Critical Theory - Tumblr Posts

Textual Criticism: The Reliability of the New Testament

By Goodreads Author Eli Kittim

One has to be au courant with lower criticism to understand the significance and reliability of the New Testament. If we look at the number of extant NT manuscripts together with the relatively short period of time within which they were written (i.e, the time between the purported events and the written documents), no other book from Antiquity even comes close. First, we have over 5,800 manuscripts just in Greek (not counting those in other languages), more than any other book in history. Second, the texts were written within approximately two decades after the purported events. Other books have a much wider time-gap between the historical events and their initial documentations, as most were written hundreds of years later. Third, the New Testament has also been the most scrutinized book in all of literature. Its textual integrity has been relentlessly challenged down through the centuries. To date, no other book in history has been criticized and attacked as much as the New Testament. And yet its textual reliability has stood the test of time. Critical scholars still find it reliable! In fact, most of the variants are due to simple spelling errors, which do not significantly affect the meaning of the text. So, the textual reliability of the New Testament is well known among scholars. It’s the best attested book from the ancient world, as well as the bestseller of all time! And if you don’t think that it’s reliable, then you have no grounds to believe in Caesar, Homer, or Alexander the Great, whose biography, by the way, was written 400 years later! That’s how reliable the New Testament really is! In his blog, Bart Ehrman, the world-renowned textual scholar, writes:

“He [Bruce Metzger, Bart’s mentor] thought

that at the end of the day, we can be

reasonably confident of something like 99%

[reliability] of the text of the New

Testament. Textual scholars, in his

judgment, argue about that other 1%. As it

turns out, I don’t disagree with most of

that.”

A Critique of Contextual Theology: Are the Meanings of the Biblical Texts Changeless or Adaptable?

By Author Eli Kittim

——-

What is Contextual Theology?

Is all theology contextual? Do different contexts have the role of attributing theological meanings to Christian texts? Or is there a subtext that does not change? And, if so, what are some of the criteria that assign meaning to theology, particularly to Christian theology?

First of all, what is “contextual theology” anyway? It’s basically a way of doing theology that takes into account both past and present contexts, be they anthropological, biological, psychological, philosophical, or otherwise. That is to say, it reconsiders the cultural milieu or the Sitz im Leben (i.e. the “setting in life") in which a text has been produced, as well as its particular purpose and function at that time. Contextual theology, then, considers both the traditions of the past, which received the revelations, as well as those of the present, and reassesses them within the framework of today’s socioeconomic and political context. In other words, the term contextual theology is a reference to the way in which Christianity has adapted its teachings to fit the successive cultural periods.

Some Examples of Contextual

Theology

For example, the early church fathers were heavily influenced by Greek thought, so their interpretation of scripture was largely derived from Platonism (e.g. Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc.). That was their particular form of contextualizing theology. Every book of the Bible was composed and edited within a specific context, be it the Exodus, the Law given to Moses at Sinai, the Babylonian Exile, or the occasional letters of the New Testament that were prompted by some crisis. And we could go on and on. Aquinas’ philosophical conceptions were heavily influenced by the rediscovery of Aristotle’s works. Not too long ago, existentialism provided the impetus for a new type of theology, and so on and so forth.

It seems as if Christian theology has hitherto been articulated in the context of the life and times in which the texts were interpreted and read. Hence the shifting theological paradigms, down through the ages, appear to be byproducts of this cultural phenomenon. As time passes, people’s ideas about theology seem to change as well. Questions associated with the quest for the historical Jesus, the nature of the triune God, and the like, arose out of much debate and discussion that often included diametrically opposed contexts. As the church councils began in the early part of the 4th century, one contextual paradigm triumphed over another. Similarly, various paradigms and approaches to scripture began to shift during the reformation and counterreformation. At the end of the day, who is to say which was the true one?

A Brief Introduction to Contextual

Theologies

Contextual theology, therefore, is a response to the dynamics of a specific cultural context. People from a different cultural worldview, such as Latin or Asian or Arabic culture, have distinct economic and social issues. That’s why there are so many contextual theologies, employing various interdisciplinary approaches, to try to explore these different sociopolitical issues, such as African theology, Minjung theology, Liberation theology, and so on.

Let’s briefly define some of these theologies to get a taste of their doctrines. Minjung theology (lit. the people's theology) is based on the South-Korean Christian fight for social justice. This theology has developed a political-gospel hermeneutic to address the Korean reality. From this point of view, Jesus is seen more as an activist for social reform than as a spiritual teacher.

