A Lawsuit of Biblical Proportions: Christian Publisher Sued for Allegedly Homophobic Translation of Bible

In Grand Rapids, Michigan, Christian publisher Zondervan is facing a $60 million federal lawsuit for allegedly homophobia and prejudicial translations of the Bible. by a man who claims he and other homosexuals have suffered based on what the suit claims is a misinterpretation of the Bible. Bradley Fowler has sued the publisher despite the fact that it is not the translator.

Fowler focuses on the translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9 — and notes that homosexuals are listed “wicked” or “unrighteous” and barred from the kingdom of heaven.

A typical such translation reads “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God (1Cor 6:9-10; NKJV).”

Fowler insists that $60 million and an apology is needed “To compensate for the past 20 years of emotional duress and mental instability,” Fowler told 24 Hour News 8 in a phone interview.

He insists that Zondervan Bibles published in the 1980s use the word homosexuals but that it dropped in later editions.

It is a frivolous lawsuit that in flawed on a variety of levels. People are allowed to interrupt Biblical passages as they see fit. It is certainly not the domain of courts to resolve such theological debates.

For the full story, click here.

60 thoughts on “A Lawsuit of Biblical Proportions: Christian Publisher Sued for Allegedly Homophobic Translation of Bible”

  1. WHO CARES.

    People need to stop messing with our freedom of speech. I am all for gay rights (because people should have rights because they’re people not straight or gay). I’m all for religious freedom. I’m all for adult content with consenting adults.

    Stop telling us what we can and cannot publish or read. It’s really none of anyone else’s business.

    Gawd. Just stop it already!

  2. PAT B.
    1, July 20, 2008 at 11:11 pm

    WELL BARTLEBEE,,,PERHAPS YOU SHOULD READ THE 18TH CHAPTER OF LEVITICUS TOO!!

    Why?

    Do you think I’m a Jew?

  3. WELL BARTLEBEE,,,PERHAPS YOU SHOULD READ THE 18TH CHAPTER OF LEVITICUS TOO!! PATTY C. APPEARANTLY FREEDOM OF SPEACH DOESN’T
    COVER GOD!!! AND I WOULD REALLY HATE TO BE THE JUDGE WHO RULES
    IN THIS MORRONS FAVOR WHEN HE STANDS BEFORE GOD!! ANY JUDGE IN
    HIS RIGHT MIND WOULD THROW THIS JOKE OF A CASE OUT! WHERE DO WE
    DRAW THE LINE ON CHRISTIAN PROSECUTION? WHY AREN’T CHRISTIANS
    TODAY,NOT TAKING A STAND? WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!

  4. Patty C:

    My wife says that I am one on occasion. So thatโ€™s one for jackass, and I am abstaining.

    ****

    That’s ‘executive’ privilege’!

  5. It is important to note that it isn’t what was put into the translation as it changed over the years, but what the publisher allowed to take out.

    Even Mr. Turley (who I have a lot of respect for) seemed to miss the point of the lawsuit– not one translation, but a “smoking gun” pattern over the years of tweaking a book to incite hate against a single group.

    Even though I’m not a law expert, this suit has some merit of discussion because inciting violence and hatred is not protected speech.

  6. Patty C:

    My wife says that I am one on occasion. So that’s one for jackass, and I am abstaining.

  7. OK, Everybody, who matters knows who they are, weigh in
    – who thinks mespo is a jackass?

    negats!
    Patty C.

  8. mespo727272
    1, July 12, 2008 at 5:13 pm

    What a jackass that guy has become in just a few days on the blog!

    As opposed to the jackass you’ve been in here along?

  9. Michael Spindell:

    Well I guess we now know for a fact that Bartlebee is really tough and can defend himself. I don’t know about you, Michael, but I am off to the gym to bulk up. What a jackass that guy has become in just a few days on the blog! I bet he’d really charm you in real time. Hoping the vacation and great expectation are going well.

  10. And if you don’t like that fact, then I suggest not writing a check with your mouth that your keyboard can’t cash.

    As I’ve repeatedly told the remainder of your murder of cawing crows, if you don’t like it, then don’t come looking for it.

