As we all know by now, "Conservapedia" -- the brainchild (??) of
Phyllis Schlafly's son, is sponsoring a project to re-translate the
bible to remove all "liberal bias" from it.
Let's examine their project - - -
Conservapedia is supposed to be a Wikipedia for conservatives and is
advertised as being an excellent resource for homeschoolers to use so
as to avoid the "liberal bias" in other online sources. Okay if you
want your kids to remain ignorant -- which seems to be the goal of
biblethumpers and holyrollers.
Well, back to the original topic.
The "Conservative Bible Project" can be found here:
http://www.conservapedia.com/...
Here is a quote from the "project" in which three examples of "liberal
bias" are cited.
First Example - Liberal Falsehood
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.
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.
Now, let's examine these examples of "liberal bias."
According to the biblical account, while Jesus was being crucified, he
asked God to forgive his killers -- "Father, forgive them, for they
do not know what they are doing." According to Conservapedia, this
passage appears in only one of the four gospels, and, some of the
people crucifying him knew what they were doing, so, this passage is a
liberal invention.
Got that? I know -- the reasoning escapes me, too, but remember -- we
aren't dealing with really bright people here.
The point of this passage is NOT that some of the people crucifying
Jesus knew what they were doing. The point is that Jesus forgave even
his killers. Of course, the rightwingnutters, biblethumpers, and
holyrollers who are behind the "conservative bible project" can't have
Jesus appear to be forgiving -- they want to slay their enemies and
pray for President Obama to die -- so -- let's wipe out all evidence
of Jesus's forgiving nature.
I can't wait to see what they say about this passage from Matthew,
Chapter 18:
" 21 Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I
forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
22 Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven
times. "
Oh, wait -- I see -- more liberal bias, what with the math involved
and all.
-----------------------------------------------
Now, let's check out their second example of "liberal bias."
A lying, cheating, stealing overseer is described as being "shrewd."
The "conservative bible project" doesn't like the word shrewd because
-- according to them -- the word connotes "dishonesty." Instead,
let's use "resourceful."
Let's see -- resourceful -- as in firing your workers then hiring them
back as contract employees so you don't have to give them bennies and
can pay them lower salaries. That's resourceful.
I see where they are going with this one.
--------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we have their third example:
Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians.
"Socialistic" words such as "comrade," "laborer," "labored," and
"fellow" are to be banned from the conservative bible?
Goddam, but it's gonna be a lot of fun when they get around to
removing the "liberal bias" from such passages as Matthew, Chapter 5,
where we find this socialist, liberal nonsense:
Matthew, Chapter 5
1Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat
down. His disciples came to him, 2and he began to teach them saying:
3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
. . .
Personally, I can hardly wait for the "Project" to work on the last few verses of Mark's gospel.
In their first example of "liberal bias," they claim that the passage found at Luke 23:24 is not found in any of the other Gospels and, therefore, it is suspect.
They don't want to go down that road.
Check out Mark, Chapter 16, Verse 18:
" they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their
hands on sick people, and they will get well."
Every bible scholar I know anything about believes that this passage
was added to Mark's gospel by some fanatics somewhere along the line
-- this passage is not found in any other gospel. In fact, the
accepted belief is that the passages that make up Mark 16:9 - 20 were
added much later to the original manuscript.
However, if this later addition were removed from the conservative
bible, then, what will the snake handlers around Sand Mountain,
Alabama, use to justify their practices of handling snakes and
drinking poison???
Maybe the "conservative bible project" will make an exception for
their soul brothers up on Sand Mountain.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...
And with that, the Old Redneck is off to sit on his front porch, watch the Chesapeake Bay, sip Wild Turkey, and re-read Matthew, Chapter 5.