Eve Sexting in the Carnival

The first image you get is of a nude woman sexting, when you read the Biblical Studies Carnival for July 2011 by Chris Brady.  Of course that's funny.  Because it's just Eve.  And she is biblical.  And you don't really realize she's "sexting" until you mouse over the cartoon Chris has posted and read his little caption that confirms what she says.

The second thing you notice, after making your way all the way through the Carnival, is that there are no other women.

Chris explains:

"The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.”

Oh, sorry about that.  I got a little confused there.  That is what the Bible explains.  This, in fact, on the other hand, is what Chris explains:

JK – The reason [for this huge oversight] is simple: no female blogger sent me links to their blogs nor did anyone else send me links to blogs by women. As my silly introduction meant to convey, I have not had time lately to read many blogs and so I relied upon links sent to me by others. 

I also asked for people to correct and expand my offering by sharing links via comments. So what links would you like to share?

No female blogger, you see.  And female bloggers and everyone else really should have more time than Chris had for his task of writing his Carnival.  And look now.  He's kindly given us more time, to correct and expand.  So what links would you like to share?  

I'm going to assume "you" is plural and is inclusive.  And I will start but would love it if you'd join in here to include daughters of Eve in with all these sons of Adam in the Carnival.  Shall we use Chris's headers?  So what links would you like to share?

Trends and being trendy

Rachel Marszalek bucked the trend of absolute male dominance in the June BiblioBlog Top 50 by Alexa by being there, the sole woman Bible blogger blogging alone last month to make it into this esteemed group. And she writes this post (musing some about the trendy of the previous month): "Sometimes the most beautiful things can stink."  And then there was also this trend near-reversal to note:  just under half (i.e., a full 40%) of the "Current Top 10" (albeit not a current list at all) are women; that's 4 of 10, ladies and gentleman, for May.

Back to the Bible, First Matters

Did you see this one by The Velveteen Rabbi, Rachel Barenblat?  Here's a snippet from just the first of June:

The "kingdom of God" may be a term more comfortable for Christians than for liberal Jews. When we hear it, many of us think of The Lord's Prayer -- "for Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory" -- and these don't feel like Jewish ideas to most of us. But they are Jewish ideas! We use these words in our liturgy every day (though in Hebrew, so they don't push the same buttons for us which may be pushed by the English terms of Christian liturgy.)

Big News

Suzanne McCarthy pointed out the big news that the Danvers Statement was inverted.  She says:  "I hope that it is not seen as cruel, but just as an alternative look at how scripture could be selected and prioritized. No sin in that, surely."  And don't worry; she did not exclude anyone's voice because she did also link to the un-inverse Danvers statement too.

----

Since we have more time, and so much of it, what in June did you read?  What "Trends," what "Bible," and what "News"?  Every correcting and expanding link you send for Chris's Carnival (in comments below here), I'll be happy to add in the body of this blogpost here.  And/ or Chris will add it in among the men, in comments below there at his Carnival.

SBC Condemns The Declaration of Independence in translation

In an effort to achieve consistency with their condemnation of the NIV 2011, the men of the SBC and of its Committee of Resolutions met late into the evening of July 3rd, 2011.  Just before midnight, in an open meeting before all of the world, the Committee allowed more discussion on the banning of all gender neutralizing translations and paraphrases of Thomas Jefferson's original Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

“This nearly is as big as it gets; next to God's Word, this is as big as it gets,” said Tom Underton of Yougoman Village Baptist Church in Monroe, La., who brought his emergency resolution to the floor after a resolutions committee declined to include it in their report. “This is the word of the Fathers, our Founders. The best-selling translations in the United States and around the world are now gender neutral.”

“As Southern Baptists, I don’t think we have the luxury of not speaking to this important issue either,” Underton said. “People are buying flags and fireworks and these translations unaware of what’s happening. We are the anchor of the patriotic evangelical world.”

The resolution expressed “profound disappointment” with various translators for their “inaccurate translation of Thomas Jefferson's inspired Declaration, which, of course, mentions God and men, all created equal and equally endowed.”

It asked LifeWay Christian Resources, the SBC publishing house, to refuse to sell these translations in its stores and encouraged pastors to make their congregations aware of concerns about them.

“We cannot commend the following to Southern Baptists or the larger Christian community,” the resolution concluded.

