrimination. Even if you think homosexuality is a sin, you should never condone discriminating against someone for something that, for all you know, they can’t control.

  • leibowde84

    I just don’t understand how any moral person could be against ending discrimination. Even if you think homosexuality is a sin, you should never condone discriminating against someone for something that, for all you know, they can’t control.

  • Catken1

    In which case, human law should not be needed to enforce God’s law for Her.
    Those of you who do not obey Her commandment to respect others’ families and marriages, and Her statement that “all acts of love and pleasure are My rituals” will face Her judgement – we don’t need government to take away your marriages and hurt your families and get you fired from your job as a result.

  • Catken1

    In which case, human law should not be needed to enforce God’s law for Her.
    Those of you who do not obey Her commandment to respect others’ families and marriages, and Her statement that “all acts of love and pleasure are My rituals” will face Her judgement – we don’t need government to take away your marriages and hurt your families and get you fired from your job as a result.

  • SimonTemplar

    Are you saying that NO MATTER WHAT compulsion a person has, if they have not control over it we should not discriminate against them when considering them for ANY JOB?

    We humans discriminate all of the time for a variety of reasons. Anyone who claims that they do not discriminate, that they accept EVERYONE without judging others with regard to their lifestyles, conduct, beliefs, past choices, is lying to themselves. And if they can not be honest with themselves then they can not be honest with anyone.

    I’m curious to know what laws are already on the books to protect people from discrimination based on sexual orientation. If such laws are already on the books, why do we need yet another one?

  • SimonTemplar

    Are you saying that NO MATTER WHAT compulsion a person has, if they have not control over it we should not discriminate against them when considering them for ANY JOB?

    We humans discriminate all of the time for a variety of reasons. Anyone who claims that they do not discriminate, that they accept EVERYONE without judging others with regard to their lifestyles, conduct, beliefs, past choices, is lying to themselves. And if they can not be honest with themselves then they can not be honest with anyone.

    I’m curious to know what laws are already on the books to protect people from discrimination based on sexual orientation. If such laws are already on the books, why do we need yet another one?

  • leibowde84

    I am speaking merely of sexual orientation, not of sexual activities. Sexual orientation, for all you or I know, is not a choice by any stretch of the word. There are a great number of homosexuals that are not sexually active, and sexual activities are not available knowledge when interviewing a candidate. Thus, we must only be speaking of the inclination, not the act itself. I find it ridiculous to discriminate against a homosexual simply because he is not attracted to the opposite sex. That is absurd and should be illegal.

    And, to answer your question, there are no laws on the books that criminalize the discrimination of homosexuality in the workplace. This is absolutely a necessary and moral law. I would strongly argue that voting or fighting against it is immoral, no matter how you think God feels about homosexual acts. Because, again, we are merely discussing orientation, not sexual acts.

  • leibowde84

    I am speaking merely of sexual orientation, not of sexual activities. Sexual orientation, for all you or I know, is not a choice by any stretch of the word. There are a great number of homosexuals that are not sexually active, and sexual activities are not available knowledge when interviewing a candidate. Thus, we must only be speaking of the inclination, not the act itself. I find it ridiculous to discriminate against a homosexual simply because he is not attracted to the opposite sex. That is absurd and should be illegal.

    And, to answer your question, there are no laws on the books that criminalize the discrimination of homosexuality in the workplace. This is absolutely a necessary and moral law. I would strongly argue that voting or fighting against it is immoral, no matter how you think God feels about homosexual acts. Because, again, we are merely discussing orientation, not sexual acts.

  • leibowde84

    It’s funny. A great deal of conservatives fail to recognize the important distinction. They often live in this fantasy world where sexual orientation doesn’t exist until intercourse is achieved. The problem with a that is, it is a logical impossibility. Intercourse cannot be achieved without orientation. Obviously there are exceptions in cases of abuse, but beyond that, it is not logically possible.

