"What if Disney Owned the Bible?"

A Boom News Flash Article

Boom News Flash Article:

Okay, so boom - "What if Disney Owned the Bible?"

The King James version, it has been established, is the property of the Crown of the United Kingdom.

Recently, however, it was circulated that it had been purchased by Google parent Alphabet and Disney.

The fact check site Politifact  stated that the referenced Facebook post was not actually factual, but rather satire.

Meta relationship notwithstanding, they report that thus far there has been no corroborating evidence.

So, who owns the Bible? Not a rhetorical question, nor an prophetic one. Just one that has been hidden in plain sight.

As an asset, The Authorized Version, backbone of the Protestant Church, is a brilliant investment which remains a global best seller. Undeniably, it's a great story.

A blameless protagonist, wronged through no fault of their own, embarks on a journey, returns with purpose, is betrayed by one close to them (who, in retrospect, was always the obvious suspect), makes the ultimate sacrifice, suffers… yet triumphs in the end.

That story arc—the blueprint of the modern novel and blockbuster motion picture —is largely lifted from narratives even more ancient… but that’s beyond the scope of this piece.

Okay, so boom - a good portfolio move, no question. The question lies in the morality of man.

No matter the truth or falsity of the acquisition claims, the issue that arises - and this is the point of the article - is that with the rights to sell, license, print and distribute, comes the inherent power to edit.

This is where the Clarion call sounds.

Would anyone actually change the Santa Biblia? Should they be so audacious – whose lens, whose agenda, whose understanding – will govern such revisions?

Let us begin with the well-established premise that context is lost in translation. (That cliché likely springs from this very example).

A historical Yashua would necessarily speak Aramaic, would read and write Hebrew. Leaving aside the generational gap between the narrative itself and its attributed authors setting it to parchment, its transmission to the Greek translation (Septuguint) was succeeded by a curious purging of all Gospels originally inked in Hebrew.

This (slight) digression is only to highlight that any potential, mistaken mistranslations, were left with no way to confirm such loss. Aside, of course, from extant manuscripts turning up, which are then summarily overlooked, save those few dogged individuals with a personal interest in the scholarship of it.

We then have it transferred again, into the romanized lettering system where, in addition to the natural loss of idiom and inherent cultural style, there were also obvious additions and redactions, in direct contravention of the warnings of Revelation 22:18-19.

This is openly acknowledged by biblical scholars. Footnotes in most modern Study Bibles will quietly tell you: “Not included in the earliest manuscripts.”

The presence or absence of a few words can significantly alter how the reader understands the verses so affected.

Let me be clear: this isn’t an attack on anyone’s faith, tradition, or belief system.  The point I set forth is this...

There’s an ever-present risk in letting corporate entities hold editorial hegemony over sacred texts.

History shows that no persons in authority - and even less the legal fiction veiled by bodies corporate - hold anything sacred when it conflicts with their bottom line. Scripture, story, or society: all are fair game if it serves their business model.

That being said, I close with a question. In their defense, perhaps?

Is there anyone “worthy to loose the seals thereof?”

(And what are the seals, exactly? Well… that’s another article.)

#okaysoboom #BoomNews

Comment your thoughts.