Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Media Distrust

    Gallup reports that U. S. Distrust in Media Hits New High. Unfortunately, I suspect this distrust does not reflect a dismay at the amount of inaccurate information and a desire to get accurate information whatever the cost. I suspect that it’s more because of the large number of partisans who think their party, candidate, or favorite issue is not getting favorable treatment.

    I too distrust the media, but my problem is that our journalists are trying for balance rather than for accuracy. The way they try to produce balance is by calling on people from both sides of any particular issue and having them argue. Since they have representatives of both sides, the reporting must be fair. No? In my view, most issues have more than two sides, and often having a Republican and a Democrat provide commentary doesn’t even cover two sides.

    Evaluations of media fairness frequently involve counting positive and negative stories about a candidate or issue, and if the counts are right, then the coverage is fair.

    There are several problems with this. One candidate or the other might be providing more fodder for negative stories than the other. If one candidate has more scandal is it to be expected that the media will manage to somehow keep the reporting equal? The problem here is that people can’t agree on just what is a real scandal.

    That’s why I’d rather have the journalists themselves evaluate what they’re presenting and give their reasons and evidence. This is one of the reasons I like organizations like Politifact. I frequently disagree with their rating of a story, but they generally provide enough information such as the source of studies, details, additional context and so forth, for me to make at least a preliminary judgment, and pointers to information if I think I need to find more.

    I think that our entire approach to media fairness should be scrapped. Identify biases, go in depth, and provide references. TV and radio programs can provide such references through their web sites. Over time I suspect the internet will adjust for bias by allowing people to select their own range of stories and opinion shows. That’s how I get my news already.

     

  • Are You Preserving Holy Bricks?

    There’s an insightful article on the Spectrum Magazine web site titled Holy Bricks. This one deals particularly with Seventh-day Adventist bricks, but the principles discussed apply anywhere. I have yet to encounter a community that doesn’t have a few holy bricks to deal with. I particularly liked the point where a constituent in a meeting said, “I don’t care if we don’t have a single student left, you’re not going to close our school!” I suspect most church leaders have heard the equivalent.

    There is a time to move forward in faith, but I don’t think that time coincides with our desire to preserve holy bricks. In any case, read the whole article. There are some great thoughts there.

  • My Continuing War on Study Bibles

    Well, maybe not a war. I don’t really hate Bibles with study notes, and even recommend their use for appropriate purposes. They’re great for giving you background information, pointing out connections, and so forth. When they tell you what the text says, they are not so great. At a minimum, use more than one, and use Bibles from different perspectives.

    I’ve written a number of posts including one comparing introductions to the book of Luke. To get more, just put “study bible” (including the quotes) in the search box at the upper right.

    In any case, my particular annoyance today is with the NLT Study Bible, and particular it’s coverage of the Proverbs 31 woman. The lectionary this week includes Proverbs 31:10-31. Now there are many ways of looking at this passage. On my lectionary notes blog, which I rarely update, I made a few comments on the passage.

    The problem I have here is that the notes are simply flat. They make no mention of how anyone could have any other view of how the passage should be read. It begins: “Proverbs ends with a powerful poem celebrating the virtuous wife.”

    It then mentions that this is an acrostic, a fine thing to note, but the question is just why did Hebrew poetry use acrostics. Was it to make the poem easier to remember? As someone who memorizes scripture from time to time, even in the original languages, I’m not certain that’s an adequate explanation. Perhaps we should start with the way in which thought structure is a core part of Hebrew poetry.

    I know that a study Bible has limited space. The problem is that a reader goes from text to notes and decides that the notes must contain the true meaning of the text. They bypass the hard work of interpretation and they miss out on all the possibilities.

    What would I want to see in such a note?

    1) The note on the structure, with some additional options as to why this might be an acrostic

    2) Some comment on why the editor chose to end his collection of proverbs with this particular passage

    3) Explanation of some of the background, such as what went on at the city gate, and so forth.

    I find this particular note lacking in all of this.

    I do want to add that this shouldn’t be taken as a criticism of just the NLT Study Bible. Many others have similar problems. This is just the one I was reading this morning. Nonetheless, in contrast, I read the notes in the New Interpreter’s Study Bible, which covers points 1 & 2 that I list above, resulting in what I would regard as a much more useful note. The Jewish Study Bible manages to cover all three.

