The claim isn't that right-wing people don't read. Just that they don't read the output of the right-wing publishing industry. But instead buy those books as cultural markers.Josh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:50 amThis is a rather bold claim; essentially claiming that right wing people don't read. I don't think is supported by actual facts, but it is certainly convenient to accuse your ideological enemies of being dumb and illiterate.In the right-wing publishing industry, books are not made to be read. They are to be displayed on your shelves, unopened, so you can glance at them and feel that somewhere, a liberal is "owned."
God Bless the USA" Bibles
-
- Posts: 16422
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
- Josh
- Posts: 24422
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
And I’d say this assumes facts not entered into evidence. It is particularly egregious in the context of the article, which claims right wing people wouldn’t read a Bible they purchased. In my experience, they read their Bibles more than I do.Ken wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:29 amThe claim isn't that right-wing people don't read. Just that they don't read the output of the right-wing publishing industry. But instead buy those books as cultural markers.Josh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:50 amThis is a rather bold claim; essentially claiming that right wing people don't read. I don't think is supported by actual facts, but it is certainly convenient to accuse your ideological enemies of being dumb and illiterate.In the right-wing publishing industry, books are not made to be read. They are to be displayed on your shelves, unopened, so you can glance at them and feel that somewhere, a liberal is "owned."
0 x
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
The Trump and Biden stickers are helpful in this regard.Szdfan wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:11 amLooking in from the outside, it can be hard to distinguish between people who are "culturally" Christian and identify as Christians without discipleship and those who are actually disciples of Jesus Christ.mike wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:41 amYes, that all makes sense to me. I think it's easy for the left to characterize Trump's most important base as being conservative Christians, but that's only partly true. I've got a auction buddy who travels with a Bible on his dashboard sort of as a good-luck talisman, and I can assure you he never cracks that book open. I expect that the kind of people who buy a Bible from Trump are just this sort of barely religious folk who don't actually care too much what the good book says precisely. I think Trump has known for a long time that he really doesn't deserve the vote of conservative evangelicals.
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
-
- Posts: 16422
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
You are tilting at strawmen. Normal Bibles aren't the output of right-wing publishing houses and, therefore, not what the author is referring to. And if you want facts in evidence, I'm sure you can find studies online which show that conservatives read less books than liberals. They do exist.Josh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:32 amAnd I’d say this assumes facts not entered into evidence. It is particularly egregious in the context of the article, which claims right wing people wouldn’t read a Bible they purchased. In my experience, they read their Bibles more than I do.
What you can also find is evidence that the output of right-wing publishing houses is often just bought in volume as a way of funneling money to right-wing political authors and most of those books are never actually read. For example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyl ... story.html
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
-
- Posts: 4668
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm
- Location: Holmes County, Ohio
- Affiliation: Gospel Haven
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
True. Good point. It is not good to try to sanitize true history. I suppose I am a bit touchy about that sort of "praise of the worldly king" because many of my people had that same attitude toward the Czar. One of the best historical books about the history of the Mennonites in Russia is full of that sort of talk. Leave it in, and let's resolve to do better, to faithfully determine to not be taken in by popular political figures, no matter which side of the left to right spectrum they fit into. (And also, popular preachers who too often skim over the top of Scripture, picking out only the parts that please the 'flesh'.)Josh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:50 amOops - I meant a page of translator's notes.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:37 am I'm not sure I understand what you mean about a "day of translator's notes", but if I do understand your meaning, I do not have any issue with the historical note itself - it's the fawning over Prince James, king of England that bothers me. Maybe I am the only one who is uncomfortable with that in my Bible.
I think it is an important piece of history that should stay with the KJV. It tells us exactly what the attitude and mindset of the translators was. Why remove it?