Another branch of Christian theology from the Indian subcontinent is called Dalit theology. It places heavy emphasis on Jesus’ mission statement, which some theologians call the Nazareth Manifesto (Lk 4.16-20), namely, the proclamation of “good news to the poor,” the release of prisoners, the “recovery of sight to the blind,” as well as letting “the oppressed go free.” From this perspective, Jesus is identified as a marginalized Dalit (i.e. a servant) whose mission is seen as liberating individuals not only from their sociopolitical and economic oppression but also from racial segregation and persecution. But does this theology really capture the core message of Jesus’ mission? Is Jesus really a political “liberator” who is solely interested in an economic and political system that guarantees equality of the rights of citizens? Or are the impoverished those who are not materially but rather spiritually poor? Although the physical dimension of these Biblical passages cannot be denied——after all, many were physically healed of all diseases, according to the narratives——nevertheless, given that the sermons of Jesus emphasize sin and the issues of the heart, one might reasonably argue that he’s referring to the prisoners of sin, and that the recovery of sight might be a metaphor for the truth that “will make you free” (Jn 8.32).

Similarly, many contextual theologies misinterpret the Beatitudes as political manifestos. Notice that Jesus says “Blessed are the poor in spirit,” not the materially poor (Mt. 5.3). Moreover, he doesn’t say blessed are those who are physically hungry and thirst. Rather, he says, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” (v. 6). So, we have the poor in spirit who will inherit “the kingdom of heaven” (v. 3), and those who hunger for spiritual righteousness who “will be filled” (v. 6). It beggars belief that any theologian can misinterpret this pericope from the Sermon on the Mount as nothing more than a social concern for the materially poor, while promising some sort of Marxist political and economic liberation for oppressed peoples.

This is precisely how Liberation theology interprets such passages. Liberation theology was developed in Latin America and was employed politically as a “preferential option for the poor.” It is true that the Bible is concerned about the welfare of the poor and needy. But it is not a political manifesto designed to liberate them through some new political system. To see Jesus as a prototype of Adam Smith or Karl Marx is to miss the point entirely. Although the Bible certainly addresses these issues and urges us to be equitable and compassionate, its primary message is soteriological, urging us to be born again: “be transformed by the renewing of your minds” (Rom. 12.2); be “born from above” (Jn 3.3)! Clearly, this is a *spiritual* message that has few political implications. It’s also important to note that Jesus did not want the crowds to politicize his message (Jn 6.15 NRSV):

When Jesus realized that they were about

to come and take him by force to make him

king, he withdrew again to the mountain by

himself.

The Excesses of Feminist Theology

A subset of this view is Feminist theology, which is primarily concerned with the oppression of women. The aim of feminist theology is to liberate women from a hitherto patriarchal society by giving them equal rights among the religious authorities and clergy. This theology attempts to reinterpret patriarchal language and imagery about God, while reevaluating the status of women in sacred texts. Feminist reinterpretations of scripture will often reject the male gender of God and will omit using male pronouns to refer to this figure. Feminist theology will often call into question authoritarian, pontific, or disciplinarian images of God and replace them with “nurturing” and “maternal” attributes.

This theology has inevitably led to the excesses of various sects who even describe Jesus as a woman. For instance, the “Dongfang Shandian” (aka Eastern Lightning) is a Christian cult from central China which teaches that Christ has been reincarnated as a woman, and that the saints are engaged in an apocalyptic battle against China's Communist Party. However, these are gross exegetical errors which take liberties in manipulating the language of the original text to suit their theological needs.

Case in point. In his recent book “What Jesus Learned from Women,” author James F. McGrath took a simple verse (mentioned only once in the entire Bible; Rom. 16.7) and turned it into a novel where both Paul and even the great Jesus himself have come under Junia’s spell. The implication is that both Paul and Jesus may have gained valuable knowledge from a woman named Junia. It’s all based on a single, isolated verse which doesn’t even hold a single shred of historical, textual, or literary evidence to substantiate the claim. Not only does it contradict Paul’s explicit statement in Galatians 1.11-12—-in which he says that his gospel is not of human origin and that he “did not receive it from a human source”——but it also subordinates the status of the miracle-working Son of God to that of an unknown female follower, who supposedly taught him everything he knows. Unfortunately, this one-verse doctrine is equivalent to speculative fiction. It simply doesn’t meet scholarly and academic parameters.

