Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Yea verily, time for a rewrite

BibleI posted a story about this on Facebook earlier today, and now I'm seeing more "buzz" about the project, so it's definitely blogworthy. Besides, I find it funny.

Did you know that there is a conservative alternative (a conservaternative?) to Wikipedia? That's right, Conservapedia was founded in 2006 by Andy Schlafly, AKA Son of Phyllis (she who is known as the Great Slayer of the Equal Rights Amendment, effectively shooting herself in the foot), because he felt that Wikipedia showed a "liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American bias." I look forward to spending a little more time at Conservapedia and seeing their interesting interpretations of history and the world around us. I really wish there will be an entry about dinosaur wranglin', but I hate to get my hopes up.

Here's the deal. The folks at Conservapedia have decided to work on a new, conservative interpretation of the bible, because they feel that it's just too goldarn liberal. This Conservative Bible Project calls for a new translation using the following guidelines. (I was only going to pick a few, but they're just all too good—I can't leave any of them out!) Open up the good book and let that conservative light shine!

  • Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
  • Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
  • 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
  • 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".
  • 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
  • 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.
  • Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
  • Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
  • 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
  • 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."

Some of my favorite parts are how they want to dump "gender exclusive" language--way to carry on the fine tradition of your mom's self-directed misogyny, Andy! Then there's getting rid of outdated terms like "peace," and we have got to stop using nasty words like "comrade" and "laborer" and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") because such “socialistic” words "improperly encourages the 'social justice' movement among Christians." *gasp* NO! Social justice must be stopped! Oh, and let's see...let's ditch the adulteress story, because that whole "let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone" crap has gotten waaaay too many of us in trouble lately! And let's be sure to put in stuff about the Free Market—in parable form, of course—to show that Jesus would have been against the stimulus package. Then there's the "liberal wordiness" to contend with.

Okay, I'll cop to that last one.

Nutwood Apostolic[gales of laughter] Oh. My. God. The more I read about this, the funnier it gets. I have to laugh about it, otherwise the sheer arrogance of these people in thinking that it is in any way appropriate to put their own conservative political spin on the bible might just make my head explode. Granted, human bias has shaped the bible ever since the first scribes started writing stuff down. It's impossible for even the best journalist or reporter to completely keep their own biases out of a story, and I'd say that's been happening since the beginning of reporters, including those who "reported" on events in the bible. Subsequent translations would include further biases. But to try to parse it in political terms like liberal and conservative is just the height of idiocy and arrogance to me.

Hey, Andy Schlafly, what would Jesus do? I bet he'd call you an asshole, tell you to mind your own business, and advise you strongly to stop politicizing his message of love and compassion to all.

At least that's my wordy liberal take on it.


  1. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I can't stop laughing long enough to make a coherent comment. What will "they" think of next?

  2. Actually, I think that was a concise way of putting Andy in his place. His cold close-minded place.

    be well...

  3. Are you sure it was "reported", because I have heard that it is the WORD of GOD.

    Seriously, the arrogance to assume that the Bible needs to be translated with any sort of bias. Scholars have studied for years to perform accurate translations. There is no room for spin here. Only after the translations are performed can we have dialogue on the original biases.

  4. I'll give my wordy liberal Amen, sistah!

  5. thinking about the bible being *more* conservative frightens me. they so must be talking about the new testament because i dont think the old testament could get any more strict about excluding those who are unclean for any reason...

    now off to make some graven marks in my flesh! sinners rejoice!!


  6. Hi Beth,
    When I heard about this, my first reaction was, "Heaven help us." But then I realized how much more convenient this new approach will be for Andy Schlafly and his ilk. Now, instead of having to carefully pick and choose bible passages to illustrate their point (ignoring ones that don't) they can point to the whole bible -- their version of it, anyway -- and pretend it's the word of God. To each their own, I always say, as long as they don't go trying to foist their version of the Bible on the rest of us.

  7. Unfortunately, those who would sign up for this latest example of creating God in man's image are totally incapable of grasping the irony in such moments.

    Even more unfortunately.....their vote carries the same weight as mine.

    And yes. I am aware how arrogant that sounds.

  8. I can make up my mind on whether it's more hilarious or frightening that someone would actually take it seriously. (Hugs)Indigo

  9. I can't laugh at those Conservatives - they give a bad name - guess that's normal.

  10. Beth, this piece made my morning! Thank you. Conservatives do seem to be very good at recreating the world and the collection of works, known as bible, in their own image. They do it with such diligence and purpose. It must be nice to only have to worry about their own views, goals, and ideals; it must be nice to have it so easy. I think that is why conservative ideology is so popular.

    As a liberal, I get tired sometimes after melding the vast variety of ideology and trying to find common ground so that we all can move a step forward. It is frustrating and hard work, but at the end of the day I know respect, inclusion, and diversity had their say in the matter and everyone has the right to dispute afterward.

  11. It seems outrageous.
    It seems frightful.
    It seems scandalous.
    And extremely pompous to make such changes.
    It has a good dose of thats hilarious.

    However, the power of words and ideas will always out live we who read and laugh at them now. So, it scares me, for our future. The current bible is written exactly as those who killed for and died for,to make to it so.


  12. I should have ended my thoughts with, what will the people who believe these versions of their truths do to make it so....
    Thats a healthy fear of words and people~

  13. Personaly I think the only one who has the right to do a rewrite is the Arthor and I haven't seen any stirring on MT Sini lately :)

  14. It's frightening how these nut cases are completely blind to the extreme ironies inherent in the crap that comes out of their mouths (is that Liberally wordy enough for you?). On one hand, they are trying to tell us that The Bible is the inerrant Word Of God, unchangeable and unchanged in the entire six thousand year history of the world. On the other hand, they are making their own modifications, totally ignorant about why we are laughing at them.

    And when they say, "exclude later-inserted Liberal passages," they, of course, mean the entire New Testament, right? These people aren't Christians. They are what John Scalzi once referred to as Leviticans.

  15. Hmm, I had NO idea that we liberals wrote the bible.
    Btw, I have to say... vagitron FTW! :)


I'm funny how, I mean funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you?