The Bible is apparently too namby-pamby liberal for the folks at Conservapedia, so they're trying to get a crew together to retranslate it conservatively. Because if I understand anything about Christians' relationship to the Word of God, it's that it must be changed every generation to keep up with ideological shifts among its most, um, energetic believers.
I agree, generally, that if someone actually followed Jesus' calls to take care of others, not make a show about public religiosity, support those in need, respect the lives of others, and many of his other admonishments, they'd be considered a radical leftist unfit to lead any major congregation (well, maybe the smelly Episcopalians would accept this person). If anything, though, that should be a call for conservatives to either pay more attention to the Bible or just admit that they don't really care what it says. Changing it to fit their biases (and then teaching it in public schools, as the Conservapedians hope) won't solve anyone's problems.
Here's the list of problems they have with the Bible:
As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:
- Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
- Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
- Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level
- Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop; defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
- Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots"; using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
- Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
- Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
- Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
- Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
- Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."
#4 is the creepiest - these folks really want the Bible to say that someone can be a "child of God," defined as a "peacemaker," while still wanting to bomb the crap out of several third-world countries.
#3 is also fun, because they think they're smart. How cute. And as Brad at Sadly, No points out, it also contradicts #10, where they're basically asking for the Bible to be dumbed down.
Here's one of their specific examples of liberal bias in the Bible:
The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:
Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible.
Indeed, the real Jesus would have just said that they know exactly what they do, so they don't deserve to be forgiven and should just go to hell. Jesus was vindictive and bitchy that way.
Here's another example:
Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians.
For example, the conservative word "volunteer" is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word "comrade" is used three times, "laborer(s)" is used 13 times, "labored" 15 times, and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") is used 55 times.
I didn't know "volunteer" was a "conservative word" - Rush Limbaugh uses it like it's a swear word. But "labor" is now a bad word, when it accurately describes what Jesus did as a carpenter? And what substitute do they have for "fellow worker"? "Dissociated, independent individual who happens to participate in the free market near me and contemporaneously" is all I could come up with for a conservative translation of "fellow worker."
To be clear, the project won't be a real translation, though. They're just planning on taking the King James Version, modernizing the language, and changing around some parts they don't like.
Really, did you expect them to learn ancient Greek? It's hard enough finding someone to homeschool trigonometry.
« Out of my Black Church, Into the Streets | Home | DC marriage bill introduced today and what's next »







I am sick to death of the Christian Right. They are just putting a new twist upon the old strategy of the Catholic Church, whch had its preists the only ones with access to the Bible. All teaching came through the priests. Now, lacking that ability, they will re-write the Bible to convey only an approved message.
Will no one rid us of these insolent priests?
MauraHennessey | October 6, 2009 11:26 PM
Reply to this comment
I wonder what Rabbi Christ would say about "Yahweh?"
After all what we have is just the prejudices of 14th century Italian bishops anyway.
They actually presume to rewrite the old testament too? :)
Read "Misquoting Jesus."
Robert Ganshorn | October 7, 2009 3:41 AM
Reply to this comment
Alex, this is just so "off the wall" of the zany Con-ass right(wrong). Only they could devise, yet another way, to further dismantle a free society. They really want to take separation to new levels lunacy and create an even more hostile following to promote their limited view. It's almost like they want to create their own Orwellian manual for the self-justifying crowd of haters. So that nasty "social justice", that peaceful, equality minded Christians follow can be squashed! This raises serious questions as to their real intent.
This must be the result of Home Schooling at this point, or the direction of. How else are they going to make a generation of isolated, home schooled young minds understand the hedonistic, hateful, wealth worshiping ways of their parents, without having had re-conceptualized the entire context of their book of pick-n-warp? How will a new generation of people educated in a system that separates them from understanding the social network of an entire world adhere to their rewritten dogma? I would assume in even a more fanatic ways than at present. Will they all be Mormons of another color under the new doctrine of Conservianity?
Gerri Ladene | October 7, 2009 6:54 AM
Reply to this comment
What I was thinking. It takes "Man created God in his image" to a whole nother level, doesn't it?
Alex Blaze | October 7, 2009 10:52 AM
Reply to this comment
Yes, after all the times that the fundies have accused the liberals and the Bible scholars of "scripture twisting" --- and then they announce a concerted effort, the whole purpose of which is to do exactly that!
Clearly, the de facto bottom line is that scripture-twisting is OK --- as long as you are consistent in the direction in which you do the twisting.
A. J. Lopp | October 7, 2009 1:28 PM
Reply to this comment
"All gods are homemade, and it is we who pull their strings, and so, give them the power to pull ours.".......Aldous Huxley
Gerri Ladene | October 7, 2009 10:21 PM
Reply to this comment
God! Bout time the Christian Conservatives did something to shut up that whiney bleeding heart lib Jesus...
Wait a minute...
Phil Reese | October 7, 2009 10:28 AM
Reply to this comment
It's been a long time, but I seem to remember a passage from Revelations that said those who tried to re-write the Bible would burn in hell. Or is that one of the passages we can ignore, like the shellfish abomination right by the totally un-ignorable gay abomination in Leviticus?
Sam Ritchie | October 7, 2009 12:30 PM
Reply to this comment
Found it:
Revelations 22:18-19Sam Ritchie | October 7, 2009 12:37 PM
Reply to this comment
It's not so hard to avoid violating that passage if you just delete it from the Bible.
Leftists/Socialists/Communists/liberals/Nazis probably added it in there anyway since they care about "accuracy" and "the truth."
Alex Blaze | October 7, 2009 1:58 PM
Reply to this comment
What would they think of the LOLcat translation of the Bible?
www.lolcatbible.com
Rebecca_B | October 7, 2009 1:45 PM
Reply to this comment
Interesting that these conservatives are basing their bible on the King James Version. Are they aware that King James was gay or at least bisexual?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_relationships_of_James_I_of_England
vivian | October 7, 2009 4:09 PM
Reply to this comment