1946: A text in context

1946: The Mistranslation That Shifted Culture

Directed by Sharon “Rocky” Roggio
Acowsay Film Company, 2022.

A distinguishing mark of Reformed biblical interpretation is the acknowledgement of context. The Bible is a library of texts, each of which arises out of a particular context. The collected, canonical Scriptures as a whole also arose from a context. Our translations come from yet other contexts. We read and apply the Bible to our lives in our specific contexts. Recognizing these levels of context when it comes to Scripture means we may need to do more than simply read the English word straight off the page and “cut and paste” it onto today. In this way, Reformed interpretation is more “literary” than “literal.”

Much of the history of biblical interpretation revolves around this issue of literary context. Whether we apply Old Testament laws today rests on an understanding that some of those laws were intended for a context very different from our own (take, for example, Leviticus 13:38-39 before a dermatologist visit). In John 6:53-56, Jesus’ words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood have original meaning not only through the literary way John uses a metaphor but also within the ancient worldview of how a student/disciple ought to be formed by a teacher/master.

This role of context in biblical interpretation undergirds a range of “hot topics” today, from the “creation/evolution” debates to conflicts about worship and church leadership. An especially vigorous debate has erupted recently about how to understand some of Paul’s language about “faith in Christ” versus the “faithfulness of Christ” (known sometimes as the “New Perspective on Paul”).

When we engage these questions about how a text of Scripture ought to be interpreted or applied contextually, we are not automatically discounting the Bible’s authority. Taking context into account helps us understand how the Bible has authority. The Bible isn’t an abstract, timeless document that emerged from a vacuum. It comes from a context. We receive it in our context. Part of how the Bible functions authoritatively is through paying close attention to context.

1946 is a documentary film that participates in this question of how the Bible’s context relates to our interpretation and application. It follows a small group of LGBTQ Christian friends working collaboratively to understand how an English translation decision made in 1946 has come to have such culture-shaping influence.

But the film isn’t simply a straightforward lesson in biblical Greek. Rather, the question of how we should interpret biblical texts about “homosexuality” is presented through the lens of a pastor – who committed to his interpretation concerning “biblical truth” – and his daughter, who is “outed” as a lesbian and then ostracized by her family. This family dynamic heightens the rhetorical force of the film’s claims about biblical interpretation.

The film makes two, inter-related arguments. First, that the original 1946 Revised Standard Version (RSV) – which was the first English translation to include the term “homosexual” – makes a translation error by using this loaded term (spoiler alert: a Canadian brings this to the attention of the translation team). The film focuses specifically on 1 Corinthians 6:9’s list of persons who “will not inherit the kingdom of God.” This list includes “homosexuals” (revised to “sexual perverts” in later editions). The film only touches on other biblical texts about same-sex sexual activities, but its point is clear: that conservative evangelical twentieth-century assumptions and beliefs about “homosexuality” have been imported into the English translation of Scripture without warrant.

This portion of the film may be difficult to follow for those with limited technical knowledge of biblical Greek or first-century Greco-Roman cultural practices around sexual activity. The film draws on several scholars who attempt to explain succinctly the ancient world’s sexual ethics, especially how sex was used as a form of domination and exploitation within a hierarchical society. Paul’s use of a highly unique Greek term (“arsenakoitai”) receives special attention because today we have very little evidence for how this term was used in Paul’s context. The only other place we’re aware of this term being used outside of Scripture at this time is in a list of economic vices, not sexual ones. But, again, these are very technical academic debates for a lay viewer.

The film’s second claim is that this translation error in the RSV participated in the American culture wars throughout the second half of the twentieth century in which gay and lesbian persons were “scapegoated” by an anxious religious culture. This point is made abundantly clear: with this translation, the Bible has been transformed into a “sacred weapon” against a marginalized and stigmatized group. The film shows how this translation began two trends: a growing number of biblical verses began to be translated into English with various forms of the term “homosexual” or “homosexuality” – and subsequent influential English translations (the Living Bible, the New American Standard Bible and the New International Version) built upon, expanded and disseminated this anti-LGBTQ tendency with conservative cultural and political support.

Some viewers of this documentary have reported being left with the impression that the Bible is an unreliable document for life and faith today. Other viewers have seen this film as part of a progressive media conspiracy against traditional biblical Christian faith. I feel that 1946 will probably only entrench the beliefs a viewer brings to it, mostly because of the first-person nature of the film’s framework and the emotional weight of the father-daughter relationship at its centre. While the scholarship is academically mainstream, the core question the film asks is whether this is an interpretive issue worth splitting families and churches over.

North American Christian faith is caught today in the grip of a powerful myth: that we can achieve scientific certainty about everything in life and faith. The pull towards biblicism remains strong in North American evangelicalism, where the Bible is assumed to address every detail of life. This desire for certainty often reinforces fear during times of cultural change; fear often contributes to tragic breakdowns in relationships. Pastor Sal says that when it comes to how the Bible regards same-sex sexuality, “the issue is truth.” His lesbian daughter agrees but with the important caution that the original context and our context work together to shape how we are to receive that truth. Whether one agrees with the arguments of 1946, a text is always nestled within a context. And the same is true of this film within contemporary debates about human sexuality.

You can view the movie in several communities across Canada or online.