That really is a sweet little clip. The child who voiced Linus had such a quintessentially warm American accent, even down to the little lisp. Magic in a bottle – from the voices to the soundtrack. It was made in 1965 and stands as a marker of the end of the Christian American culture, only recognized now in retrospect.
But, a nit to pick, and a great lesson for all in how important an accurate translation of the Bible is. Most Bibles today read Luke 2:14 as:
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.”
The last clause is totally wrong, and was mangled intentionally and with malice.
The Vulgate Latin, which is St. Jerome’s inspired synthesis of the original source texts triple cross-referenced against each other in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew in preparation for the eventual setting of the canon of scripture at the Council of Carthage in 397 AD, reads thusly:
“…gloria in altissimis Deo et in terra pax in hominibus bonae voluntatis”
In English, in the Douay-Rheims translation this reads:
Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will.
These are two completely different ideas. Radically different. The bad, modern translation has peace and goodwill together as co-subjects, as unqualified universals: “peace, goodwill TOWARD men”. The accurate translation clearly has goodwill not as the COMPOUND SUBJECT along with peace, but as the QUALIFIER. To men OF GOOD WILL. Good will isn’t the subject, it is the OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION.
The Peace of Our Lord is a massively qualified, and extremely rare and precious thing. When the priest says at Mass, “Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum” (The peace of the Lord be always with you), he isn’t just saying “nice things” as filler. This is a profound and precious prayer.
Why would God, in His Perfect Justice, wish good will towards those men who are at war with Him, and thus His Church? Is not the Second Person, God Incarnate in the Manger in Bethlehem, the Judge of mankind? Is not the Baby wrapped in swaddling clothes He who will sort the sheep from the goats? Is He not the One who is come to sift the wheat from the chaff? Did He not say:
“Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword.”
Oh, but if we are under attack by Communist-homosexualist infiltrators, and we want God reduced to an abstract philosophical construct, an “I’m okay, you’re okay” joke of a deity, an effete, toothless “idea” that is merely an excuse for neo-pagan self-worship and narcissistic performance opportunities, then, by all means, mangle and rearrange the Word of God. As the infiltrators tell their victims, “It doesn’t really matter what the original texts said – all that matters is what today’s translation says to you . . . ”
Luke 2:14 is a quick, easy way to check the veracity of any translation of the Bible. Break yours out and check right now. And then, when you find it incorrectly translated, as you almost certainly will, ask yourself what other verses have been mangled. And then ask yourself what you’re missing in the seven books that Luther removed. Uh-oh.
Nonanonymous says:
Haven’t heard of Douay-Rheims, as the Stephen’s Greek text is the source for the KJV of 1601, if I’m not mistaken. However, I’m familiar with translations of the bible, enough to be dangerous.
I like the English Standard Version, which translates Luke 2:14 thusly,
“Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!” (Luke 2:14 ESV)
The most egregious mistranslations are those which purport to support the doctrine of the Trinity, but don’t try telling that to a turnip head.
Again, not familiar with the cited text, however, prior to using the ESV, the most accurate translation of the bible I’ve found is the NRSV completed in 1989, which is going to be the case, barring some known mistranslations for known reasons, unless some new evidence, like the dead sea scrolls, profane literature found in broken pottery in the dead sea, mostly bills of laden but which shed light on the usage of the ancient language, are found.
Stated another way, we have the most accurate translations of God’s Word we’ll ever have. It’s up to you and I whether to believe it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
25th December 2012 at 10:11 pm
crazyivan says:
Lots of geese migrating these last few weeks. They fly by in great v-shaped formations. But they also land and fuck around in my stubble fields next to my fort. I watch them a lot.
Modern scientific folklore tells us that they fly in a “v” formation so that each goose in trail benefits from the displacement of air provided by the goose in front of it, so he or she doesn’t have to flap so hard.
From my observations the ones in the back are flapping harder than the lead goose on point, and are actually buffeted around. This explains why they have to flap harder. Also they seem to be making small maneuvering corrections constantly, whereas the lead goose is Steady Eddie (justa cruzin tryin to stay in front).
21 years as a cropduster tells me that undisturbed air makes for the best flight.
What The Discovery Channel doesn’t address is that geese shit a lot. Whereas us humans plan ahead when to have a bowl movement (my grandma’s term) geese are constantly and relentlessly passing gooseshit. A little squirt here, a little squirt there, here a squirt there a squirt….
