"1946" Movie In 7D

A doc is coming out called "1946." The filmmaker shows how Bruce Metzger, interpreter and editor of the RSV and NRSV translations of the Bible, thought that maybe putting the word "homosexual" in the translations might not have been such a great idea from a letter Metzger sent to a seminarian student Metzger thought would never see the light of day. He was once quoted as saying gays in the Church was like having "whores" in the Church plying their trade, so him going with the word homosexual was his prejudice being put in the translation with those on his panel either going along with it or staying silent with their objections. They had the chance to immediately change that translation mistake with a letter from a seminarian that made them rethink what they did, or was it a conviction of the Holy Spirit? Either way, they waited years for the updated translation to take the word homosexual out and replace it with a more ambiguous term. Did the Church go along with that change? The Church responded, saying, "No. No, that's all right. We'll just stick with the translation that has the word homosexual in it, and you can keep your other translations. Thank you and have a nice day Bruce and friends. XOXO."

The anti-gay are already jumping all over this documentary by saying, "So what? The descriptives of homosexuality in past translations finally gave the word 'homosexual' its proper place in this one translation." 

My take:

In most cases, with the earliest Bible translations that we have? The verse in a translation is carried over from a prior translation. If a mistake was made with the meaning of the verse in THAT Bible's translation, and not caught and corrected by the next group of translators? That mistake will be carried over into the next translation, and the one after, and the one after that, and on and on with the only difference being the wording of the era that translation was written. So, what do you do to correct this? Bypass the jumble of differing translations of the word by going directly to Leviticus to get Paul's reason for going there. 

Some say the meaning of the word is referencing pederasty, the argument this documentary makes, while others, like myself, say cult idolatry with going to Leviticus context and the time and world of the ancient Canaanites. The fact is that the word is wrong in Metzger's translation because the "homosexual" descriptors in most prior translations are wrong.

The 1940s-50s saw homosexuals as mentally sick child predators who were institutionalized and lobotomized. This was the world Metzger saw homosexuals in his time. That bias informed his own translation, as the biases informed prior translators who did not always read the word as homosexual, putting arsenokoite as a "homosexual." This word, used for the first time, would carve in stone a condemnation of male AND female homosexuals (it's impossible to read female homosexuality into this word) those in the Church needed one word to do it with. 

...

I had a strong presence in YouTube comments. One thing I can say in all honesty out of the endless people I've engaged and debated, who've ranged from pastor, priest, and pew sitter, is that give it time, their debating with me always goes from the Bible to other issues, the real core of the problem they have with homosexuality.

They find homosexuality disgusting or at some level distasteful is what it really boils down to for most when they give up hiding behind Scripture. They love going to bogus science studies of disease and mortality rates as a reason to hate me. Me going to an early grave racked with disease is a reason to have a problem with me? If anything, that should be making you show me the love of Christ MORE, considering my short and miserable existence here on Earth. Or how all humans would die out if we found ourselves on a mysterious island with no heterosexuals to procreate. Like we were somehow air-lifted there in our sleep by unknown entities or all procreation would just stop if all heterosexuals just evaporated off the face of the Earth one day. Statistically, a society can't be all straight or all gay in orientation. I guess bisexuals would also not exist.

You do know that gay men and women still have their working sexual organs, right? So we could still be able to re-populate the Earth if we wanted to, but we would do it by careful design. We would also be better at procreation than you would because each child will be WANTED and not by accident, making abortions nonexistent. Isn't that what you want? 

They only do this "It would end the human race" scenario with gays and not heterosexuals who might, for instance, be genetically sterile because of a nuclear winter or a mass genetic screw-up where only males are born (not a problem for all gay men). They also don't see the problem that being celibate for the Kingdom, what Paul wished we all did, that also would bring about our extinction. 

All this is very telling and backs what I've always believed. The Bible comes in second with why they have a homosexuality issue. The Bible is the backup they need to justify how strongly they feel against homosexuality, it's a reference, not the reason. They think the Bible is somehow saying to them; "I have your back with whatever else you have on these perverts." For those who say I'm driven by my homosexuality to read the Bible how I read it, aren't you reading the Bible through the lens of your own heterosexuality? Your bias would be stronger than mine because it was drilled into you starting at birth (blue is for boys and pink is for girls) and reaffirmed to you every day of your life.

All I care about is the Word of the eternal and living God to guide me on this subject and I don't need to go anywhere else. Too bad you people can't say the same.

...