You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 02:47:56 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Conservative Bible  (Read 7200 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ElayneTopic starter

The Conservative Bible
« on: October 12, 2009, 11:16:24 PM »
Quote
Conservative Bible Project
From Conservapedia

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning are, in increasing amount:

    * lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts introduced by Christ
    * lack of precision in modern language
    * translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one.

Experts in ancient languages are helpful in reducing the first type of error above, which is a vanishing source of error as scholarship advances understanding. English language linguists are helpful in reducing the second type of error, which also decreases due to an increasing vocabulary. But the third -- and largest -- source of translation error requires conservative principles to reduce and eliminate.

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
       4. 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".
       5. 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
       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."

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.

Benefits include:

    * mastery of the Bible, which is priceless
    * mastery of the English language, which is valuable
    * thorough understanding of the differences in Bible translations, particularly the historically important King James Version
    * benefiting from activity that no public school would ever allow; a Conservative Bible could become a text for public school courses
    * liberals will oppose this effort, but they will have to read the Bible to criticize this, and that will open their minds

How long would this project take? There are about 8000 verses in the New Testament. At a careful rate of translating about four verses an hour, it would take one person 2000 hours, or about one year working full time on the project.

    * 1 Possible Approaches
    * 2 Building on the King James Version
    * 3 First Example - Liberal Falsehood
    * 4 Second Example - Dishonestly Shrewd
    * 5 Third Example - Socialism
    * 6 Advantages to a Conservative Bible Online
    * 7 References
    * 8 See also

Possible Approaches

Here are possible approaches to creating a conservative Bible translation:

    * identify pro-liberal terms used in existing Bible translations, such as "government", and suggest more accurate substitutes
    * identify the omission of liberal terms for vices, such as "gambling", and identify where they should be used
    * identify conservative terms that are omitted from existing translations, and propose where they could improve the translation
    * identify terms that have lost their original meaning, such as "word" in the beginning of the Gospel of John, and suggest replacements, such as "truth"

An existing translation might license its version for improvement by the above approaches, much as several modern translations today are built on prior translations. Alternatively, a more ambitious approach would be to start anew from the best available ancient transcripts.

In stage one, the translation could focus on word improvement and thereby be described as a "conservative word-for-word" translation. If greater freedom in interpretation is then desired, then a "conservative thought-for-thought" version could be generated as a second stage.
Building on the King James Version

In the United States and much of the world, the immensely popular and respected King James Version (KJV) is freely available and in the public domain. It could be used as the baseline for developing a conservative translation without requiring a license or any fees. Where the KJV is known to be deficient due to discovery of more authentic sources, exceptions can be made that use either more modern public domain translations as a baseline, or by using the original Greek or Hebrew.

There are 66 books in the KJV, comprised of 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, and 788,280 words.[6] The project could begin with translation of the New Testament, which is only 27 books, 260 chapters, 7,957 verses, and less than 200,000 words.

Retranslation at rate of 20 verses a day would complete the entire New Testament in about a year. With 5 good retranslators, that would be an average of only 4 verses a day per translator. At a faster rate of 20 verses per day by 5 good translators, the entire New Testament could be retranslated in less than 3 months.

First Example - Liberal Falsehood

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.

Second Example - Dishonestly Shrewd

At Luke 16:8, the NIV describes an enigmatic parable in which the "master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly." But is "shrewdly", which has connotations of dishonesty, the best term here? Being dishonestly shrewd is not an admirable trait.

The better conservative term, which became available only in 1851, is "resourceful". The manager was praised for being "resourceful", which is very different from dishonesty. Yet not even the ESV, which was published in 2001, contains a single use of the term "resourceful" in its entire translation of the Bible.

Third Example - Socialism

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.
Advantages to a Conservative Bible Online

There are several striking advantages to a conservative approach to translating the Bible online:

    * participants learn enormously from the process
    * liberal bias - and lack of authenticity - become easier to recognize and address
    * by translating online, this utilizes the growing online resources that improve accuracy
    * supported by conservative principles, the project can be bolder in uprooting and excluding liberal distortions
    * the project can adapt quickly to future threats from liberals to biblical integrity
    * access is free and immediate to the growing internet audience, for their benefit
    * the ensuing debate would flesh out -- and stop -- the infiltration of churches by liberals pretending to be Christian, much as a vote by legislators exposes the liberals
    * this would bring the Bible to a new audience of political types, for their benefit; Bible courses in college Politics Departments would be welcome
    * this would debunk the pervasive and hurtful myth that Jesus would be a political liberal today

http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project

Basically, in this project, the Conservatives argue that the current Bible is too liberal and that they plan on rewriting the Bible to remove pro-Liberal bias from the Bible.