  • More on The Voice

    I haven’t had time to read enough of The Voice to draw final conclusions, just to make observations. I do intend to continue reading and try to come up with some more precise and well-supported conclusions. The problem is that I find The Voice the most difficult mix of good and bad ideas I’ve ever encountered in a Bible translation. It doesn’t classify easily.

    Chad Whitley commented on my previous post and linked to a review on his site. Well, he doesn’t call it a review, but an “amalgamation of thoughts” which would be  a fair description of what I’ve done thus far as well. I think his amalgamation is well worth reading.

    I would add a few notes:

    1) I’m less concerned than Chad is with the translation team. When I have the text in front of me, I’m much more concerned with seeing the product and comparing it to the source languages. For someone who does not read the source languages, however, the team is an important consideration, and I use it in my selection tool. (Note that The Voice is not listed there as I have not completed the relevant stats.)

    There are some stellar names on the translation team, but as I work my way through the product, I’m getting less and less happy. It doesn’t seem to be consistent. Consistency would allow me to read it with profit even if I disagreed with the translation choices. As it is, when I see italics, I’m not really certain what’s going on until I compare it to the source texts. I found myself thinking a few times, “I don’t think _____ would do it this way.” That leads me to wonder about the team process, which has so much to do with the consistent feel of a translation effort.

    2) Taking up from point #1, the methodology is problematic based on the results. When I had just read the preface, I was willing to defend The Voice, even though I was pretty certain the translators (or the publisher) had fallen victim to “translation preface inflation.” If we were talking TV shows, we’d say that the entire genre of translation prefaces had jumped the shark years ago.

    The problem is that prefaces tend less to explain how a translation was accomplished than they do to market the translation. Instead of seeking clarity of expression they seek motivation. It’s advertising copy. I have always recommended that Bible students read the preface to their Bible translation, but that is becoming less useful.

    3) I find the text very readable, but I also find the italics distracting. Since they don’t seem to be consistent, I can’t really work them into my mental state while reading. I’m not sure that there is any good methodology which would allow for the use of italics–or any other form of distinction within the text–and be perfectly consistent.

    Finally, on the matter of the word “logos” in Greek, I have seen and even used other terms to translate it into English. If we are not going to use “word” I often prefer “message.” Then we have the sense that God’s message took on human form. I think that works reasonably well if we compare Hebrews 1:1-3. But in the latter passage we have “spoken.” God spoke through the prophets of old and now he has spoken to us through his Son. So “voice” might work. I’m working through mentally how that might change which passages the texts in question might evoke, which is an important part of understanding.

    In any case, I think Chad’s nicely nuanced comments in turn surrounded by caveats (his nuances and caveats, not mine!) will be very helpful if you’re trying to evaluate this version for use in any particular setting.

  • On Deepening Progressive Theology

    As you can see in the header, I use the labels “passionate moderate” and “liberal charismatic.” The first is one I adopted myself, the second was bestowed on me by an enemy, who combined the two things he liked the least in order to describe me. Nonetheless, it has an element of truth. I even used it in the subtitle of a book.

    But one of my complaints about liberal Christians has been that they (or we) are often much more certain of what we don’t believe than of what we do. Comments such as “we don’t take things so literally” or “we see that as more of a story” are used to cover wide swaths of theological thinking, but often the speakers don’t actually have any idea what that “less literal” meaning might be.  I have always known of serious progressive theological thinkers, and enjoyed their writings. Unfortunately, I’ve also known the other variety.

    So I like to see efforts to further define liberal or progressive theology, such as The Eight Points in Process – A Theological Vision – The Way of Jesus by Bruce Epperly. It is just the first article in a series, and it looks very promising. I see serious theological reflection written in terms that anyone can understand. For example:

    An early Christian spiritual leader, Iraneaus, proclaimed that the “glory of God is a fully alive human being.” From this perspective, Jesus is the fully alive one. The light of God focused on Jesus in a special way, giving him a unique message, spectacular healing energy, unhindered hospitality, and prophetic action. We follow Jesus’ Way not only because of his teachings but because of the power, wisdom, and healing he channeled.

