Conservative Bible Project Cuts Out Liberal Passages »
Posted By bluetexasvalley 2 months ago in News
Lo and behold, the Bible has gotten too liberal, according to a group of conservatives. And it needs a little editing.
Read Full Story at huffingtonpost.com »
1325 Views Share Story 111 Comments Report
Submitted By:
bluetexasvalley
I am a 60-plus widow, retired after almost 40 years in the newspaper business. My love of politics was learned, first, from my father, a ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 93 of 111 Comments (view all)
-
100%
bluetexasvalley2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
That's the inspiration behind the Conservative Bible Project, which seeks to take the text back to its supposed right-wing roots.
Yes, even scripture is not orthodox enough for the modern conservative. Not that it's the fault of the author(s), exactly. The group cites a few reasons why the Bible is too progressive: "Lack of precision in the original language ... lack of precision in modern language" and "translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one."
So how can the Bible be conservatized? The group has proposed a Wikipedia-like group editing project. Some of the ideas would only bring the translation closer to the original. But others would fundamentally change the text.-
-
100%
cowboygrandpa1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
btv:
Reply
FTA:
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."
Ya know, I've said many times, that there are some conservatives who think they are Christians because they think God wants them to have authority over us, in order to show their superiority in their belief's and ways of doing things.
Sometimes God puts people like GW Bush, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon in Charge to show the people they lead how foolish it is to want a human leader. When all they do is get us deeper into trouble, and take our eyes off God and His Way.
I'm getting further and further from the politics of man, as I grow and see the purposes behind it.
Jimmy Carter was the last deeply Christian President we had. And look how the world treated his ideas and faith. Yet look what he has gone on to accomplish outside of the constricting lies of the politicians and their handlers.
The conservatives who believe in the lie of their greed, in the lie of their self righteousness, in their own foolish salvation through a poltical Jesus. Believe in a lie, their foundation is like the man who built on sand. It will not stand up to the forces that will attack and destroy it.
Truth, The Word of God who spoke this very world into being, the corruption that is eating at their souls, and the lack of anyone powerful enough to stand before God and challenge His Word. -
100%
Justice4All1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I read a very good book a few years ago called "Misquoting Jesus". It's about how the new testamint was written and what original sources still exist. None by the way. I forgot the authors name, it's here on one of these shelves. It was a bit heavy but very well documented.
Reply -
-
-
-
96%
hyperbola2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And the gullible fall for it every time. "Nationalism" is of course the other tool of the oligarchical class for keeping the peasants dumb, docile and under control.
Reply
Religion and Nationalism: A Dangerous Mix Throughout History
The continuing turmoil in the Middle East has highlighted once again the potential danger which exists whenever religion and nationalism are mixed together in what has, historically, proven to be a destructive combination. ....
http://www.acjna.org/acjna/articles_detail.aspx?id...
-
-
100%
dunkirk2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can see the following being used as a bible teaching lesson after the conversion:
Reply
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/09/17_fra... -
100%
Sageparadox2 months ago
-
-
-
100%
epiphannyy2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
"The group has proposed a Wikipedia-like group editing project."
This is perfect. Preparing to rewrite their supposedly perfect Bible by modeling the most imperfect source material available today. I don't know a single learned authority that gives ANY credence to a Wikipedia source because there is no peer review, no real check and balance to guarantee accuracy. How perfect is it that this is the model these "pure conservatives" have chosen to follow for their new "Bible project" of theirs?
First they try and rewrite the whole story of "creation" to accommodate the new found scientific knowledge of dinosaurs, etc, that didn't originally exist in the conscienceness of those who wrote it in the first place. Now that time has punched holes in the original story, they "edit" their version to fit the new realized facts, but even that isn't good enough for them. Now they want to politicize it as well.
Just when you think it can't get any more pathetic..-
100%
traveler20002 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I mostly agree with you, and gave you a positive rate.
Reply
However:
***...tne MOST imperfect source material available today..**
I did find quite a lot good and exact info on Wikipedia.
But, like for ALL sources, you have to double check.
If and when you research some thing you should ALWAYS try to find different sources.
Concerning the "peer review", every body, including specialist or people who "really know" , can correct and edit what is written. A "history" of comments and/or corrections are found in most articles, including sources -
-
-
100%
jovial2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is getting nutso. If one can edit the Bible or Quran to their liking they can assume a great amount of power. The motivation is very strong for men to try and cheat. By cheating however, they appoint themselves as God. If we are to believe that the Bible is the word of God, let no man edit it.
Reply-
-
100%
PapaWolf2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>If one can edit the Bible or Quran to their liking they can assume a great amount of power.