Specifically, they say they are going to remove the quote from Jesus, "Forgive them, Father, they know not what they do."

They also say they are going to remove socialist parables by Jesus and replace them with free market parables, so as to prove that Jesus was not a socialist but rather a capitalist.

No, I'm not kidding.  They even have a draft version of the Bible up.

http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible

Offline Vekseid

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2009, 11:24:17 PM »
I can only imagine that some variants of Gnostic Christianity would send them into an apoplectic fit.

Offline ElayneTopic starter

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2009, 11:24:44 PM »
Quote
After all these years, one could assume the Bible has held up pretty well, but a group of conservatives in the United States thinks it needs a rewrite.

The folks behind Conservapedia, a right-leaning version of Wikipedia, have launched the Conservative Bible Project, aimed at getting rid of what they call liberal bias, wordiness, emasculation and a general dumbing down of the Old and New Testaments.

A dozen or so users, led by Conservapedia founder Andy Schlafly – the son of conservative political activist Phyllis Schlafly – are tackling the 27 books of the New Testament and 39 books of the Old Testament. Anyone can offer suggested changes.

Mr. Schlafly is a Princeton- and Harvard-educated lawyer and home-school teacher in New Jersey who began Conservapedia in 2006 because he felt Wikipedia was too liberal and anti-Christian. He believes the project will restore the Bible to its original intent.

“The trouble is, new translations of the Bible are done by professors at liberal universities who overwhelmingly voted for Obama,” Mr. Schlafly said. “Their political bias seeps into their translations and we felt it necessary to counteract that with one that uproots and eradicates any liberal bias.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/group-of-us-conservatives-rewrite-the-bible/article1319247/

Offline The Overlord

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2009, 02:04:19 AM »

Twenty different ways I could rant on this article, starting with these Marlboro-smoking short-dicks that are afraid to have any of the equality that ‘emasculation’ is bringing about.


Bottom line here, it’s not at all about venerating god properly, it’s all about creating god (and god’s word) in your own line of thinking, and as it was explained to me a good 25 years ago, the canon of the bible is closed. Nothing can be added to it or taken away. That's exactly what they're trying to do here.



Quote
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

      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


Hmm, too many big long words for you? Smells like oxymoron to me.  >:)




Offline Cythieus

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2009, 02:35:22 AM »
I will just quote this:

"I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from them, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book."

In short, go on and do it. I don't fee sympathy for them.

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2009, 03:34:08 AM »
Why does it not surprise me that Conservapedia has a hand in this?

Offline Vekseid

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2009, 04:29:16 AM »
I could list any number of reasons. Their traffic was falling, though, so I imagine they wanted to drum up something nice and outrageous.

Too little, too late, I think.

Offline Kate

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2009, 04:44:58 AM »
Oh religion.

Christain's as a whole mean well, I do believe they generally do want peace and "souls saved",
and perhaps some miracles did happen, strange things do in this world.

What I DONT understand is they already know that Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were at best followers of Jesus - writing what they recall he did etc 20 years after his death.

Even with an intention to be as accurate as possible, their recall will change due to their perspective of interpretation, what they write will change due to their intention.

If christianity believed the views of JC were effectively that of god ... the dead sea scrolls (reputably written by JC himself without others putting their lean on it) is probably a safer bet.

Proving it was JC that wrote them, not so easy, proving that "JC's" understanding of the language and the views of god for the contexts he is writing in, not so easy, proving that JC's approach suit others ... not so easy.... unless you don't look for that and have faith in it being right in the first place.

As historical documents the bibles is useful .... perspective of God expressed ?
God that I though JC himself mentioned was not understandable by the mind of man let alone
capture-able by the languages of mankind... Logically ? No.

Faith ?

Hmm ... faith is a super placebo, the power of belief I think is real,
in a word faith is confidence in life for whatever you are thinking ...
which I do beleive in.

Offline Lilias

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2009, 04:52:30 AM »
Let's say I'm happy to be Greek. So I can read my NT in the original (and the OT in the Septuagint translation, which predates agendas).

Offline Kip

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2009, 07:03:14 AM »
Well because I'm obviously liberally biased, much of what I would say in response could be dismissed.

The blaring fault in their logic that jumped out at me is -

It's alright to impose conservative bias onto the bible but not liberal bias?  How very.... biased.