Problems of Contextual Theology

The Contextualization process is employed in the study of Biblical translations as regards their cultural settings. Hermeneutically speaking, contextualization seeks to comprehend the origins of words that were used by the Hebrew and Greek texts, and Latin translations. However, it has also allowed secular and political groups to read their own message into the text by expanding the cultural contexts so as to accommodate such meanings. Given that modern liberal contexts are intrinsically alien and sometimes even contradictory to the authorial intent of the scriptures, the contextualization process of attributing cultural or political “meaning” to a text can have dire consequences.

The omission and replacement of the words of scripture with more “context appropriate” terminology with regard to race, gender, inclusive language, sexual orientation, and sociopolitical considerations, coupled with large-scale contextual *reinterpretations,* not only violates its integrity but it also represents a desecration of the text, which actually expresses a fundamental equality of all people whose identity is derived exclusively from Christ: “There is no longer Jew or Greek [race], there is no longer slave or free [power structure], there is no longer male and female [gender]; for all of you are one [equal] in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3.28 NRSV).

Even though the Biblical texts were created within a cultural context and not in a vacuum, nevertheless the verbal plenary inspiration——the notion that each word was meaningfully chosen by God——supersedes the cultural milieu by virtue of its inspired revelation, if indeed it is a revelation. In that case, the language from which the text is operating must be preserved without additions, subtractions, or alterations (cf. Deut. 4.2; Rev. 22.18-19). Therefore, It is incumbent on the Biblical scholars to maintain the integrity of the text. One thing is certain. The New Testament was not only significantly changed by the Westcott and Hort text, but it has also been evolving gradually with culturally sensitive translations regarding gender, sexual orientation, racism, inclusive language, and the like. Contextual theology has broadened the scope of the original text by adding a whole host of modern political and socioeconomic contexts (e.g. critical theory) that lead to many misinterpretations because they’re largely irrelevant to the core message of the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus!

——-

The Great Reset: The Coming of the Fourth Reich

By Psychologist & Author Eli Kittim

Globalists Use Nazi-like Tactics to Control the Masses Via Propaganda & Censorship

Isn’t it strange that on the 100th anniversary of the Nazi party’s founding the Fourth Industrial Revolution was set in motion? The Nazi party was founded on 24 February, 1920. As if to celebrate its anniversary, 100 years almost to the day since its founding, a global pandemic was unleashed, which was declared “a global health emergency” by the WHO on January 30, 2020, and “a global pandemic” on March 11th of the same year. You might say, what? I don’t see the connection with Nazi Germany. Be patient; you will!

Is it a coincidence that everyone who's anyone is in on it? From important heads of state, to the fake news media, to Big Pharma, to the global social networking Big Tech giants like Twitter, Facebook, and Google, everyone is not only in on it but carefully controlling and censoring the exchange of information so as to exclusively promote their agenda, while silencing the opposition. It’s essentially a globalist totalitarian ideology which does not tolerate any alternative points of view. Any alternative viewpoint is labeled as “misinformation,” and is therefore considered as a “false claim,” which is then banned or eliminated. That’s precisely why Twitter and Facebook suspended Donald Trump’s account: his agenda contradicted theirs. Any one who has recently watched any TV news-channel or social media platform will have noticed the nonstop commercials——which either employ scaremongering tactics or a barrage of pop-up ads——that are desperately trying to persuade the public to get vaccinated, even offering incentives for research participation (such as $100). As a rule, these Big Tech social media giants are invariably censoring, libeling, discrediting, or downplaying the legitimate scientific claims of credible virologists and doctors, belittling and ridiculing their work, while also dangerously curtailing and restricting people’s freedoms that are guaranteed by the first amendment, to wit, the freedom of speech and of the press. In some extreme cases (e.g. on LinkedIn) users are given *commands* as to what to say, when to say it, and how to generally conduct themselves via a series of prompts, such as “say thank you,” or “congratulate so and so on his anniversary,” or “do this,” “do that,” and so on. As a psychologist, I see this as a form of mind control.

So, it turns out that this is not a free society after all. In fact, these are the exact same tactics that Nazis used to brainwash people into obeying their agenda. Josef Goebbels (the Minister of Propaganda), for example, controlled the media and the arts, feeding Germans with nonstop Nazi ideology while simultaneously censoring other information. That is precisely what’s happening today: mass control through propaganda and censorship!

