The Conservative Bible project

HT Exploring Our Matrix

Conservapedia has a new Bible translation project called the Conservative Bible Project. Deirdre Good analyses it here. A commenter on Exploring Our Matrix points out that this site is not a parody.

Kephale as "cause"

This is from Women in ministry: four views by Robert Clouse et al. (page 168) Here the Greek word kephale for "head" is interpreted as "cause." This is understood to fall under the same general category of "source."

The Greek writer Artemidorus (second century AD) yields numerous examples of head (kephale) meaning "source."In LIb. 1, Cap. 2. Paragraph 6, we read, "He [the father] was the cause [aitios] of the life and of the light for the dreamer [the son] just as the head [kephale] is the cause [aitios] of the life and the light of all the body." In another section (Cap. 35, Paragraph 36) Artemidorus writes, "indeed, the head is to be likened to parents because the head is the cause [or source] of life."

It is important to note that "source" or "cause of life" is not the meaning of kephale, but is one possible way of interpreting it.

Kephale as "source"

While I have often remarked on the poor attestation of kephale as "leader," "authority" or even "superior rank." I have not always been a strong supporter of kephale as "source." Kephale is the Greek word for "head." However, in English "head" can be used of a person who is in a leadership position. It can be used in this way directly and without comparison, metaphor or elaboration, as in "head of state." This expression does not exist in ancient Greek.

Some have suggested that kephale should best be understood as "source" instead, but others say that this has little legitimacy. I would like to review the literary evidence for kephale as "source." The first and most interesting example is from an Orphic fragment,

Zeus is the first. Zeus the thunderer, is the last.
Zeus is the head (kephale). Zeus is the middle, and by Zeus all things were fabricated.
Zeus is male, Immortal Zeus is female.
Zeus is the foundation of the earth and of the starry heaven.
Zeus is the breath of all things. Zeus is the rushing of indefatigable fire.
Zeus is the root of the sea: He is the Sun and Moon.
Zeus is the king; He is the author of universal life;
One Power, one Dæmon, the mighty prince of all things:
One kingly frame, in which this universe revolves,
Fire and water, earth and ether, night and day,
And Metis (Counsel) the primeval father, and all-delightful Eros (Love).
All these things are United in the vast body of Zeus.
Would you behold his head and his fair face,
It is the resplendent heaven, round which his golden locks
Of glittering stars are beautifully exalted in the air.
On each side are the two golden taurine horns,
The risings and settings, the tracks of the celestial gods;
His eyes the sun and the Opposing moon;
His unfallacious Mind the royal incorruptible Ether.

In some occurrences of this prayer the Greek word arche is found instead of kephale. This is teh intial part of the Liddell. Scott, Jones entry for arche,

A.beginning, origin,νείκεος ἀ. Il.22.116 ; πήματοςOd.8.81 ; φόνου21.4 , etc.; opp. τέλος, Hdt.7.51, etc.; opp. τελευτή, Thgn.607, cf. Pl.Lg.715e, Hp.Morb.1.1; ἀ. γενέσθαικακῶνHdt.5.97 ; ἀ. ποιήσασθαίτινοςTh.1.128 , And.2.37, Isoc.12.120, etc.; ἀ. λαβεῖντινόςAeschin.1.11 ; τὰςἀρχὰςεἰληφέναιPlb.4.28.3 ; ἀρχὴνὑποθέσθαι lay a foundation,D.3.2, etc.; βαλέσθαιPl.Ep.326e (and Pass., ἀρχαὶβέβληνταιPi.N.1.8 ); ἀρχὴνἄρχεσθαίτινοςPl.Ti.36e ; source of action, [ὁἄνθρωπος]ἔχειἀρχὴνἐλευθέραν Plot.3.3.4 .

I suggest that one possible interpretation of kephale is as arche, origin or source. Perhaps Paul in writing 1 Corinthians, was more interested in creating a cosmogony than maintaining a gender hierarchy of human interaction. More on this later.

PS Thanks to those who commented on my googling difficulty with my school blog. It nows googles appropriately. Apparently I was not patient enough.

here and there

I have added Dr. Claude Mariottini to my sidebar. He frequently posts on women in the Hebrew Bible or other related topics. Browse his recents posts for some interesting discussions.