Offline Jude

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2009, 07:14:58 AM »
Quote
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
Quote
not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity
Quote
diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity
Quote
intellectual force and logic of Christianity

Hahahahahahahaha.

Offline Nacht

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2009, 08:00:40 AM »
One of my best friends has his opinions on this matter as well, and personally, I agree with him.. just not with so much swearing :P
(Warning: Contains ranting, raving, swearing, consumption of alcohol, and hairy man-nipples)


Re-writing the Bible

Offline Jefepato

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2009, 09:30:47 AM »
Are we actually sure that Conservapedia isn't a joke site?

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2009, 09:39:24 AM »
Don't know.. but this makes me cry that these knuckle draggers are responsible for ..well any effort at all.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2009, 10:00:06 AM »
I don't understand what is wrong with a modern translation like the popular one I use in my ministry work the New Living Translation. I always felt strongly if a Bible is not readable by a common person in their own language and in a use that is popular its not a good Bible. The point is to get the message out and read it that was the whole point of the Reformation to not have a Latin only Bible controlled by one faith.

As for altering the text there is adding and subtracting from the Word and taking the idea and writing it in a way a person can enjoy reading it, and still means the same thing. I feel strongly the NLT does that well.

Using the logic of that verse above there should never have been any translations from the original Hebrew and Greek languages and make people study to read the Bible. After all any translation is going to change the original language of the biblical books to some degree. If one thinks about it seriously.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2009, 10:19:30 AM »
Let's say I'm happy to be Greek. So I can read my NT in the original (and the OT in the Septuagint translation, which predates agendas).

*has major floatyhearts for this*

My husband was bar mitzvah'ed, so at one point, he could read the OT in Hebrew - or at least the first 5 books.

Offline Kate

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2009, 10:58:26 AM »
hey btw to all "pro-Christians"...

Alot of flack can go your way from those that don't beleive

- to those that dont nor want to - it does seem a lot of flack historically has been thrown around by them to this day though ( ... crusades aside ... )

but if any really do jump down your throat saying all christianity = all things bad

Remind them of one thing most dont know....

In the dark ages the ONLY people in the west who were literate were those of priestly order - (they knew latin and a snippets of other stuff)

Without THEM translating the Rosetta stone / ancient greek tablets to rediscover western philosophy and bring on the Renaissance wouldn't have been possible.

and YES the church has done a lot of bad but it has done a LOT of good also
(Charity/ orphanages/ funding schools hospitals public works like wells etc ... )
... and still does.

Offline Mathim

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2009, 11:05:46 AM »
Isn't the bible just a work of fiction anyway? The mythology of a lot of the stories is plagiarized from other cultures that predate the writing of the bible, and there are lots of other things, like the fact that it's written by MAN, not any god. So it makes sense they're going to want to capitalize on those facts; just re-write it the way they want to fit their perfect bourgeoisie worldview.

Offline Cythieus

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2009, 11:39:22 AM »
Let's say I'm happy to be Greek. So I can read my NT in the original (and the OT in the Septuagint translation, which predates agendas).

Do you really think that? You know that the Catholic Church and the Jewish one both edited their parts of the Bible, they decided what books stayed and what went. Even the Latin Vulgate has been tampered with. This is why books like Enoch are considered non-Biblical and yet they fit so well and actually explain a lot of the issues in other books better.

There's a Gospel of Saint Tomas, A Book of Adam and Eve, and I think there are some others. The names of Angels were taken out and depending on what religion you are, you Bible still might be different. Catholic and Greek Bibles have more than Protestants.

Oh religion.

Christain's as a whole mean well, I do believe they generally do want peace and "souls saved",
and perhaps some miracles did happen, strange things do in this world.

What I DONT understand is they already know that Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were at best followers of Jesus - writing what they recall he did etc 20 years after his death.

Even with an intention to be as accurate as possible, their recall will change due to their perspective of interpretation, what they write will change due to their intention.

If christianity believed the views of JC were effectively that of god ... the dead sea scrolls (reputably written by JC himself without others putting their lean on it) is probably a safer bet.

Proving it was JC that wrote them, not so easy, proving that "JC's" understanding of the language and the views of god for the contexts he is writing in, not so easy, proving that JC's approach suit others ... not so easy.... unless you don't look for that and have faith in it being right in the first place.

As historical documents the bibles is useful .... perspective of God expressed ?
God that I though JC himself mentioned was not understandable by the mind of man let alone
capture-able by the languages of mankind... Logically ? No.

Faith ?