By now, we know that many credible scientists, virologists, and doctors do not accept the data-manipulation and biased recommendations of government public health agencies, which are being dictated by the CDC, the WHO, and the globalists. These agencies themselves are sending mixed and contradictory messages. On the one hand, they are rigorously promoting vaccinations and emphasizing how safe they are. Yet, on the other hand, they themselves admit on their own websites the risks, side effects, and potential harm that these experimental vaccines pose to humanity: deaths, blood-clots, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, facial swelling & paralysis, myocarditis, severe anaphylaxis, and other medical concerns and complications that have put a halt to some vaccines, at least for a time. And even virology expert, Geert Vanden Bossche, PhD, who has previously worked with the B. & M. Gates Foundation and GAVI, and Michael Yeadon, former vice president and chief scientist at drugs giant Pfizer Inc., are both saying that healthy people shouldn’t be coerced into taking “experimental” vaccines. Especially since 99.9% of the population in the US survives COVID. So, the initial social media criticism——excoriating these credible scientists as conspiracy theorists——no longer works! These forced genetic-altering vaccines that maximize Big Tech/Big Pharma profitability, but which show little regard for human health, are reminiscent of the coerced & unethical genetic research “experiments” that were performed at the Auschwitz death camps by Dr. Josef Mengele, the infamous Nazi doctor.

That’s precisely what’s happening today: mass control through propaganda and censorship! The First Reich was the Holy Roman Empire. The Second Reich was the German Empire. The Third Reich was Nazi Germany. Wiki characterizes the Fourth Reich as follows:

The Fourth Reich … is a hypothetical future

Nazi Reich that is the successor to Adolf

Hitler’s Third Reich (1933–1945). The term

has also been used to refer to possible

resurgence of Nazi ideas.

6️⃣6️⃣6️⃣

The Mark of the Beast

This scenario has already been prophesied in the Book of Revelation, chapter 13 verses 16-17 (KJV), in which a charismatic world leader will dominate the world, at the end of days, under a one-world government, and will not allow people to buy or sell, or hold a job, if they don’t have the χάραγμα (mark), which can be translated as a notch, slit, or cut:

he causeth all, both small and great, rich

and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark

in their right hand, . . . And that no man

might buy or sell, save he that had the

mark.

What, then, is the Fourth Reich? It’s the fourth industrial Revolution that commenced on the 100th anniversary of the Nazi party! Coincidence? I think not! It’s a plan by the new global elite to take over the world by coercive measures, just as Hitler did in Nazi Germany. During the lockdowns, the mass media deliberately doctored images and reported false information in order to instill fear and influence public opinion. Case in point, according to Fox News:

CBS News admits 'mistake' after airing

footage of overcrowded Italian hospital in

report about NYC.

Due to extreme censorship & coercion, the mass exodus from social networking giants like Twitter & Facebook is a testament to their growing unpopularity and the public’s discontent.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution: The New World Order

In the long run, it’s not even about the vaccines. The forced vaccines are only a part of it. They are a means to an end. They are the first phase of fear and disinformation in order to control & manipulate the masses. But the end is something entirely different. So, what’s it all about? It’s all about the “the great reset”: the 4th industrial revolution. Klaus Schwab, the *German* founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), admits that “the fourth industrial revolution will impact our lives completely.” It will not only change our currencies, our economies, our cities, how we live and communicate with each other, but it will also radically change our identity through nanotechnology, biology, and so on. This is all anticipated in his book “COVID-19: The Great Reset.”

See the YouTube video “What is the Fourth Industrial Revolution?”: https://youtu.be/7xUk1F7dyvI

But this movement needs coercion, restriction, and manipulation of the masses in order to work. This is serious business, and it’s quite frightening! We’re talking about a global dictatorship that has been in the making since the founding of the Federal Reserve in the early part of the 20th century. It has been affectionately called by Henry Kissinger, George H. W. Bush, Barack Obama, & Gordon Brown, among others, as “the new world order.” It’s not a conspiracy theory since many US presidents, British prime ministers, and high level officials have explicitly referred to it as an ideal future government that they are all working towards. This is no longer a conspiracy theory since this totalitarian world government——which has now reared its ugly head by censoring the masses through social media-driven panic, fake news, government lockdowns, and forced mask and passport mandates——is emerging before our very eyes. According to Wikipedia, an approximation of the phrase “new world order” is inscribed in Latin on the reverse side of the Great Seal as well as on the back of the US one-dollar bill:

The Latin phrase ‘novus ordo seclorum’,

appearing on the reverse side of the Great

Seal since 1782 and on the back of the U.S.

one-dollar bill since 1935, translates to

‘New Order of the Ages’ …. this is an allusion

to the ‘New World Order.’