Another blog that I read frequently are Submission Tyranny. I highly recommend Fireproof: part 1 the faulty premise, and part 2. She writes,

I must add here that it is the voluntary submission of the wife—submission to avoid an ugly denigrating attack—that causes abusive husbands to attack their wives, either physically or non-physically. When the wife showers her husband with loving and submissive behaviors, many abusers consider that a weakness and "go in for the kill," to thoroughly establish their power and control. Other times an abuser begins to think she is doing it by her own choice, not because of his coercion. Therefore, if her actions originated from her own choice, he is no longer in control. Since she is being so perfect, he must change his rules for her, even if he has to resort to the ridiculous, in order to regain that sense of dominating her. If an abuser has any inner prompting to feel ashamed of himself and change his ways, he tends to quickly squash it and be even more vicious to silence that inner prompting.

This is the reality of submission. It is crazy making. Defending the subordination of women is utter crap.

Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

I really enjoyed reading Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. Here is an interview with him about this book which I found interesting.

The most dramatic chapter was on the positive correlation between frequent airline crashes and a high power distance index,

Hofstede’s Power distance Index measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that a society’s level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders.

Gladwell recounts the discovery that those countries with frequent airline crashes also had a high power distance index. If the co-pilot had too much deference for the pilot, or if the pilot used deference and mitigated speech when addressing the air traffic controllers, then a crash was much more likely to happen.

It was chilling to read the transcription of terminal conversations between pilot and co-pilot in which the co-pilot demonstrates respect and a submissive attitude to the pilot to the detriment of the safety of everyone on board.

Many airlines now teach assertiveness training and a standardized procedure for co-pilots to challenge the pilot if there is a safety concern. The co-pilot is to express concern with increased assertiveness three times and then take over the controls from the pilot in an emergency which the pilot is not responding to.

This kind of assertiveness training is badly needed for those caught up in biblical womanhood. It is amazing to see how the cultural presuppositions about role caused the death of so many people. The vast majority of plane crashes could have been avoided it someone had taken over controls at the right moment.

Phoebe as defender

I notice that April has linked to Elizabeth McCabe's article on Phoebe, A Reexamination of Phoebe as a “Diakonos” and “Prostatis”: Exposing the Inaccuracies of English Translations I remember discussing McCabe's premise with Bruce Waltke. He was quite dismissive of the association between prostatis and proistemi. As one would expect.

However, I feel that it is worth pointing out that the masculine form of prostatis, which is prostates, was used in a prayer to Christ. Not only that, it was used alonside beothos, the Greek for ezer. In an earlier post, I wrote,

These two words βοηθος and πρστατης are used as titles for Christ alongside "saviour" and "high priest." Here is how the words were used in 1 Clement 36:1.

Αυτη η οδος, αγαπητοι, εν η ευρομεν το σωτεριον ημων, Ιησουν Χρστον, τον αρχιερεα των προσφορων ημων, τον προστατην και βοηθον της ασθενειας ημων.


This is the way, beloved, in which we found our salvation; even Jesus Christ, the high priest of our oblations, the champion and defender of our weakness. tr. Charles Hoole 1885


This is the way, dearly beloved, wherein we found our salvation, even Jesus Christ the High priest of our offerings, the Guardian and Helper of our weakness.tr. J. B. Lightfoot.

So here, in an old fashioned translation, we find that prostates, the word for Phoebe was translated “champion" and the word for Eve, boethos was “defender.”

I developed these ideas into an article which is posted here. Champion and defender: the other side of the word.

Evgeny Morozov on the spinternet

For all those people who assume that the internet is a medium which fosters a democratic environment, you need to listen to this. Evgeny Morozov studies how the Net is used as a means of repression, just as effectively as it liberates - ask him anything. We need to stop kidding ourselves and realize that the internet is a medium with positive and negative aspects.

The Gender Neutral Bible Controversy

Mike is reading The Gender Neutral Bible Controversy byVern S. Poythress and Wayne Grudem (you can download it HERE, if you’d like). I extend to him my sympathies. Mike makes the point that when reading the Liddell Scott Jones lexicon entry for aner, Poythress and Grudem cite "man as opposed to God" without recognizing that this is the normal indication of that the word refers to a generic human being, male or female. He then asks,

So, why do we claim that these sorts of generics are still understandable today, when we don’t understand them today?

I have certainly noticed that male generics are not understood today. Many readers will approach any use of "he" in the text and assume that it refers to men. Typically, if the word is used in the context of salvation then the reader assumes a generic meaning, but if it refers to someone who leads, teaches, protects, provides or bears responsibility then the assumption is often that it refers to males only. This was the case with 1 Tim. 5:8.

I work hard every day to lead, provide and protect my family, and I am insulted by the juvenile attitude of those who treat women who care for their families as if they did not exist. Yes, ideally it is nice to be part of a couple. I agree. But consigning single women who care for their own families to the round file, is simply not an indication of a Christian religion.