1 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
-
- Posts: 16422
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
I mean the actual name of the translation is "King James Version" It seems useful to put in some translator notes that indicate where that name actually came from. The translation was, in fact, commissioned and sponsored by....King James.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:47 pmTrue. Good point. It is not good to try to sanitize true history. I suppose I am a bit touchy about that sort of "praise of the worldly king" because many of my people had that same attitude toward the Czar. One of the best historical books about the history of the Mennonites in Russia is full of that sort of talk. Leave it in, and let's resolve to do better, to faithfully determine to not be taken in by popular political figures, no matter which side of the left to right spectrum they fit into. (And also, popular preachers who too often skim over the top of Scripture, picking out only the parts that please the 'flesh'.)Josh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:50 amOops - I meant a page of translator's notes.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:37 am I'm not sure I understand what you mean about a "day of translator's notes", but if I do understand your meaning, I do not have any issue with the historical note itself - it's the fawning over Prince James, king of England that bothers me. Maybe I am the only one who is uncomfortable with that in my Bible.
I think it is an important piece of history that should stay with the KJV. It tells us exactly what the attitude and mindset of the translators was. Why remove it?
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
-
- Posts: 4668
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm
- Location: Holmes County, Ohio
- Affiliation: Gospel Haven
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
I have no issues with credit being given to 'Prince James, King of England' for funding the project. He was, after all, the sponsor, and without his approval the translators might have been taking their lives in their hands. All of the praise & glory given to his is the part to which I would object. (But it might well have been the condition under which the entire project was taken up. He DID also insist that his name be put into the text - the reason a couple of men were renamed 'James'. Bit of vanity there, don't you think?)Ken wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:12 pmI mean the actual name of the translation is "King James Version" It seems useful to put in some translator notes that indicate where that name actually came from. The translation was, in fact, commissioned and sponsored by....King James.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:47 pmTrue. Good point. It is not good to try to sanitize true history. I suppose I am a bit touchy about that sort of "praise of the worldly king" because many of my people had that same attitude toward the Czar. One of the best historical books about the history of the Mennonites in Russia is full of that sort of talk. Leave it in, and let's resolve to do better, to faithfully determine to not be taken in by popular political figures, no matter which side of the left to right spectrum they fit into. (And also, popular preachers who too often skim over the top of Scripture, picking out only the parts that please the 'flesh'.)
0 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
-
- Posts: 16422
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
The King James version is essentially the Anglican Bible and King James was the divine-right ruler coronated by the Anglican Church. I expect that sort of flowery language was more or less par for the course for official pronouncements in those days. They probably used "all praise & glory" type language for simple government budget documents as well.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 2:45 pmI have no issues with credit being given to 'Prince James, King of England' for funding the project. He was, after all, the sponsor, and without his approval the translators might have been taking their lives in their hands. All of the praise & glory given to his is the part to which I would object. (But it might well have been the condition under which the entire project was taken up. He DID also insist that his name be put into the text - the reason a couple of men were renamed 'James'. Bit of vanity there, don't you think?)Ken wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:12 pmI mean the actual name of the translation is "King James Version" It seems useful to put in some translator notes that indicate where that name actually came from. The translation was, in fact, commissioned and sponsored by....King James.Neto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:47 pm
True. Good point. It is not good to try to sanitize true history. I suppose I am a bit touchy about that sort of "praise of the worldly king" because many of my people had that same attitude toward the Czar. One of the best historical books about the history of the Mennonites in Russia is full of that sort of talk. Leave it in, and let's resolve to do better, to faithfully determine to not be taken in by popular political figures, no matter which side of the left to right spectrum they fit into. (And also, popular preachers who too often skim over the top of Scripture, picking out only the parts that please the 'flesh'.)
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
- Josh
- Posts: 24422
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: "God Bless the USA" Bibles
That may be the case, but I’m not sure why you’d limit that to “right wing”, as there is plenty of evidence the left wing does the same thing - unless you really believe Barack Obama’s books were bestsellers studiously read by millions of buyers.Ken wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:41 pm What you can also find is evidence that the output of right-wing publishing houses is often just bought in volume as a way of funneling money to right-wing political authors and most of those books are never actually read. For example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyl ... story.html
1 x