Politically Correct Scripture?

[Chaotic Void]

Is it 'blasphemous' to quote the Bible [on shirts, in assignments, etc] using 'politically correct' terms?

ie: Wearing a shirt that has Matthew 4:19 [And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men {KJV} ] except instead of saying "Fishers of Men" it says "Fisher's of People".

[Soyeong]

Blasphemy an act of cursing or reviling God or assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God. Being politically incorrect is a supposed act of cursing or reviling other people because they assume you are trying to offend them. Ok, so it doesn’t quite work, but in my opinion, being PC is just being overly concerned about a group of people who look for small things to get offended about. You can’t say they are old, they are just chronologically experienced, I mean seriously…:no: Blasphemy has more to do with affronts to God than to other people.

[Timothy Leary]

Is it 'blasphemous' to quote the Bible [on shirts, in assignments, etc] using 'politically correct' terms?

ie: Wearing a shirt that has Matthew 4:19 [And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men {KJV} ] except instead of saying "Fishers of Men" it says "Fisher's of People".

It means the same thing in that example. Got another one?

[Pilgrim]

Is it 'blasphemous' to quote the Bible [on shirts, in assignments, etc] using 'politically correct' terms?

ie: Wearing a shirt that has Matthew 4:19 [And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men {KJV} ] except instead of saying "Fishers of Men" it says "Fisher's of People".

It's not blasphemy but it may or may not be wrong given the context. Your example, for...err...example, is not wrong. In fact, using the word "people' better captures the intent of Jesus' words since he never intended for women to be left out of the community of faith.

But take Paul's use of the words "teknon" and "uios" "children" and "son" respectively. Many translations use the word children as a translation for "uios." This is problematic because the term "son" carries with it, in the cultural context of Biblical times, ideas of inheritance. Using sons as a translation is better and then it's up to the preacher or teacher to explain why.

[Soyeong]

Oh, I read the question wrong, if a mod would be so kind as to delete my first post.

If you looked translations, such as The Message, the whole thing is changed to use more modern language. I think it is ok to use as long as you understand it was meant to help make it easier to read and not as a study Bible. Likewise, I think it is ok to paraphrase the Bible as long as you are not changing the meaning. If the shirt has the Scripture reference, then there should be a Bible that is is quoting it from.

[Chaotic Void]

I used the term blasphemous because I couldn't think of a better term at the time of the post. Now I have a better term, so I will rephase the question:

Is it considered 'Tampering with Scripture' to quote the Bible using politically correct terms?

[I know, same Schtuff, different toilet, but Tampering with Scripture suits the question better lol....]

[Pilgrim]

I used the term blasphemous because I couldn't think of a better term at the time of the post. Now I have a better term, so I will rephase the question:

Is it considered 'Tampering with Scripture' to quote the Bible using politically correct terms?

[I know, same Schtuff, different toilet, but Tampering with Scripture suits the question better lol....]

No, it's not. As long as the translation is being faithful to the meaning. Otherwise, any time you translated into a different language you'd have to say that was tampering of a sort.

[casaba]

Just a quick defence of 'politically correct' speech: Like the terms 'liberal' and 'feminist', the ideas behind being 'politcal correct' are honorable and justified. The world is constantly changing and, to my mind, the world today is a more liberal, feminist, and politically correct today than ever, which is a good thing. However, certain individuals, generally those who resist change, seem to love finding some extreme behavior and then claim that the whole idea is evil. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in turning the term into epithets.

Posting eligibility follows the same guidelines as Christianity 201 in that only those persons holding to historical church orthodoxy (as defined by the Apostles Creed, and/or the Theology Web Statement of Faith, for example) will be permitted to post in Biblical Ethics

[Amazing Rando]

Is it 'blasphemous' to quote the Bible [on shirts, in assignments, etc] using 'politically correct' terms?

ie: Wearing a shirt that has Matthew 4:19 [And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men {KJV} ] except instead of saying "Fishers of Men" it says "Fisher's of People".

Far from being blasphemous, it's actually more anthropologically accurate and faithful to what the text actually says. The Greek word in question is anqrwpwn. It means "human beings," and it's the same root from which we get the word "anthropology."

The Greek language already had perfectly good words for "man" and "women" (anhr and gunh respectively). Honestly, I think it does a disservice to the Greek to render anqrwpos as "man."

[Soyeong]

Just a quick defence of 'politically correct' speech: Like the terms 'liberal' and 'feminist', the ideas behind being 'politcal correct' are honorable and justified. The world is constantly changing and, to my mind, the world today is a more liberal, feminist, and politically correct today than ever, which is a good thing. However, certain individuals, generally those who resist change, seem to love finding some extreme behavior and then claim that the whole idea is evil. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in turning the term into epithets.
I agree that is a good thing to censor yourself in order to avoid offending one. However, with people looking to get offended and with the media all too eager to let them know when they have been offended, it gets ridiculous how much self censorship politicians have to go through. As I said, I was trying a little too hard to make the parallel and it didn’t quite work. I don’t think the whole idea is evil; I just think people have taken it too far.

[Chaotic Void]

What about Making it so that it's so 'politically correct', that the meaning is lost? I cannot think of any example, but I don't think the Bible is free from getting the meaning PC'd out of it

[James Peter]

Its not worse than any other mistranslation/misapplication of Scripture. Churches abuse Scripture (either intentionally or unintentionally) all the time. Bad exegesis/translation is always wrong but if you shot everyone who was guilty of it there would be no church left.

[Timothy Leary]

What about Making it so that it's so 'politically correct', that the meaning is lost? I cannot think of any example, but I don't think the Bible is free from getting the meaning PC'd out of it

If you intentionally changing the meaning, then yes - I'd say that's wrong. That's true with any author. But if it isn't attributed as a direct quote, then it'd probably be OK. People paraphrase things all the time.

[aardvarkcore]

It's the whole 'gender inclusive' thing. The main Bible I use is partially gender inclusive (ie. P.C.) the main difference is that it says "Brothers and sisters..." rather than just "Brothers..."

You have to look into the social context of when the Bible was written.