  • leibowde84

    It’s funny. A great deal of conservatives fail to recognize the important distinction. They often live in this fantasy world where sexual orientation doesn’t exist until intercourse is achieved. The problem with a that is, it is a logical impossibility. Intercourse cannot be achieved without orientation. Obviously there are exceptions in cases of abuse, but beyond that, it is not logically possible.

  • leibowde84

    I apologize, I didn’t directly respond to your argument. Basically, there are laws in place to protect employees from being terminated or discriminated against without cause. Homosexuality is not a crime, it is not harmful to those around it, and, beyond pure speculation, has no negative impact on society. Thus, it would be hard to claim that discriminating against a homosexual is somehow similar to discrimination against a drug-addict or mental patient (which are both legally protected groups as well … you can’t fire a drug addict if he/she is in recovery). Now, I know you will claim that homosexuals should be in recovery as well, but it is not a negative condition under the law, so that would be a ludicrous argument.

  • leibowde84

    I apologize, I didn’t directly respond to your argument. Basically, there are laws in place to protect employees from being terminated or discriminated against without cause. Homosexuality is not a crime, it is not harmful to those around it, and, beyond pure speculation, has no negative impact on society. Thus, it would be hard to claim that discriminating against a homosexual is somehow similar to discrimination against a drug-addict or mental patient (which are both legally protected groups as well … you can’t fire a drug addict if he/she is in recovery). Now, I know you will claim that homosexuals should be in recovery as well, but it is not a negative condition under the law, so that would be a ludicrous argument.

  • jdpetric

    “I find it ridiculous to discriminate against a homosexual simply because he is not attracted to the opposite sex.”

    I agree, also I think when speaking of “sexual orientation”, as leibowde84 later indicates, sexual “inclination” may best describe the matter.

    I too know several individuals who have homosexual “inclinations” but do not act on them because they hold the same view that God has, that He disapproves of those who practice the act. These may have practiced the acts at one time but came to terms that abstinence is possible.

    That abstinence is possible is reflected in the Scriptures. Note what is said at 1Corinthians 6:9-11, ” What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.  And yet that is what some of you WERE.

    Further, they may have at once practiced

  • jdpetric

    “I find it ridiculous to discriminate against a homosexual simply because he is not attracted to the opposite sex.”

    I agree, also I think when speaking of “sexual orientation”, as leibowde84 later indicates, sexual “inclination” may best describe the matter.

    I too know several individuals who have homosexual “inclinations” but do not act on them because they hold the same view that God has, that He disapproves of those who practice the act. These may have practiced the acts at one time but came to terms that abstinence is possible.

    That abstinence is possible is reflected in the Scriptures. Note what is said at 1Corinthians 6:9-11, ” What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.  And yet that is what some of you WERE.

    Further, they may have at once practiced

  • jay2drummer

    And if that’s their religious belief, that’s one thing. However, if it’s not, why should thy be expected to behave any different than a heterosexual?

  • jay2drummer

    And if that’s their religious belief, that’s one thing. However, if it’s not, why should thy be expected to behave any different than a heterosexual?

  • jdpetric

    Yes jay2drummer, if it is their religious belief.

    But why should they be expected to change ?

    Maybe because, expectations are one thing (“Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you (or all) because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” 2Peter 3:9),

    but however, reality is another. (“Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it;  whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.” Matthew 7:13-14)

    So if they change or abstain that will be up to them, won’t it ?

  • jdpetric

    Yes jay2drummer, if it is their religious belief.

    But why should they be expected to change ?

    Maybe because, expectations are one thing (“Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you (or all) because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” 2Peter 3:9),

    but however, reality is another. (“Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it;  whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.” Matthew 7:13-14)

    So if they change or abstain that will be up to them, won’t it ?

