The Conservative Bible

The Conservative Bible (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

SpinnerofTales -> The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 6:03:53 AM)
It seems that the “media is liberally biased” trend is extending to the good book itself. Some guy has started a project to re-translate the bible into more conservative friendly terms: http://news.aol.com/article/bible-too-liberal-conservatives-say-yes/706054 Now, aside from the obvious jokes (Instead of god giving mana from heaven to feed the Jews in the desert after they departed from Egypt, he instead deregulated the mana industry and let free market forces solve the problem. The Sermon on the Mount will be read as “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth, without having to pay the ‘death tax’” There are more and I hope to see many of them on this thread) the problem seems to be the trend towards altering the bible out of all recognition to suit a political or social agenda. Liberals are not innocent of this. Just look at the bibles that say “God the parent” instead of “God the father” and you’ll see what I mean. I have to wonder why a book known as “The Greatest Story Ever Told” needs so many rewrites.

pahunkboy -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 6:16:07 AM)
That rotten Obama- ruins everything! He ruined the bible!! HE- HE He done did it. yup. It is OBAMAS, Barry Satoros fault.

HatesParisHilton -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 6:32:14 AM)
well, King James started a trend... then that Smith guy found the missing tablet of missing Commandments... personally? unless I get mah J Cracks with it, I ain't even cacking it open. I'll bet this will be the ONE book Google doesn't try to get it's weasely-copyright-neutering hands on too quickly...

Moonhead -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 7:10:43 AM)
I doubt it'll measure up to the King James translation.

HatesParisHilton -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 7:13:48 AM)
Not if they change from cubits, it won't. ha ha. get it? won't measure up?

Moonhead -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 7:18:10 AM)
[sm=banana.gif][sm=LMAO.gif][sm=banana.gif]

Arpig -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:02:26 AM)
~FR~ quote: "There was a reading from the gospel, and the pronoun used to refer to a child in this translation was 'it'," he said. "So this translation of the gospel referred to a child as an 'it,' a thing. And that is liberal, it's offensive and it's incorrect." Why is referring to a child of unspecified gender as "it" liberal? I would have thought that was simply grammatically correct.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:06:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Why is referring to a child of unspecified gender as "it" liberal? I would have thought that was simply grammatically correct. Good point. Personally I'm more worried about passages like "Renditon unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's", though

HatesParisHilton -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:15:19 AM)
why would they change THAT word from the original, though? (only to make the Cheney rendition practice appear more acceptable now it's fallen into history?) I mean, it'd be "heart rendering" (hur hur, remember that one?) if such were thecase...

graphicdesignace -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:24:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HatesParisHilton Not if they change from cubits, it won't. ha ha. get it? won't measure up? :D Hilarious!!

Hillwilliam -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:43:44 AM)
What's a cubit? -------------- Bill Cosby

elegantcdgoddess -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:51:47 AM)
Great, but pointless. What we need is to insert promotional lines in the bible. Just think, it is widely distributed, very popular item. More houses own a bible then Yellow Pages, jet YP are full of colorful adds, and bible still has none. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete. John 16:24 change into: Apply online and you will receive it in the mail, and your joy will be complete. New Visa card, now with godly images. John 16:24 or: Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment. John 7:24 change into: Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment. But for right appearance, visit our new collection at www.nordstroom.com John 7:24

thishereboi -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 8:56:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig ~FR~ quote: "There was a reading from the gospel, and the pronoun used to refer to a child in this translation was 'it'," he said. "So this translation of the gospel referred to a child as an 'it,' a thing. And that is liberal, it's offensive and it's incorrect." Why is referring to a child of unspecified gender as "it" liberal? I would have thought that was simply grammatically correct. I guess it just shows the extremes that people will go to, to turn anything into a left vs right problem.