"The Declaration of Independence was never intended

for kids or
for women, or
for pinko commies or
for Southeast Asians in general or
for "Americans who cuss" even if they're as equal as any other man created or
for dummies of any kind for that matter.  We condemn the following:

--The Declaration of Independence Translated for Kids, 2000:  “We think that all people are created the same and that God wants every one of us to be free and happy.”

--Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s and colleagues’ Declaration of Sentiments, 1848:  “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;”

--Hồ Chí Minh’s Proclamation of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, 1945:   “Hỡi đồng bào cả nước, Tất cả mọi người  [each and every one, all people] đều sinh ra có quyền bình đẳng. Tạo hoá cho họ những quyền không ai có thể xâm phạm được;”

--some unknown translator rendering the Declaration of Independence of the USA into Malaysian, 2002:  “Kita berpegang kepada kebenaran yang nyata ini, bahawa semua manusia [each and every one, all humankind] diciptakan sama tarafnya, bahawa mereka dikurniakan oleh Pencipta mereka hak-hak tertentu yang tidak boleh dipisahkan;”

--H. L. Mencken’s “The Declaration of Independence in American,” 1921:  “All we got to say on this proposition is this: first, you and me is as good as anybody else, and maybe a d*mn sight better; second, nobody ain’t got no right to take away none of our rights; third, every man has got a right to live, to come and go as he pleases, and to have a good time however he likes, so long as he don’t interfere with nobody else.”

--The Declaration of Independence for Dummies, Part I, 2003:  “We think it’s pretty obvious that God created every person equal, and he gave each person specific unchanging rights which should never be trampled upon.”

[end quote]"

Gender Dividing: Women, NIV 2011, the SBC

What's the most important thing to notice about Moe Gerkins and about Selma Wilson? It's that they're women, right? I mean, why would Moe say the following if she were not a she?

"Whatever its strengths were, the TNIV divided the evangelical Christian community," said Zondervan president Moe Girkins. "So as we launch this new NIV, we will discontinue putting out new products with the TNIV."

Girkins expects the TNIV and the existing edition of the NIV to phase out over two years or so as products are replaced. "It will be several years before you won't be able to buy the TNIV off a bookshelf," she said.

"We are correcting the mistakes in the past," Girkins said. "Being as transparent as possible is part of that. This decision was made by the board in the last 10 days." She said the transparency is part of an effort to overhaul the NIV "in a way that unifies Christian evangelicalism."

And why would Selma write the following with her husband if she were not a she?

Teaching Spiritual Truth as You Go

The greatest celebration centers on God's love for us....  As you go, remind your child:

• She was created in God's image!

So God created man in His own image;
He created him in the image of God;
He created them male and female. (Gen. 1:27)

Moe, of course, said what she said when CEO of the publishing house that was trying to bridge the divide among evangelical Christians.  And Selma wrote what she wrote when she was still just the Vice President of the publishing house that is an arm of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), establishing the women's ministry at Lifeway.

That these two women are women and not men, are females and not males, is the most important thing.  Right?  Their gender affects and infects their perspectives and their speech and their writing.  Right?

But look how funny this is, and how strange!  Did Selma get a say when the men of the SBC recently resolved not to sell the newest Bible published by the company Moe was Chief of?

I do want you to notice how funny and how strange it is that Selma chose to use the language of her publishing company's Bible above.  Selma and her husband used the Holman Christian Standard Bible.  Notice their use of the gender-neutral word, "child"!  And notice their use of "she" next to the Bible's use of "He" and "He."

But what if they'd done the evangelical Christian divisive thing of writing this for daughters and for sons?  What if Selma and her husband, female and male, had used the controversial Today's New International Version?  It would have been written this way:

Teaching Spiritual Truth as You Go

The greatest celebration centers on God's love for us....  As you go, remind your child:

• She was created in God's image!

So God created human beings in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. (Gen. 1:27) [TNIV]

Notice how gender-blind and gender-neutralizing this very offensive language is!  Oh, never mind.  Yes, right, right.  I see it now.  The TNIV actually still called God "he" and "he."  Well, give me this then:  look how small the "h" in "his" "he"!!  And look how the gender-neutralizing TNIV has the audacity of putting "God" before "he" and "male and female" before "he" too!!  How dare they not start the clauses with "He"!   How dare they not start the sentences with capital "H" "He"!

