Which Bible would be the official one? The evangelical minimalist with 66 books, the Roman Catholic with 73 or the Orthodox Church with 76 books? The matter was debated at , on October 30th, in a session chaired by the senator (Republicans).
The session discussed , which proposes “to prohibit any alteration, adaptation, editing, suppression or addition to the texts of the Holy Bible to maintain the inviolability of its chapters and verses, also guaranteeing the preaching of its content throughout the national territory”. The project was proposed by federal deputy Pastor Sargento Isidório (Avante) and has already been approved by the Chamber and the Senate’s Human Rights and Participatory Legislation Committee.
According to experts in theology and law heard at the session, if PL 4606/19 is approved, a commission will have to be created with experts in biblical texts to prepare the translation of the Bible that would be recognized as official by the Brazilian State.
The motivation for the initiative was made clear in Senator Magno Malta’s favorable opinion: “The Bible should not be subject to changes motivated by ideologies, cultural agendas or militants. What is at stake here is not just the text, but the faith of the simple, sincere and devout people who find comfort, guidance and salvation in the Scriptures.”
The purpose of the Bill is to prevent the hermeneutical plurality of translation and interpretation of biblical texts. For example, there is debate in the academic biblical community whether the Greek terms malakoi and arsenakoi, 1 Corinthians 6:9, commonly translated as “effeminate and sodomites” would not be better translated respectively as “cowards and abusers”. The first translation is used to maintain that sin is a sin that condemns its practitioners to hell. In the case of the second translation, it is understood that the sin condemned is homosexuality and not homosexuality.
By proposing the prohibition of any “alteration” of the biblical text, the aim is to silence biblical and theological debates that involve current behavioral issues. Of course, in favor of Senator Magno Malta’s pet interpretation, which is considered free from ideology.
Renato Gugliano, a legal expert who represented the session, pointed to the unconstitutionality of PL 4606/19. According to his opinion, the project proposes control of the sacred text and this violates the constitutional principles of secularism and religious neutrality of the Brazilian State.
The theologians from different religious denominations invited to the session, specialists in Greek and Hebrew, were unanimous in recognizing that the project is unfeasible, from the point of view of the technique of translating biblical texts, and undesirable from the point of view of the exercise of religious and academic freedom.
Experts in biblical languages showed the various Catholic and evangelical translations of the Bible in circulation in the country. These translations were made from copies of manuscripts in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. The originals of the biblical texts are not known and the copies differ from each other, to the point where there is no one hundred percent textual coincidence between any of the manuscripts. So, how would the official translation of the Bible of the Brazilian National Congress be produced?
The merit of the session chaired by Senator Damares Alves was to bring together experts from conservative and progressive theological currents. Despite the consensus among theologians for the disapproval of PL 4606/19, in the public consultation the votes in favor of approving the project totaled more than 90%.