  • jay2drummer

    Yes, but that doesn’t mean that anyone else should be expected to make the same choice. Nobody is telling a homosexual they should change their beliefs if they believe they should remain chaste to please God. What they are saying is that those who don’t hold these beliefs shouldn’t have to be any more chaste than any heterosexual out there if they want to get or keep a job. If you wouldn’t fire a straight person for having sex or being attracted to a person of the opposite sex, then you have no business to do so with a homosexual who is attracted to or who has sex with a person of the same sex. God loves all of his children equally, even the gays ones, just as he made them, and would not discriminate against them, nor condone discrimination against them, according to my beliefs, and the beliefs of millions. Your assumption is that there is only one valid belief set in the world, which is far from accurate. It should be up to the individual if they change or abstain, but no person, neither a parent nor sibling nor boss nor coworker nor neighbor nor teacher nor politician nor anyone else, has any business pressuring them or bullying them into being any more chaste than they would if the person were attracted to someone of the opposite sex.

  • jay2drummer

    Yes, but that doesn’t mean that anyone else should be expected to make the same choice. Nobody is telling a homosexual they should change their beliefs if they believe they should remain chaste to please God. What they are saying is that those who don’t hold these beliefs shouldn’t have to be any more chaste than any heterosexual out there if they want to get or keep a job. If you wouldn’t fire a straight person for having sex or being attracted to a person of the opposite sex, then you have no business to do so with a homosexual who is attracted to or who has sex with a person of the same sex. God loves all of his children equally, even the gays ones, just as he made them, and would not discriminate against them, nor condone discrimination against them, according to my beliefs, and the beliefs of millions. Your assumption is that there is only one valid belief set in the world, which is far from accurate. It should be up to the individual if they change or abstain, but no person, neither a parent nor sibling nor boss nor coworker nor neighbor nor teacher nor politician nor anyone else, has any business pressuring them or bullying them into being any more chaste than they would if the person were attracted to someone of the opposite sex.

  • jdpetric

    If you look above, I am in agreement that homosexuals should not be discriminated against.

    God does not distinguish, as more grievous, one sin from another sin as you may have gathered from the Scripture quoted at 1Corinthians (” fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.”) The end result is the same.

    Further, what the “world” does or does not believes as a whole is one thing and is mostly different than what God believes and the standards He has set for humans. And there in lie the difference.

    Also that is why I use the Scripture’s to make a point, not to make an assumption based on my point, but that of God’s.

  • jdpetric

    If you look above, I am in agreement that homosexuals should not be discriminated against.

    God does not distinguish, as more grievous, one sin from another sin as you may have gathered from the Scripture quoted at 1Corinthians (” fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.”) The end result is the same.

    Further, what the “world” does or does not believes as a whole is one thing and is mostly different than what God believes and the standards He has set for humans. And there in lie the difference.

    Also that is why I use the Scripture’s to make a point, not to make an assumption based on my point, but that of God’s.

  • Catken1

    “Are you saying that NO MATTER WHAT compulsion a person has, if they have not control over it we should not discriminate against them when considering them for ANY JOB? ”

    If it does not interfere with their ability to do their job or work with co-workers, no, we shouldn’t.
    Gay people should be expected to have the same control over their sexuality as heterosexuals – no sexually harassing or raping anyone, for example, and no having sex or walking around unclothed or unprofessionally clothed in the office. But they should not be expected to be more restricted in their behavior than heterosexuals – heterosexuals, for example, can keep pictures of their spouse and kids on their desk, bring them to work functions when that is permitted or encouraged, mention their family in conversation, and cover their spouses and kids under employer-provided benefits, and gay employees should be able to do similar things without being fired or penalized.

    ” Anyone who claims that they do not discriminate, that they accept EVERYONE without judging others with regard to their lifestyles, conduct, beliefs, past choices, is lying to themselves.”

    Very true. And an employer might judge you personally based on your beliefs, or on what you wear, or what color your hair is, or whatever – but the decision as to whether to hire or promote or fire you ought to be made based on your work performance, full stop. A good businessperson ought to be able to separate personal from professional judgments.

