Editing "God's Word": The Conservative Bible Project. (translation, disciples, America)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:[1]
Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
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
Thus, a project has begun among members of Conservapedia to translate the Bible in accordance with these principles. The translated Bible can be found here.
Conservatizing the Bible - Crunchy Con (http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2009/10/conservatizing-the-bible.html - broken link)
"The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[7]
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."
If we are to sling out passages that only appeared in one of the gospels, and which seemed contradictory, we would have to lose a lot. Evidently the real criterion is whether the Rightwing fund...sorry - "Conservatives" approve of it or not.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-06-2009 at 08:09 AM..
If I were a conservative, I'd be embarrassed by this. This is the sort of thing that makes you look like a joke.
Conservapedia is kind of a joke. I was initially somewhat interested in it as Wikipedia is a bit biased on social issues, but I realized pretty quick that its "conservatism" is on the crankish side. At the time it included some weirdly intense hostility to vaccination and efforts to find kangaroos in the Bible.
I don't know if all conservatives need to embarrassed by every kook under our (more or less) flag. I'm sure the majority of the celebrities who signed that petition supporting Roman Polanski are liberals, but I'm also pretty sure most liberals have nothing to do with it. They either don't care or have an opposite view to that group. I wouldn't even be surprised if most entertainers either don't care or would be cool with Polanski going to jail.
Frankly, I'm so disgusted with the false doctrine of a "correct" political component of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that this latest manifestation of foolishness leaves me speechless.
The level of ideological hubris needed to even presume to make the Word of God match your ideology is just breathtaking in it's hypocrisy.
"My convictions are based solely on the Bible, which I interpret according to my convictions."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.