Since the Great Reset was unveiled by the World Economic Forum & the UK’s Prince Charles, and is also embraced by the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, it’s no longer deemed as a conspiracy theory. Klaus Schwab, the founder of the WEF, has said repeatedly that capitalism has failed and has used Marxist terminology to instill his ideas. This is a socialist agenda (dare I say Red fascist?) in which we keep hearing the phrase, “you will own nothing, and you will be happy.” The high profile Davos regulars, such as Angela Merkel and Bill Gates, as well as the rest of the attendees, like the heads of Russia, Japan, Spain, Greece, Israel, Singapore, France, and so on, all know what is going on and exactly where we are headed. This reset has not caught anyone by surprise. But this form of communism, when enforced by a totalitarian government, ultimately becomes fascism!

The protests in France, Italy, and around the world, demonstrate that people are beginning to wake up. They realize that they’ve been lied to by politicians, government agencies, health agencies, the CDC, the WHO, and by the fake news media. Using critical thinking, they’re not buying the lies anymore. If you’re looking for “truth,” you’re not going to find it listening to Anthony Fauci or Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. Hence why the protests and the riots around the world have become more widespread. For years, left-wing totalitarian globalists have been infiltrating our education system, and especially academia, instilling a sense of hatred for our founding fathers, while inculcating anti-patriotism and applauding those who burn our flags or who disrespect our country in international sports events by turning their backs on the national anthem, and the like. They have divided our country with Marxist rhetoric, critical race theory, BLM, & the anti-statue movement, literally removing our greatest heroes from sight!

The Globalist Goal is to Abolish Personal Rights, Religion, Race, Ethnicity, Country, & National Identity

This is a well-planned maneuver that was conceived a long time ago to supposedly end all ethnic and racial heritage, to eliminate national identity, history and culture, to remove flags & national governments, to create a cashless society, to merge humans with machines (transhumanism), and so on and so forth. Mikhail Gorbachev had written about some of these themes a while back. The Vatican has also issued statements that demonstrate a sense of allegiance with this globalist movement. Most importantly, the global elite want to severely restrict the practice of religion, as in Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and China, or to abolish it altogether, as Iceland tried to do when it passed legislation banning American televangelists. And they are all reiterating the exact same narrative, from prince Charles to George Soros. So, the global elite knew what was coming. There’s only one problem: they never told the people.

Now that I have your attention, Klaus Schwab wrote a book called “The Fourth Industrial Revolution,” in which he describes an age:

[of] technological revolution … that is

blurring the lines between the physical,

digital, and biological spheres.

The First Industrial Revolution started in Great Britain c. 1760. The second industrial revolution (mass production) took place in the late 1800s. The third industrial revolution (the digital revolution) happened in the second half of the 20th century (semiconductors/personal computers). The fourth industrial revolution is characterized by the notion of humans merging with technology and artificial intelligence. This is reminiscent of Ray Kurzweil’s technological singularity. If this is the case, innovators, investors, and shareholders——like Silicon Valley, Big Tech, & Big Pharma——will largely benefit from this endeavor. To this end, the COVID-19 pandemic was manufactured so as to begin the process of transhumanism and global economic & political control.

This war on society can be viewed as World War III. We are at war with those who want to abolish our freedoms and liberties, our rights to free speech and privacy, our rights to ownership, our rights to choose our political and economic systems, etc. Our bodies do not belong to the government. They belong to us. Ultimately, we have the right to make the choice of whether or not to stick a needle in our arm, without fear, threat of imprisonment, or legal ramifications. According to the Nuremberg Code of Ethics, there can be no form of coercion in human experimentation. Moreover, a mandatory vaccine with surveillance capability (nanotechnology) constitutes a violation of the 4th Amendment, namely, the right to a person’s privacy. The Great Reset will create a dystopian society where another Hitler (which the Bible calls “Antichrist”) will rise to power (cf. Rev. 13.16-17). The New World Order will control every aspect of life through artificial intelligence à la George Orwell’s 1984! The 2nd phase will probably involve military control of cities. In fact, some cities have already invoked martial law. The following abridged message was sent to me via Goodreads by a friend named James Morcan, who lives in Sydney, Australia:

Here in the biggest city in Australia we have

martial law masquerading as medical law …

with the army out on daily patrol on the streets

monitoring citizens to ensure everyone “follows

zee rules”… plus helicopters and drones

constantly flying overhead for the same purpose.