  • Catken1

    “Are you saying that NO MATTER WHAT compulsion a person has, if they have not control over it we should not discriminate against them when considering them for ANY JOB? ”

    If it does not interfere with their ability to do their job or work with co-workers, no, we shouldn’t.
    Gay people should be expected to have the same control over their sexuality as heterosexuals – no sexually harassing or raping anyone, for example, and no having sex or walking around unclothed or unprofessionally clothed in the office. But they should not be expected to be more restricted in their behavior than heterosexuals – heterosexuals, for example, can keep pictures of their spouse and kids on their desk, bring them to work functions when that is permitted or encouraged, mention their family in conversation, and cover their spouses and kids under employer-provided benefits, and gay employees should be able to do similar things without being fired or penalized.

    ” Anyone who claims that they do not discriminate, that they accept EVERYONE without judging others with regard to their lifestyles, conduct, beliefs, past choices, is lying to themselves.”

    Very true. And an employer might judge you personally based on your beliefs, or on what you wear, or what color your hair is, or whatever – but the decision as to whether to hire or promote or fire you ought to be made based on your work performance, full stop. A good businessperson ought to be able to separate personal from professional judgments.

  • jdpetric

    You are right, it is “just your opinion”.

  • jdpetric

    You are right, it is “just your opinion”.

  • jdpetric

    “Also, it seems clear that Paul added the parts of the New Testament regarding homosexuality … Jesus never spoke about it.”

    True, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, he did however mention “marriage’ as being a union instituted by God from the “beginning” (Adam and Eve) and as a union between a man and a woman.

    “In reply he (Jesus) said: “Did you not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?” Matthew 19:4-5

    Further, it was the common practice of the day that men married only women and the only acceptable practice.

    The Apostle Paul, like Jesus, was inspired by God and expressed God’s point of view on matters.

    “But the Lord said to him (Paul): “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel” Acts 9:15

    “For the one whom God sent forth (Jesus) speaks the sayings of God, for he does not give the spirit by measure. The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.” John 3:34-35

  • jdpetric

    “Also, it seems clear that Paul added the parts of the New Testament regarding homosexuality … Jesus never spoke about it.”

    True, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, he did however mention “marriage’ as being a union instituted by God from the “beginning” (Adam and Eve) and as a union between a man and a woman.

    “In reply he (Jesus) said: “Did you not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?” Matthew 19:4-5

    Further, it was the common practice of the day that men married only women and the only acceptable practice.

    The Apostle Paul, like Jesus, was inspired by God and expressed God’s point of view on matters.

    “But the Lord said to him (Paul): “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel” Acts 9:15

    “For the one whom God sent forth (Jesus) speaks the sayings of God, for he does not give the spirit by measure. The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.” John 3:34-35

  • jdpetric

    Oh and yes, the Apostle Paul was not “divine”, but he was in powered by God’s Holy Spirit as was Jesus because he too was able to preform miracle, and cast out demons.
    ” These, (Paul and Bar′na·bas), shook the dust off their feet against them and went to I·co′ni·um. And the disciples continued to be filled with joy and holy spirit. Acts 13:51-52

    “Therefore they, (Paul and Bar′na·bas), spent considerable time speaking with boldness by the authority of Jehovah, who bore witness to the word of his undeserved kindness by granting signs and portents to occur through their hands” Acts 14:3

  • jdpetric

    Oh and yes, the Apostle Paul was not “divine”, but he was in powered by God’s Holy Spirit as was Jesus because he too was able to preform miracle, and cast out demons.
    ” These, (Paul and Bar′na·bas), shook the dust off their feet against them and went to I·co′ni·um. And the disciples continued to be filled with joy and holy spirit. Acts 13:51-52

    “Therefore they, (Paul and Bar′na·bas), spent considerable time speaking with boldness by the authority of Jehovah, who bore witness to the word of his undeserved kindness by granting signs and portents to occur through their hands” Acts 14:3

  • larryclyons

    Didn’t Christ also bless the union between a Roman centurion and his male lover?

  • larryclyons

    Didn’t Christ also bless the union between a Roman centurion and his male lover?