  11. BARTLEBEE
    1, July 12, 2008 at 4:45 pm
    Michael Spindell
    1, July 12, 2008 at 11:38 am

    Perhaps your output is the result of feeling rejected or misunderstood at this website and so a determination developed in you to show us all the breadth of your intelligence

    ๐Ÿ˜

    uhhh… nooo….my “output” is the result of being attacked without provocation.

    Its called, “standing up for yourself”.

    When someone hits me, I usually hit them back.

    Perhaps in circles you run in, the response to being hit is curling up in a ball and crying.

    I however respond to attacks, especially when they get personal, which your attacks, by your own admission above in not actually responding to my comments, but instead merely launching juvenile personal attacks, were.

    As for my “breadth of intelligence, you’re the ones who keep referring to it. I never once suggested anything with regards to my own IQ.

    What you deduce from my posts, is your business, but I’m neither a scholar nor a professor, just a poor ole country blogger, responding to the voluminous unwarranted and self aggrandizing personal attacks on me, apparently simply because you don’t like me.

    So if you want to apologize for launching unwarranted personal attacks on this lone blogger, then do so.

    But spare me the self aggrandizing lectures trying to psychoanalyze my motivation for responding to your smears in kind.

    When someone hits me first, I usually hit back.

  12. Michael Spindell
    1, July 12, 2008 at 11:38 am
    Bartlebee,
    Youโ€™re right I offered no refutation to your numerous posts. While you are no doubt in awe of yourself and your perspicacity, I find it tedious and overwrought

    So your response to attacking me without provocation, is that you’re a pompous ass who attacks anyone who you decide you don’t like, simply because you feel like it?

    ๐Ÿ˜

    Ok….I can accept that.

  13. Bartlebee,
    You’re right I offered no refutation to your numerous posts. While you are no doubt in awe of yourself and your perspicacity, I find it tedious and overwrought. You think yourself amusing and no doubt to yourself you are. I commend you for being so happy with yourself, no matter how tedious that self may be to others.

    I admit that I am judging you and for all I know you might be a fine person with a winsome personality. I try hard not to be initially judgmental of people. I apologize for misjudgment if that is the case. Perhaps your output is the result of feeling rejected or misunderstood at this website and so a determination developed in you to show us all the breadth of your intelligence. However, you must admit that your incessant and voluminous comments might well appear to others as the disruption of a persistent troll, who by the dint of his output attempts to stifle, rather than promote discussion.

    Which brings me full circle. I do admit to not directly responding to your points. My non-response was borne of a judgment, made from your many comments that your posts were more about your ego than discussion. This was bolstered by your tendency to engage in personal attacks with those you found disagreeing with you. Admittedly, your perspective is that you were attacked first, but I believe the opposite to be true. So while admitting that I may be judging you harshly, I refuse to engage with you, not out of fear, but out of boredom. Perhaps if you would expose more of your real self than the hubris so evident in your discourse, we might all come to see you as a valuable co-contributor.

  14. I will concede this point however.

    You do posses about as much knowledge on the Bible, and the topics of which you’re expounding on, as do the Evangelical Christians.

    ๐Ÿ˜

    In fact, if I didn’t know better…

  15. mespo727272
    1, July 11, 2008 at 4:12 pm
    I see that you have incurred the wrath of our little Bartlebug. I am amazed that he sees only his facts when our posts are full of them

    Well, I would agree that they’re full of something.

    ๐Ÿ˜

    However you’ve yet to procduce a single “fact” that refutes anything I’ve said.

  16. MichaelSpindell:

    I see that you have incurred the wrath of our little Bartlebug. I am amazed that he sees only his facts when our posts are full of them seriatim. I also enjoy his numerous posts when one or two would do. Is is insecurity or erratic thinking? In any event, I shall join you today in the sunshine and play a round. I do hope that when nature calls both of us can answer the call in a place worthy of it and, coincidentally, likewise worthy of Bartlebee’s musings.

Comments are closed.