Reply
But it's been done many times. The "original" Bible - Greek / Syrian / Antiochian / Russian / etc. Orthodox "Septuagint" Bible has books that most, if not all, of the subsequent Bibles don't include. Some are in a different order, & others don't contain all the text of the originally compiled. -
100%
jordan111 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If one can edit the Bible or Quran to their liking they can assume a great amount of power.>>>>>
Reply
Some already have, through their sermon's every Sunday. Whether or not it comes out of their mouths or in an edited version of the book, the end result is the same.
-
-
100%
miklkit2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The New Testament has already been heavily edited. The Council of Nicea did the deed in AD 325. Jesus was considered a man before they voted to make him a god. Those who voted against them were exiled. Have you ever wondered why it has taken so long to release the Dead Sea Scrolls? The church doesn't want the un edited bible to get out.
Reply-
100%
CRYMTYPHON2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Err, miklkit,
Reply
- of of 2007 all but two of the thirty nine volumes
are translated; released; out .
And the church does not have control of them.
Princeton, The U of Chicago, and Jerusalem
have diferent parts.
There really wasn't anything all that theologicly
unsettling about anything in it. -
50%
vettenut1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
miklkit:
Reply
LOL!!!
You've watched or read "The DaVinci Code" too many times!
That part about the Council of Nicea having a grand debate about the deity/non-deity of Jesus, and then about the vote being a close one is: FICTION!
Imagine that! A very entertaining FICTION novel contains FICTIONAL ACCOUNTS of many events of many centuries previous.........!!!
Dan Brown is NOT an historian, he's a FICTION writer!
The Council of Nicea did NOT vote to invent a "Jesus who is divine." No. They simply confirmed and affirmed that the teachings/writings of the Apostles clearly and unequivocally declared that "Jesus is divine."
If by "heavily edited" you mean that later copied text was manipulated to substantively say things that the original text did not say, you would be strictly speculating, and not speaking from a position of actual evidence.
If by "heavily edited" you mean that certain text was judged "inaccurate," "conflicting" or "unacceptable," and was not included in the "canon of Scripture," then you would be correct. The Council of Nicea found certain texts to be incongruent with the teachings of the Apostles (less than 250 years old at that time, and not twisted or tweaked by a powerful Church). They chose to maintain alignment with the Apostles, and to reject all things that were not congruent with what they knew as truth.
Example: Anyone writing a mathematics textbook would not include a chapter written by someone who insists that two plus two equals seven point three five five. No! Neither would they give credence to a "contributor" who would insist that there exists a finite quantity of real numbers. No! To preserve the integrity of the book, they would "weed out" incongruent texts and sources. That is precisely what the Council did!
That did not harmonize with Dan Brown's fictional story line, so he took liberties with facts, and composed a FICTIONALIZED account of the Council, to propel his story line forward.
(continued) -
-
-
94%
slate2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If they want to change the Bible, the first thing you should do is stop talking about Hell like it's a place to go burn forever and back to the Original Hebrew meaning of the grave (or death),,,,, but they would not do that (saving people from a burning place of torment is very profitable isn't it?)
Reply -
100%
CRYMTYPHON2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
99.9% of American conservatives would never tolerate
Reply
anyone changing the bible.
It is an idea that might appeal to
the Karl Rove types; non-believers who
see social-religious conservatives
as 'useful' but dislike having to
sit next to them.
Jefferson did an edited version;
I think people burned it.-
-
-
100%
lovemylibs1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The bible is just a book of stories to this conservative. I tolerated it being changed into The Green Bible so I guess I should tolerate it being changed into The Conservative Bible.
Reply
Jefferson's version was big on Jesus' teachings and small on government's role in religion. I think Jefferson considered Jesus' teachings to be somewhat of an ethical guideline for man. It's better than "Family Guy", I think? -
100%
andrevaugh1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are wrong about that! The conservatives already have accepted every blinking change in the bible that every man has made through the centuries. Might I remind you that the citation after The Lord's Prayer: "For Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours now and forever." was added by King Henry the VIII.
Reply
-
-
-
-
5%
Icantwait2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Nope, Just can't make Radical Liberals happy. First of all, Radical Liberals do not believe in God, The Bible, and Heaven. They Believe in Creationism, The Big Bang Theory, and Eliminating The Constitution. Now, that it has been mentioned that a reevaluation of the Bible be undertaken. Yes, the Radical Liberals are against that. Not just against it but have replaced the original story with an array of lopsided theories of their own. They are never content. Forgive them for they know not what they want. The Real American
Reply-
-
100%
smithichie2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Liberals do not believe in God, The Bible, and Heaven. They Believe in Creationism, The Big Bang Theory"
Reply
You may be a 'real' American, but you aren't real bright, are you? Creationism usually requires a god to do the creating. I think you might be thinking of what YOU think, but your fingers aren't so sure. -
100%
PapaWolf2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
cantwait...