  • NMremote

    Those who take it upon themselves to “interpret” the bible for their own purpose to “build up” their own place in the hierarchy of “Life on Earth” have a need to raise themselves above “all other creatures” to justify their domination. It is this mentality of “better than animals” that has brought humanity to this point in our evolution and the subsequent looming destruction of our species.
    Religion is the greatest evil on earth – pretending to know the future without a shred of evidence – and knowing that “God” will come and save mankind…

  • NMremote

    Those who take it upon themselves to “interpret” the bible for their own purpose to “build up” their own place in the hierarchy of “Life on Earth” have a need to raise themselves above “all other creatures” to justify their domination. It is this mentality of “better than animals” that has brought humanity to this point in our evolution and the subsequent looming destruction of our species.
    Religion is the greatest evil on earth – pretending to know the future without a shred of evidence – and knowing that “God” will come and save mankind…

  • leibowde84

    You do realize that Luke, Paul’s best friend and assistant, wrote both of those passages. So, I don’t give too much weight to them specifically as proof of any real occurrence.

  • leibowde84

    You do realize that Luke, Paul’s best friend and assistant, wrote both of those passages. So, I don’t give too much weight to them specifically as proof of any real occurrence.

  • leibowde84

    “But the Lord said to him (Paul): “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel” Acts 9:15

    Again, not a great source as this was written by Luke, Paul’s assistant, who had a tremendously great interest in making Paul look as divinely inspired as possible.

  • leibowde84

    “But the Lord said to him (Paul): “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel” Acts 9:15

    Again, not a great source as this was written by Luke, Paul’s assistant, who had a tremendously great interest in making Paul look as divinely inspired as possible.

  • larryclyons

    Any English copy of the bible is an interpretation. Unless you can read Ancient Greek or Aramic, you are not reading the original. The parts of the Bible was first translated into Greek, then from the Greek into Latin. Then from Greek and Latin it was badly translated into Jacobean English.

    So which translation is not an interpretation of the bible?

  • larryclyons

    Any English copy of the bible is an interpretation. Unless you can read Ancient Greek or Aramic, you are not reading the original. The parts of the Bible was first translated into Greek, then from the Greek into Latin. Then from Greek and Latin it was badly translated into Jacobean English.

    So which translation is not an interpretation of the bible?

Read More Articles

shutterstock_186566975
Hey Bart Ehrman, I’m Obsessed with Jesus, Too — But You’ve Got Him All Wrong

Why the debate over Jesus’ divinity matters.

SONY DSC
Dear Evangelicals, Please Reconsider Your Fight Against Gay Rights

A journalist and longtime observer of American religious culture offers some advice to his evangelical friends.

shutterstock_186090179
How Passover Makes the Impossible Possible

When we place ourselves within the story, we can imagine new realities.

This Passover, We’re Standing at an Unparted Red Sea

We need to ask ourselves: What will be the future of the State of Israel — and what will it require of us?

HIFR
Heaven Hits the Big Screen

How “Heaven is for Real” went from being an unsellable idea to a bestselling book and the inspiration for a Hollywood movie.

shutterstock_186364295
This God’s For You: Jesus and the Good News of Beer

How Jesus partied with a purpose.

egg.jpg
Jesus, Bunnies, and Colored Eggs: An Explanation of Holy Week and Easter

So, Easter is a one-day celebration of Jesus rising from the dead and turning into a bunny, right? Not exactly.

pews
Just As I Am

My childhood conversion to Christianity was only the first of many.

shutterstock_127731035 (1)
Are Single People the Lepers of Today’s Church?

In an age of rising singlehood, many churches are still focused on being family ministry centers.

2337221655_c1671d2e5e_b
Mysterious Tremors

People like me who have mystical experiences may be encountering some unknown Other. What can we learn about what that Other is?

bible
Five Bible Verses You Need to Stop Misusing

That verse you keep quoting? It may not mean what you think it means.

csl_wall_paper
What C.S. Lewis’ Marriage Can Tell Us About the Gay Marriage Controversy

Why “welcome and wanted” is a biblical response to gay and lesbian couples in evangelical churches.

Antonio_Molinari_David_y_Abigail
How to Resolve Conflict: A Bible Lesson for Foreign Policy Leaders

The biblical story of Abigail shows how visible vulnerability can create a path toward peace.