What I was going to say is that Ann Nyland wrote about Grudem's utter confusion with regard to the generic use of aner in this article. She had an email dialogue with Grudem in 2002. I had an email conversation with him in 2006 in which he stated that he was unaware of the generic use of aner. This is not possible because Nyland clearly provides it.

More feminine language for God

Damian continues his quest for feminine language for God.

slaves to one another

The Hebrew and Greek words that are usually translated as "slave" in English, have a much broader range of meaning. This does not mean that a slave was not a slave in those days. In fact, slaves were owned and beaten and fucked. (Sorry, I can't think of a better word at this moment.) It wasn't a pleasant thing.

Of course, some slaves had very high status, and one of my favourite slaves was Tiro, after whom the Tironian notes shorthand system was named.

But back to the Hebrew word abad, and the Greek word doulos. The Hebrew word abad is used in Gen. 2:15. Adam was to "work" the garden and keep it. We believe that work is a good thing, but to be a slave is a bad thing. The Greek word doulos and its verb douleo are also used in negative and positive ways.

The first way that one can serve is as an involuntary or owned slave. The second is as a voluntary slave of a good and kind master. The third way one can serve is in a mutual relationship, to be slaves of each other. This way is found in Galatians,

For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. Gal. 5:13 NRSV

Sometimes the scriptures instruct people to submit to unjust slavery and oppression, sometimes they teach that one should submit to a loving master but we also see that the ideal of mutual service is taught.

In 1 Peter, we find that Christ submitted to death, slaves submitted to being beaten unjustly and wives submitted to patriarchal husbands.

Serving others is a healthy thing and working is a privilege, but slavery is worse than death. In a similar way, marriage is healthy and the commitments of family are a privilege, but being locked into an involuntary situation where you are mistreated by your spouse, husband or wife, is a misery.

We need to have a healthy view of human hierarchy as a pragmatic and fluid arrangement in which mutual service is expressed in participatory leadership and shared responsibility and accountability and where lines of authority are limited, skill based and task oriented. The scriptures are not obscure on this matter, but repeat it in several places.

The commandment of Christ is to love one another, to love your next one as yourself, to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, to be the slaves of one another, to submit to one another, to hold others in esteem.

It would be a funny Bible that said "some submit to others." "some love others," "some hold others in esteem," and "some of you become slaves to others." That would be a strange beast of a Bible.

It is interesting that most Bibles do not translate Galatians 5:13 literally. I find that the NRSV is better in this case with demonstrating the concordance that is found in the Greek. Cheers to the NRSV for a literal translation of this verse.

Beyond crazy

Frank Schaeffer - can Christianity be rescued from Christians?

Translating the word "sword"

Dr. Claude Mariottini has an excellent post on how the word "sword" is translated in the Hebrew Bible. He concludes,

In conclusion, let me say that no one should be shaken by the differences we find in English translations of the Bible. We have to remember that no translation is meant to be a word-for-word translation of the Hebrew and Greek. Rather, the intent of a translation is to provide an accurate understanding of the message of the Bible.

Every translation of the Bible is good and every translation of the Bible has its flaws. No translation of the Bible will translate a certain Hebrew word the way I think it should be translated, but in the end, a translation will carry the message that God cares for us and that he demonstrated his love for us by sending Jesus Christ to reveal the magnitude of God’s love. And that is all we need to know.

NLT: The gift of singleness is dead

In the NLT, in 1 Cor. 7:7, the text at Biblegateway.com (NLT 2004) says,

But I wish everyone were single, just as I am. But God gives to some the gift of marriage, and to others the gift of singleness.

However, at the NLT site, the text reads,

But I wish everyone were single, just as I am. Yet each person has a special gift from God, of one kind or another.

This change was in part a response to The Gift of Singleness blog. I met one of the writers, Gortexgrrl, last spring. She emailed me and we ended up getting together for supper.

Common English Bible

I guess I must have heard of this, but it didn't really register. The Common English Bible translation was started in 2008 and has its own wikipedia page. Here is a list of translators, among them a few I went to school with. Greg Bloomquist was in my first year Hebrew class.

I would love to see a sample of this. It sounds as if it will be about the same level of language as the NIV, and about a grade 7 yo 8 reading level. It is worth remembering that by some measures, the average adult reads at a grade 6 reading level.