It is my hypothesis (and I will stake my reputation on it) that geese do not fly in v shaped formations for aerodynamic advantage other than keeping their wings clean.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14 
0
25th December 2012 at 11:27 pm
anotherjuan says:
Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.
what would be the point of all this theological argument? either you are willing to believe or you are not. the scientific method was developed as a methodology to prove or disprove reality and separate it from unreality. science is the study of the material universe. but you can’t use science to prove the existence of God anymore than you can save your soul by being good, doing good things and thinking good thoughts.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
25th December 2012 at 11:41 pm
Stucky says:
Whoever wrote the Gospels certainly did not know that they were writing “Sacred Scriptures”. There were MANY gospels … one wasn’t any more “sacred” than the other. The four we wound up with were basically selected by various churchy leaders voting them in at Nicea … about 300+ years after Christ’s birth. IMagine that …. the Words of God determined by popular vote! lol Most importantly, there is not one single shred of a parchment of any Original Gospel.
So, it is hilarious (to me) to see churchy leaders and churchy followers arguing over “my version is older/more reliable/better than yours. If they ever find the Original Source Document, then call me and I’ll listen to what it “really” says.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
12 
2
25th December 2012 at 1:18 am
chen says:
stuck nobody has seen your birth certificate parchment so how do we know you exist? especially since there are so many others claiming to be you
Like or Dislike:
2 
3
25th December 2012 at 10:47 am
bluestem says:
chen, trust me, Stuck exists. John
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
25th December 2012 at 1:20 pm
chen says:
gospel of bluestem notwithstanding, stuck is a chimera, a fount of diverging viewpoints that lead one to believe there are not one but several people posting as stucky. while i do believ God is everywhere at once, i cannot believe the same of stucky, if he really does exist (lol)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
25th December 2012 at 2:07 pm
Novista says:
chen
Are you suggesting stuck is a victim of Multiple Personality Disorder? Maybe the experts are wrong and it is really an asset.
Man, this one sure loved fours:
Irenaeus writes in Adversus Haereses:
The Gospels could not possibly be either more or less in number than they are. Since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is spread over all the earth, and the pillar and foundation of the Church is the gospel, and the Spirit of life, it fittingly has four pillars, everywhere breathing out incorruption and revivifying men. From this it is clear that the Word, the artificer of all things, being manifested to men gave us the gospel, fourfold in form but held together by one Spirit. As David said, when asking for his coming, ‘O sitter upon the cherubim, show yourself ‘. For the cherubim have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. For the first living creature, it says, was like a lion, signifying his active and princely and royal character; the second was like an ox, showing his sacrificial and priestly order; the third had the face of a man, indicating very clearly his coming in human guise; and the fourth was like a flying eagle, making plain the giving of the Spirit who broods over the Church. Now the Gospels, in which Christ is enthroned, are like these. (3.11.8)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
25th December 2012 at 11:42 pm
chen says:
i was kidding, stuck sometimes does come off as an erudite theologian and other times like a superficial buffoon. that is the reason i said there must be two, maybe four people writing as stuck, stucky, stuchenmeister, et al. i have read in the bible that stuck questions, let man be a liar but God be true, something like that – i’m human and i might get a word wrong but that’s the general idea. So, much as i like the guy, i won’t buy into his tale of multiple and varied gospels. if the council at nicea threw out any manuscripts it may be they found them lacking in truth, psuedographia, and apocrypha
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
25th December 2012 at 12:08 am
Susan says:
Better late than never. I am always amazed at how people who supposedly aren’t interested in faith for themselves, are always talking about it.
I for one believe that the “goodwill towards men” is on the face of it, correct. God sent his son as a gift of good will to all men, that all might be saved.
But, true, its important that scripture is not changed from its orginal meaning. If thats your concern, it would be interesting to remember that the Dead Sea Scrolls matched up extremely well to current translations.
Also, even if the writers of the bible were unaware that is was to become gospel, the Holy Spirit certainly did. If anyone believes in a God of the bible, who isn’t able to protect and provide the correct scripture down through the ages, that is irrational.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
25th December 2012 at 2:10 pm
Anonymous says:
” If anyone believes in a God of the bible, who isn’t able to protect and provide the correct scripture down through the ages, that is irrational.” – Susan
No. No. No.
Now if you take someone that does NOT believe in a God of the bible, yet admits the bible is true…
well, that’s irrational.
I think that the word you are looking for is delusionable
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
25th December 2012 at 4:43 pm