Conservatives want to edit the bible due to "liberal" bias

jank

The Nut jobs are at it again.

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/25741.html

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
2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, “gender inclusive” language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
3. 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[3]
4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] 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”.
5. Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as “gamble” rather than “cast lots”;[5] using modern political terms, such as “register” rather than “enroll” for the census
6. 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.
7. Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
8. Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
9. 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
10. 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.”

http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project

Are these guys really trying to be the "bad" guys in 1984. Are they going to turn the word "peace" into "war"........

LostinKildare

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrY8v0dsS14

jank

In their eyes Jesus is a cigar smoking free market exponent in the mold of Reagan, only with more hair. God forbid if he were black!

Overheal

The Nut jobs are at it again.

More Partisan war mongering.

Nothing new here then. /coat

jank

Overheal wrote: »

More Partisan war mongering.

Nothing new here then. /coat

War mongering? In fairness the only people who are war mongering here are those behind this stupid project.

As the saying goes....."Dont shoot the messanger".... Unless of course he is in the bible.:p

SteveS

jank wrote: »

War mongering? In fairness the only people who are war mongering here are those behind this stupid project.

It seems like a pretty small group. I can't seem to find much support for this movement on conservative boards and blogs. I occasionally post on a religious board that is mostly populated by conservative Evangelicals and most of them hadn't even heard of the "Conservative Bible". Upon investigation, most seemed to think it was stupid and not needed. I couldn't find a single post that thought it was a good idea. If I didn't know better, I'd think this was a joke.

Overheal

From a website Sadlyno.com ?

irish_bob

jank wrote: »

In their eyes Jesus is a cigar smoking free market exponent in the mold of Reagan, only with more hair. God forbid if he were black!

you mean neo christians or fox news christians

Black Swan

Will they rename the New Testament?

sceptre

If this is being run by a group as big as four people and their dog I'd be semi-surprised. And yet another bible version wouldn't keep me awake at night either - while some people regard the text as sacred, the translations have rarely been so.