Women's speaking justified

Mark Baker-Wright asked to be added to the friends of the TNIV, and I have found his post about Margaret Fell's Women's Speaking Justified. He writes,

About 7 years ago, when I audited David Scholer's "Women, the Bible, and the Church" class at Fuller Theological Seminary, I was actually somewhat surprised to learn that the debate about whether or not women should be ordained in Christian churches wasn't an entirely 20th century phenomenon. I had always assumed that it arose out of women's rights movements such as the suffrage movement that gave women the right to vote in 1920 (in the United States, that is). In fact, the question of whether or not women had the right to be church leaders (especially in ordained positions) has been going on for many centuries.

Indeed, I suppose that I shouldn't have been so surprised. Why would some of the ancient church "fathers" (and, let's face it, the earliest church leaders were primarily men) have engaged in such aggressive attacks against women as church leaders if there weren't in fact women who were arguing for their rights to such positions?

Of course, there have always been women in the church who have spoke out and taught.Hilda was the teacher of five bishops in the 7th century, and Margaret Fell wrote in the 17th century.

NIV 2011.com

Aberration blog brings our attention to the F.A.Q.'s on the www.nivbible2011.com site.

The happiness gap

There was a slew of blogs (NY Times excerpt available here) which reported that women's overall happiness has fallen with women's liberation.

Here is a language log post which may demsytify some of the statistics surrounding this issue. And here is Mark Liberman, Oct. 6 2007.

OK, so imagine coming into a door labeled "the room of unhappy people". You enter, and find yourself in a hall with 51 to 54 women, and 46 to 49 men. Do you think that you could decide which sex predominated, without lining everyone up and doing an explicit count?

Now imagine that you walk through two such rooms, where the first one is around 51-to-49 female, and the second is around 54-to-46 female. Do you think that you would notice the direction of difference in the sex ratios, without another pair of line-ups?

More to the point, do you think that you could spin differences like these into today's second-most-emailed NYT story?

If your answer is "yes", then you may have a future as a science writer. (Or, perhaps, as an economist...)

Not Only a Father

Tim Bulkley has uploaded his book Not Only a Father: Motherly God-Language in the Bible and Christian Tradition.

I have discovered that there is far more mother language referring to God in Christian tradition than I had formerly thought. I will be reading through Tim's book.

Here and there

There are actually quite an amazing number of posts from the last few days on gendered language in the scripture.

Kurk has really brought to light for me that the expression "son of man" meant "son of the human" and that is Mary. Mary is the anthropos, the human, that Christ is the son of.

Damien continues to think about feminine language. Alan discusses Carson's book on gender language and the translation of aner. Joel H. writes about Girl things and Boy things. and Peter writes on the value of women, oxen and cows.

There are lots of other interesting conversations going on elsewhere that I wish I could mention, but my time is limited at the moment.

(I do have a bloggy, techy problem, however, if anyone thinks they have a clue how to help me out I would appreciate a note. I have a new blog here, not related to this blog, and although I did choose in the settings to have the blog open to google, I can't google it. It refuses to show up in any search results. Anyone have any idea what's wrong?)

Anthropos in the Peshitta

Kurk has collected some of the posts on anthropos and aner here. I wonder if he is aware of the posts on Café Apocalypsis.

The passage under discussion is Matt. 12:9-14. The NIV uses "man" every time that the Greek word anthropos occurs in the text.

I tell you that one greater than the temple is here. ⁷If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent. ⁸For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."

⁹Going on from that place, he went into their synagogue, ¹⁰and a man with a shriveled hand was there. Looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, they asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"

¹¹He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? ¹²How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

¹³Then he said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." So he stretched it out and it was completely restored, just as sound as the other. ¹⁴But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus.

Perhaps we can learn something from the way that the Peshitta translated the words for "man" in this passage. In the Peshitta, a Syriac (Aramaic) translation from the Greek, written in Syriac script, uses bar anash for "Son of man," geber for "a man" with a shriveled hand, and enosh for how much more valuable is "a man" than a sheep."

Now I realize that this puts the Peshitta on the list of translations seriously affected by feminism. Which is very odd because the editors of this text scrupulously altered the text to eradicate the feminine gender of the Spirit. But they forgot to eliminate the phrase bar anash, the human Christ.

The point is not whether the ESV, NIV or TNIV is the definitive translation. But rather, we need to realize that they are all approximations. If you stifle one of the approximations of the original, then some of the truth is denied.

So far, I have discovered that the Peshitta, Luther, and Tyndale translations all go against the Colorado Springs Gender Guidelines. Personally I prefer to burn the guidelines and keep the translations intact.