Hmm ... faith is a super placebo, the power of belief I think is real,
in a word faith is confidence in life for whatever you are thinking ...
which I do beleive in.


The problem with all of that is that, the Bible says not to hate gays, it says that early Christians lived in Socialist type communities and these people are starting to see their own argument works against them.

And it is believed that some of the books were written as long as almost 100 years later.

Offline Lilias

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2009, 12:56:23 PM »
Do you really think that? You know that the Catholic Church and the Jewish one both edited their parts of the Bible, they decided what books stayed and what went. Even the Latin Vulgate has been tampered with. This is why books like Enoch are considered non-Biblical and yet they fit so well and actually explain a lot of the issues in other books better.

There's a Gospel of Saint Tomas, A Book of Adam and Eve, and I think there are some others. The names of Angels were taken out and depending on what religion you are, you Bible still might be different. Catholic and Greek Bibles have more than Protestants.

Yes, I actually do think that. The Septuagint translation dates from the 3rd-1st century BC. And the lack of a 'church' agenda is precisely the reason why the Orthodox OT has more books - there was no Deuterocanonical/Apocryphal controversy.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2009, 01:02:05 PM »
Are these the same people that say 'If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me'?   ::)

Offline Cythieus

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2009, 01:05:54 PM »
Yes, I actually do think that. The Septuagint translation dates from the 3rd-1st century BC. And the lack of a 'church' agenda is precisely the reason why the Orthodox OT has more books - there was no Deuterocanonical/Apocryphal controversy.

But remember that the edits I am talking about date back to around 240 something (if I remember correctly). Enoch was so opposed that burn orders were sent out, the book is only around now because some African Churches kept some. In a time when the Church had that much control and literacy is lower, its a lot easier to change the tide of what people know as the book. Some of these books are held up alongside the other books of the Bible for a long time before suddenly becoming Heresy and vanishing. It worries me because even with the complete copies we have from back then, its hard to say what is and isn't there and what might have been lost forever in all the translating and editing.

But I agree, no one should be trying to edit the Bible for their political purpose.

Offline Valerian

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2009, 01:31:22 PM »
A quick Google search makes it seem as though nothing from the Bible has been edited out (like the Book of Enoch) since a bunch of bishops got together in the fourth century AD and pulled out a few things they didn't like.  So I'm thinking anything BC is pretty well intact.

NB: Val is not even close to being a biblical scholar, and is apparently one of those unwashed liberal heathens that need to be tricked into reading the Bible in order to refute the conservatives.

However, I find it funny (in a really, really sad sort of way) that so much effort is being put into this.  I don't know a thing about the Bible, but I do know something about the problems of translation -- and in this case, we're not only talking about translating from language to language, but from era to era.  I wrote an entire term paper on those problems in college and still barely scratched the surface; and in that case, my example was translating from 18th century French to today's English.  That's nothing compared to the magnitude of translating the Bible.

It doesn't matter if a divine force makes perfect, original copies of every biblical manuscript appear -- you're still going to have an awful time making them both readable and accurate for most people, even without worrying about the fine points of when 'comrade' is more accurate than 'volunteer', or whether 'casting lots' is better than 'gambling'.  (Gambling probably makes most people think of a Vegas casino these days, anyway.)

Whoever's working on this is going to wear themselves out to no good purpose, but hey, they're grownups.  Maybe they're enjoying themselves.

Offline The Overlord

Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2009, 02:35:10 PM »
One of my best friends has his opinions on this matter as well, and personally, I agree with him.. just not with so much swearing :P
(Warning: Contains ranting, raving, swearing, consumption of alcohol, and hairy man-nipples)


Re-writing the Bible


“If I cannot move heaven, then I will raise hell.”

Damn, that’s good. *writes that one down*


‘Note the dick quotes’…exactly what I was talking about it. If you can sit through the whole thing he makes some very solid points I am in complete agreement with.

I must say, however, a beer-sodden shirtless rant…dude put on a T-shirt or something. Had to put this one on audio only in the background as I surfed another page…hairy man booby never going to help sell your point.   :-X

Offline Avi

  • I'll show you how to soar.
  • On Hiatus
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Location: Memphis and Maury City, TN
  • Gender: Male
  • Flying by the seat of his pants...
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Conservative Bible
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2009, 03:25:50 PM »
I will just quote this:

"I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from them, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book."

In short, go on and do it. I don't fee sympathy for them.

Amen, brother. 

On another note, for a truly depressing experience, read their entry about President Obama.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2009, 05:29:34 PM by Avi »