DesFIP -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:05:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales Just look at the bibles that say “God the parent” instead of “God the father” and you’ll see what I mean. According to my rabbi, who is a scholar, the original term is not "God our Heavenly Father" but translates more accurately into "Our motherly father" and the patriarchal translations were so done to convey political/patriarchal feelings at the time. The original shows the duality of God, the encompassing nature in as much as I can remember of his sermon. Scholars in liturgical Hebrew did not write the King James. That was a translation from the Vulgate Latin, which was a translation from classical Latin, which was a translation from Greek, which was a translation from Aramaic, which was a translation from ancient liturgical Hebrew which is a language without vowels or punctuation. Basically it was a game of telephone where enormous errors entered in over the two thousand years. ED: My comments of course refer solely to the Torah, what you folks refer to as the Old Testament.

elegantcdgoddess -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:08:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig ~FR~ quote: "There was a reading from the gospel, and the pronoun used to refer to a child in this translation was 'it'," he said. "So this translation of the gospel referred to a child as an 'it,' a thing. And that is liberal, it's offensive and it's incorrect." Why is referring to a child of unspecified gender as "it" liberal? I would have thought that was simply grammatically correct. I guess it just shows the extremes that people will go to, to turn anything into a left vs right problem. And true conservative should make few versions of bible. In my humble oppinion they need PG-13, and R at least. Right needs to act to prevent our innocent children from being exposed to graphic violence and sexual acts. I dont think there is any true right wingnut who will allow his or hers child to even look at old testament. Probably liberal left added that. Daddy what did Ham do to naked drunk Noah in Genesis 9? You can argue left vs. right in bible forever, lol.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:15:08 AM)
quote: It seems that the “media is liberally biased” trend is extending to the good book itself. Some guy has started a project to re-translate the bible into more conservative friendly terms Hardly surprising, since "liberal bias" has long meant "not conservative biased."

Kirata -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:21:58 AM)
~ FR ~ Bleh. I wish these wacko "Christian" types would stop marketing themselves as Conservatives (or that the media would stop characterizing them as such, whichever). In my opinion, the overlap in views stops way short of this crap, and even where it exists it too often arises from different motivations and is purely opportunistic. K.

thishereboi -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:26:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: elegantcdgoddess quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig ~FR~ quote: "There was a reading from the gospel, and the pronoun used to refer to a child in this translation was 'it'," he said. "So this translation of the gospel referred to a child as an 'it,' a thing. And that is liberal, it's offensive and it's incorrect." Why is referring to a child of unspecified gender as "it" liberal? I would have thought that was simply grammatically correct. I guess it just shows the extremes that people will go to, to turn anything into a left vs right problem. And true conservative should make few versions of bible. In my humble oppinion they need PG-13, and R at least. Right needs to act to prevent our innocent children from being exposed to graphic violence and sexual acts. I dont think there is any true right wingnut who will allow his or hers child to even look at old testament. Probably liberal left added that. Daddy what did Ham do to naked drunk Noah in Genesis 9? You can argue left vs. right in bible forever, lol. Maybe if you explain what a "true conservative" is, this will make more sense. Oh and where are they teaching kids graphic violence and sexual acts. I must have missed that sunday. Go figure.

Arpig -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:42:03 AM)
quote: Scholars in liturgical Hebrew did not write the King James. That was a translation from the Vulgate Latin, which was a translation from classical Latin, which was a translation from Greek, which was a translation from Aramaic, which was a translation from ancient liturgical Hebrew which is a language without vowels or punctuation. Basically it was a game of telephone where enormous errors entered in over the two thousand years. Actually the New Testament was translated from Greek (specifically the Textus Receptus), and the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew(specifically from the Masoretic Hebrew texts)

Musicmystery -> RE: The Conservative Bible (10/7/2009 9:43:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata ~ FR ~ Bleh. I wish these wacko "Christian" types would stop marketing themselves as Conservatives (or that the media would stop characterizing them as such, whichever). In my opinion, the overlap in views stops way short of this crap, and even where it exists it too often arises from different motivations and is purely opportunistic. K. This is a good point. I was (and really still am, I suppose) moderate until Jerry Falwell and company. My opposition was (and is) fierce, as I think this undermines much of what is great about the U.S....so starting with Reagan's election, I turned to the only other game that could hope to reign these guys in. Just my response, of course. That was also the start of "my way or not at all" politics that shut down bi-partisan deal-making to create the stand-offs we have in Congress today. In the 70s, opposing members sat down together after session and worked things out. Now they don't even meet, and are expected to vote in blocks. That block voting turned a lot of moderate Republicans out in the last few elections--people we could have used, otherwise popular in their districts, if they had been able (or willing) to act other than administration/party rubber stamps. But I think we're gonna be stuck with it for quite a while.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625