    Though this uses some vocabulary that may wave red flags for some people, it addresses a serious issue. Can Jesus be reduced to just a great ethical teacher? If you are one of the people who find the vocabulary troubling, I’d suggest reading it again and then thinking of some phraseology from the gospel of John.

    I personally find process theology to be a bridge too far, but I do find much here that is helpful. I’ll definitely be following this series through to the end.

  • Proper B20 – Gutting another Passage

    There are times when I understand why we select verses to read in the Lectionary, and there are times when I don’t. In this case, I don’t. We have James 3:13-4:3, 7-8a. I don’t see adequate reason not to read 3:13 – 4:10 as a whole, and if I were to preach/teach on this passage I would definitely include the other texts. I do appreciate the inclusion of the buildup (3:13-18) which tells us the importance of 4:1-10.

    This isn’t too long to read as a whole. Verses 4-6 provide additional understanding as to why these conflicts take place and what to do about them. Version 8b-10 tell us something about how to get away from the problem.

  • Proper B20 – The Proverbs 31 Woman

    This passage has created quite a few problems over the years. There are women who feel really oppressed by it. Others feel this truly describes the perfect woman and try to get women (and girls) to live up to it. I encountered these various attitudes in a discussion group yesterday.

    My strong suggestion is to read this more as satire. The author is pointing out how much of the actual work that goes on is taken care of by the women, especially the wives of the powerful, while the men hang out at the city gate, which was where the politics goes on. Then, as now, a person of means was in a much better position to work the political circuit because you needed to be there when things happened. The husband of the woman described here was in a good position to be politically powerful. He looked terribly wise, but who was actually doing the work?

    One of my pastors, Geoffrey Lentz, suggested that this passage is intended to tie in with lady wisdom introduced early in the book. (He didn’t claim this as original, but he’s my footnote!) Thus the “woman of power” is, in some sense, God. I tend to agree with him on this, though only as the intention of the redactor, and as a canonical read of the text.

    By the nature of Proverbs, as well as the indications in the text itself, this is a separate piece of the collection. In other words, we have no context for the words as they were originally presented. They might well have been an independent poem. In fact, I would suspect they were. But why include them in Proverbs, and specifically as the last portion? I think that positioning tends to support the idea that this is Lady Wisdom in some sense.

    However you do it, make sure not to make this passage a club to beat other people with. Women have enough expectations placed on them.

    I do recall my mother bringing this up at our wedding. We had arranged for a multigenerational blessing. My mother would say a few words, then our children would do so. I know Jody got tense when my mother read a portion of this passage. But then she turned it around. Her point was that a man needs to earn the Proverbs 31 woman. What sort of a man can deserve this woman? Good question, I think!

     

  • Such a Prayer – Jody’s Devotionals

    I want to call attention to my wife’s excellent devotional on prayer.

  • ERB Review of The Voice

    Since I’ve been making moderately negative comments about The Voice here on this blog, I’m going to link to a more favorable short review at Englewood Review of Books. Here’s the conclusion:

    In some of the introductory material, the editors (led by Chris Seay) note that “Too often, the passion, grit, humor and beauty have been lost in the translation process” and that “The Voice will call you to step into the whole story of God with your whole heart, soul and mind.”  My engagements with this new translation so far confirm that these are not slick marketing ploys, but really capture the essence of this exciting new presentation of the scriptural story.

    My experience has been the opposite. I started out defending this translation from objectors, and I would still defend it on a number of points. But after reading it for a longer period of time, I have grown less and less fond of it overall. It does great in some places, but I find the inconsistent use of italicized material, not to mention simply having that much italicized material in the first place, off-putting.

    You can find my comments on this issue in more details, in order of posting: Italics and The Voice, Italics in The Voice – The Story of Bathsheba, The Other Extreme on Explanation in Translation, Psalm 51 in The Voice, and Yet Again The Voice and Italics.

    I’m guessing my near obsession with this issue will not resonate with many readers. The difference in my review and the one I linked should provide a lesson to those considering any book: Make sure you know why the review author likes or does not like the book in question. You might find his or her “flaws” to be features!

    Similarly it might suggest to some reviewers to provide more explanation for their view of a book, whether positive or negative. That allows readers to make their own judgments of the value of the review as well.

     

     

  • The Advantages of Extremism (John Cleese)

    Just so!

    (HT: Exploring Our Matrix)