Reply
Hate to tell you this, but you ARE an idiot, & definitely NOT a "Real American". Nothing personal, but your posts leave people with no other conclusion.
>>Liberals do not believe in God, The Bible, and Heaven. They Believe in Creationism, The Big Bang Theory,
1st, just about EVERY Democrat / Liberal I personally know is a Christian, Muslim, Jew or Hindu. & if we don't believe in God, exactly how do we believe in Creationism? And exactly WHAT about the Big Bang Theory precludes God's creationism, or creationism precluding the BBT?
>>and Eliminating The Constitution
And what does believing in God have to do w/the Constitution? & it's us LIBERALS who have been arguing AGAINST illegal wire taps, illegal search & seizure, indefinite & illegal detainment, revocation of habeus, illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, torture, etc., that you "Reactionary Conservatives" who have been trying to dismantle it for almost 30 years.
& reevaluating the Bible???? Just because it doesn't fit THEIR conception of what it should say????? That says all we need to know about you - if you don't like the message, change it. -
100%
jakesguile2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Your entire argument? Let me show you the -A
Reply
Some/Most Liberals DO believe in God, "radical" or otherwise.
The Bible and Heaven included in that, to varying degrees of truth. I don't believe the Bible is an inerrant document but I do believe the stories are meant to guide our lives, QED I believe in the Bible.
I don't believe in Creationism (no true liberal does, I believe you meant Evolution)
Anybody who DOESN'T believe in the Big Bang Theory is quite possibly an idiota
Liberals don't believe in eliminating the Constitution
Argumentum Ignorantium, false patriot, I suggest you return to school and evaluate the definition of "Real" because you don't know the definition at ALL, AT ALL. -
0%
Icantwait1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Well, this little test I presented to all you Radical Liberals was passed by some and failed by others.
Reply
It was brought to my attention recently that Radical Liberals read My Fellow Americans and then skip to The Real American. So, I did a little herky jerky movement to see how many Radical Liberals were sucking in my remarks. Why? Because it generally doesn't matter what anyone puts down since most of those truly genuine responses are not read by the Warped side of the Left.
Well, Jake, good work you did notice that Evolution is what you actually believe in and not Creationism. Got You. Whose the Idiot now? The Real American -
-
-
-
100%
Justice4All1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was going to start my own religion and everyone who joins will be in the "Gods favorite people club"
Reply
But if they are going to re-write the bible then maybe I can sign up for that project. No need to completely re-do my own holy book. -
100%
Justice4All1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was going to start my own religion and everyone who joins will be in the "Gods favorite people club"
Reply
But if they are going to re-write the bible then maybe I can sign up for that project. No need to completely re-do my own holy book. -
100%
proffordisabilities1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And Jesus chased the money changers (that's you, Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Target, etc. at your 29.9-32.9% interest rates) out of the temple for the great sin of usury. I think that Delaware is the only state that allows such usurious, consumer killer interest rates, and where is the Great Democratic Voice on this? And let's all cry in unisome for those poor banks with credit cards and the tallest buildings (matched by insurance companies) in every large city in the United States we had to bail them out, when they easily could have sold a bank or two to bail themselves out...are we all stupid, or do we just have a great middle class and lower class urged to serve the rich here, while we suffer at their demands? Seems like we all have the "Save the wealthy Blues.
Reply-
100%
Beau78901 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
About the credit cards, nearly all states allow those usurious interest rates. Many of the credit-card companies are based in Delaware and are allowed to sell across state lines (much like some would like private health insurance to be), which allows them to skirt much of the regulations imposed by individual states. Great idea, huh?
Reply
-
-
100%
wscotten1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I was a Christian familiar with the bible and just arrived in America for the the first time, I would be certain that the progressive liberals were the Christians and the conservatives were not. For me , this would be based on New Testament of course. Can I be a Christian and only believe in the New Testament? Is there such a denomination?
Reply-
100%
PapaWolf1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Try looking at the Bible as more of a teaching tool. If you notice, it starts with the basics & adds more "meat", so to speak. That's why Jesus is the FULFILLMENT of the Old Testament.
Reply
Kind of like, in the 1st grade, you learn 1+1=2. In Calc, you learn partial differential equations.
-
-
100%
wscotten1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I was a Christian familiar with the bible and just arrived in America for the the first time, I would be certain that the progressive liberals were the Christians and the conservatives were not. For me , this would be based on New Testament of course. Can I be a Christian and only believe in the New Testament? Is there such a denomination?
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
gwnichol1 month, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is nothing new. The Bible has been edited by various groups with their own agendas since people started reading it. This, of course negates the whole reason it exists because some in our society are so selfish, insecure and narcissistic that the thought of helping others in any way really offends their sensibilities!
Reply -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.