The Queen James Bible website argues that homosexuality was first mentioned in the 1946 Revised Standard Version translation of the Bible. No prior Bibles mentioned homosexuality outright, it claims. The name of the Bible is an affectionate reference to King James I, who was instrumental in the creation of the King James Bible and whom some scholars allege was bisexual.
The Queen James Bible tackles scriptural passages that have been used to condemn homosexuality, such as the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Levitical prohibition on sexual relations between males (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13). The editors use familiar LGBTQ-friendly interpretations of these passages. For instance, the Sodom and Gomorroah story in which the men of the city threaten Lot's angelic guests is interpreted as a story about rape and humiliation, not homosexuality. The Levitical passages are interpreted as bans on same-sex sexual activity in the context of idolatrous worship, not necessarily blanket bans on all same-sex relations. The editors discuss the subtleties of Hebrew and Greek terms in the Bible, such as toevah (traditionally interpreted as "abomination") and malakoi (traditionally translated as "soft" or "effeminate") often explored in LGBTQ theology. The result is an English-language Bible that strives to avoid the homophobic language of previous translations.
The editors of the Queen James Bible admit that scripture contains contradictions and unjust passages, but these passages were beyond the scope of their LGBTQ-focused project.
"The Queen James Bible resolves any homophobic interpretations of the Bible, but the Bible is still filled with inequality and even contradiction that we have not addressed. No Bible is perfect, including this one. We wanted to make a book filled with the word of God that nobody could use to incorrectly condemn God’s LGBT children, and we succeeded."I am not a Biblical scholar, so I do not know how accurately the Queen James Bible captures the spirit and letter of the original texts. In the interpreters' haste to expunge homophobia from the Bible, I worry that they may be softening scriptural passages that are genuinely homophobic.
Nevertheless, an LGBTQ-friendly interpretation of the Bible is a noble endeavor and a loving gift to LGBTQ Christians and their allies. Religious Right homophobes have used scripture to shame and condemn the LGBTQ community, and I'm pleased to see LGBTQ persons of faith taking scripture back. By presenting the scripture with nuance, the Queen James Bible can help expand the conversation about faith, sexuality, and scripture.
(Hat tip to Gay Star News and Gay.net)
Next project: A new translation of Mein Kampf edited to remove or soften the anti-Jewish passages.
ReplyDeleteInfidel753 -- I'll admit that I'm ambivalent about the Queen James Bible. On one hand, it's a commendable attempt by the LGBTQs to reclaim a scripture that has been used to condemn them. Their aim is to resist homophobia, which I respect. On the other hand, I worry that they are ignoring some genuinely homophoboc passages. We need to see scripture for what it is, not what we wish it to be. At what point does one conclude that a scripture is so broken that it can't be fixed?
DeleteWhatever that point is, any honest translation or interpretation of the Bible is clearly far beyond it. Hence my analogy. A gay-friendly Bible is as absurd and impossible as a Jewish-friendly Mein Kampf. We need to repudiate the Bible, not make ludicrous and vain efforts to twist it into something benign.
DeleteKing James bisexual? Wow, had not heard this theory. Interesting because the KJV seems to be the choice of a lot of right wing fundamentalists--Including the Mormons..
ReplyDeleteDonna -- I don't know if King James I was truly bisexual, but it's an intriguing idea. He was known to have very close friendships with several men in his court, leading some to speculate that they were romantic.
DeleteI've got mixed feelings about this as well. I read over their explanations for their changes, and I am not sold. While I do think the Sodom and Gomorrah take is accurate, the other ones are, in my opinion, less so. Some of the verbiage on their website is a bit odd; like pointing out that it's only eight versus out of thousandths which are used to condemn homosexuality, as if being statistically insignificant made it untrue. If that was the case, we'd have to drop John 3:16 too.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I applaud the effort to make a Bible with is more accepting of people's natures, to provide for more civil discourse and discussion on the matter, and to present a more loveable version of God. Because ultimately the version of God people worship is usually closely aligned with their own personalities, so promoting a more tolerant God can't be a bad thing.
Wise Fool -- I'm delighted that the editors want to challenge religious homophobia, but some of their weaker arguments could end up undermining them (such as the statistically igsignificant observation). I hope the Queen James Bible leads to less homophobia in religious circles and more self-acceptance among LGBTQ Christians, however.
DeleteHoly crap, I love it!
ReplyDeleteGrundy -- The Religious Right will probably hate it -- but that gives us one more reason to like it!
Delete