So notice now the NIV 2011, the one no longer sold in Selma's company's stores.  Notice how it fails to make good on Moe's promises on behalf of her company to overhaul that gender-neutralizing-horrible TNIV.  If Selma and her husband could have used the NIV 2011 to revise their male-and-female parenting book for sons-and-daughters, then just look at how it'd be:

Teaching Spiritual Truth as You Go

The greatest celebration centers on God's love for us....  As you go, remind your child:

• She was created in God's image!

So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. (Gen. 1:27) [NIV 2011]

---

I'm being a little silly.  Just a little.  But I was noticing what Al Moehler, President and spokesman for Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, had said when the announcement came out from Moe's publishing house that it was going to try to bridge the divide.  I was also noticing what Suzanne McCarthy had said.

Al said:

Maureen (Moe) Gerkins, president of Zondervan, along with representatives of Biblica and the Committee on Bible Translation, have approached this new project and update with the stated determination to revisit controversial translation issues related to the TNIV and to consider all the concerns raised in that process. She has demonstrated integrity in discussing these issues openly and honestly. She, along with Zondervan’s partners, has promised an openness to these concerns. They have not promised to change their translation philosophy. Their straightforwardness on this is commendable, even where we may find ourselves in disagreement over these decisions and the underlying translation philosophy....

In the end, the update of the NIV to be released in 2011 will have to stand on its own. Those of us who have had significant concerns with the TNIV should communicate these concerns respectfully, candidly, and directly to the Committee on Bible Translation, to Zondervan, and to Biblica. When released, the updated NIV will deserve and require the attentive study and review of all committed evangelicals. We must hope and pray that this updated NIV will be found both faithful and useful. For now, the decisions that will determine the faithfulness and usefulness of this updated edition are in the hands of the Committee on Bible Translation. We must all pray that their work will produce an updated translation we can greet with appreciation and trust. We must take the members of the Committee on Bible Translation at their word that they will consider these concerns. To fail to pray and to act in this way will be to fail at a basic Christian commitment. The issue is not only the integrity of a Bible translation, but our integrity as Christians.

That was September 2009.  But in June 2011, Al said this:

Mohler said he thought the Resolutions Committee and messengers were both right.

"The [SBC] Committee on Resolutions had good reason for deciding that this was not the most timely opportunity to bring a resolution on the NIV," Mohler told Baptist Press. "I would not second guess the Resolutions Committee, and I certainly know their conviction on these issues. But once that resolution was brought to the floor, Southern Baptists simply had to support it, and support it overwhelmingly, on the basis of the fact that what it said was patently true and did reflect the established concerns of Southern Baptists."

The question is did the male-only Resolutions Committee communicate [their] concerns respectfully, candidly, and directly to the Committee on Bible Translation, to Zondervan, and to Biblica or give the updated NIV ... deserve[d] and require[d] ... attentive study and review [on behalf of any and] of all committed evangelicals?  Did these men, as Al called for, pray and ... act in this way [to give their] basic Christian commitment?  But does it matter now?  Al is not going to "second guess the Resolutions Committee."

Suzanne said:

I predict that complementarians will completely reject the new NIV because of 1 Tim. 2:12, 1 Cor. 11:10, the paragraphing of Eph. 5:21-22, and Romans 16:7. John Piper has already spoken vociferously against the NIV 1984, perhaps to pave the way for a full rejection of the NIV 2011.

That was November 2011.  Today (in July 2011) she said:

Enough time had not passed. The steam was building. The negative responses came and keep on coming. I was especially disappointed to find the Biblical Studies Carnival link favourably to a negative post on the NIV 2011. Notably that post included this passage,

In Roman Catholic and Southern Baptist contexts – the largest church polities in the US – a reaction against gender-sensitive translation has set in. Both faith traditions seek to retain a degree of independence from prevailing cultural trends. This is no doubt salutary.

I believe that it needs to be said, that not all women find the ways in which the RC and SBC counter cultural trends to be salutory. In the past, it was slavery, now it is the rights of women to be treated as equals. What is salutory about that?

Who's dividing by gender now?  Is it Moe or Selma or Suzanne or any other woman who is reading the Bible with her "child"?