Masks are now mandatory everywhere, even if

you’re outside miles from anyone in public

parks. Citizens have to digitally sign-in everywhere

and many are being tracked 24/7 Chinese

communism-style. All forms of protesting in

public is now illegal here. … Whenever prisoners, I

mean citizens (sorry, my mistake), are briefly

allowed outside their homes they cannot go more

than 5 miles away and cannot see friends or

family…Sydney has been in this position for

months and it may continue until Christmas, and

neighbouring Melbourne has been locked down

for 8 of the last 12 months…Those who wish to

remain unvaccinated are also being stigmatized,

marginalized and are being punished by losing

their jobs, travel opportunities, and ability to

socialize. All that’s lacking is a Star of David-style

badge so everyone can identify the unvaccinated

in public. … At some point we all have to be honest

I think and consider that if it looks and feels like a

tyrannical, dystopian society, then it probably is...

James

See the YouTube video “Dangerous Marxist Leaders Call for the ‘Great Reset’ to Destroy Capitalism”: https://youtu.be/Se9rkxUK8zU

God’s Gender in Contextual Theology: Should We Preserve the Biblical Text in Light of New Age Interpretations?

By Bible Researcher Eli Kittim 🎓

I’m all for women’s rights, and I admit that in heaven there is no gender (Gen. 1:26-27; Mk. 12:25). I also know that many members of the LGBTQ+ community have been **reborn** in God. It’s also true that the masculine form of God is sometimes added to the English Bible translations, as Bruce Metzger argues.

However, from a textual perspective, I disagree with the idea that every name of God in the Bible means God/dess in its original language, as some feminist theologians contend. Although conventional Jewish theology doesn’t ascribe the notion of sex to God, it’s clear that the gender of God in the Tanakh is presented with masculine grammatical forms & imagery. For example, in the Hebrew Bible, Elohim is masculine in form. Also, when referring to YHWH, the verb vayomer (“he said”) is definitely masculine; we never find vatomer, the feminine form. In Psalms 89:26, God is explicitly referred to as “Father”:

He shall cry unto me, Thou art my Father,

My God, and the rock of my salvation.

In Isaiah 63:16, God is directly addressed as “our Father":

Thou, O Jehovah, art our Father; our

Redeemer from everlasting is thy name.

The same holds true in the Greek New Testament. For example, Κύριος (Kyrios) is a Nominative Masculine Singular noun which means “Lord.” Θεὸς (Theos) is a Nominative Masculine Singular noun which means God. In Luke 1:68, the definite article ὁ (ho), which refers to the God of Israel (ὁ θεὸς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ), is a Nominative Masculine Singular (he). None of these phrases referring to the Lord (ό Κύριος) or to God (ό Θεός) have feminine forms in the original Koine Greek. Even the incarnated God is said to be male (see Rev. 12:5)!

However, many modern Bible translations furnish us with new additions, paraphrases, and grammatical forms that clearly deviate from the Biblical texts. They do not remain faithful to the original biblical languages in preserving their literal meanings. For example, there are numerous modern Bible translations——such as the NLT, the CEV, and the NRSV——which attempt to reword the original texts by adopting gender-neutral language. This is not simply a benign translation philosophy based on a feminist biblical interpretation, but it can also be seen as a tool for political activism in trying to change gender perceptions and alter the Bible’s authorial intent. This is theologically dangerous because when we tamper with the Bible’s grammatical structures we gradually lose the precise words of the revelations as they were given in their original forms. According to Wayne Grudem, the translator’s job is to translate the original language accurately and precisely rather than to offer opinions regarding gender-related questions.

The doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration——the notion that each word was meaningfully chosen by God——supersedes the cultural milieu by virtue of its inspired revelation. Therefore, the language from which the text is operating must be preserved without additions, subtractions, or alterations (cf. Deut. 4:2; Rev. 22:18-19). Accordingly, it is incumbent on the Biblical scholars to maintain the integrity of the text.

For example, since the mid-nineteenth century, the New Testament was not only significantly changed by the Westcott and Hort text but it has also been evolving gradually with culturally sensitive translations regarding gender, sexual orientation, racism, inclusive language, and the like. Contextual theology has broadened the scope of the original text by adding a whole host of modern political and socioeconomic contexts (e.g. critical theory, feminist theology, etc.) that lead to many misinterpretations because they’re largely irrelevant to the core message of the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus!

WTF happened to Slavoj Zizek?

I was just reading Mapping Ideology on the exercise bike and like... he used to be cool?

He lost me a couple years ago with some bass-ackwards essay bitching about the existence of trans folks and them daring to ask for rights over on Terf Island or w/e.

Also, I really ought to read Marcuse.