The eager young men at Conservapedia are p.o.'d that the Bible might be seen as too liberal. So they've come up with the Wiki-style Conservative Bible Project, to make sure the Lord doesn't go all wobbly on us. Excerpt:
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
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[2]
Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[3] 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";[4] 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
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.
"The liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio"? Hoo-wee! Elitists like to use words, and lots of 'em! "Unnecessary ambiguities"? But how are you going to abide by the conservative mandate to avoid "dumbing down" Holy Writ while at the same time avoiding big words liberals use?
More seriously, the insane hubris of this really staggers the mind. These right-wing ideologues know better than the early church councils that canonized Scripture? They really think it's wise to force the word of God to conform to a 21st-century American idea of what constitutes conservatism? These jokers don't worship God. They worship ideology. As Mark Shea says:
Right wing dementia marches on apace. Some of this has a grain of sense to it, as ideological madness always does. For instance, the dumb attempts to feminize Scripture are pernicious and need to stop. But seriously: the story of the woman taken in adultery is "liberal"? Free market as Sacred tradition? Liberal wordiness?
You really need to read the whole Conservapedia entry to grasp how crazy this is. It's like what you'd get if you crossed the Jesus Seminar with the College Republican chapter at a rural institution of Bible learnin'.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I am a liberal in your midst--("Quick, hide the children!"). I want to thank you for your integrity. So many of today's conservative politicians have sold their souls with outrageous fabrications for a few votes, (and in some cases, possibly, a few more dollars?). While my ideas and values may be different, I do believe there is a great conversation to be had between political partisans with integrity.
Merry Christmas to all!
"These right-wing ideologues know better than the early church councils that canonized Scripture?"
That's an argument from authority, sir.
And BTW the Biblical Canon existed long before the early church councils.
The "Conservapedia" is NOT a conservative website, instead it's a fanatical Young Earth Creationist Fundamentalist website. Only 18% of Republicans believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" and yet this is ALL the website is about. I wish that there could be a way to challenge the URL.
As far as these clowns translating the Bible, idiots! Any attempt to translate the Bible with an agenda will obviously reflect that agenda and therefore render the translation biased and worthless. The NIV is a good translation. I met one of the translators, a Greek linguist who was absolutely brilliant. The translation closest to the original text would be the NASB.
My suggestion is to have an atheist w/o a political agenda translate it for you. He'll simply translate it like he was translating a Greek myth without shoe-horning in 4th century or modern Christian concepts. Isn't that what you want - an unbiased translation?
Thanks for this post. I actually came across it while doing some work on what I refer to as a "narrative interpretation" of the books of 1st and 2nd Samuel. My goal is to put something together that will work well in a dramatic audio format. The reason for the independent interpretation is to avoid copyright issues (kind of ridiculous considering it is the Bible). If I can complete either part of the project, I hope to release everything under a free Creative Commons license.
That being said, what got me the most (though a lot of it was pretty awful) were the words "Not Dumbed Down." Isn't there a reason the Church wanted the Bible in a language other than Latin? Oh yeah, so everyone could have the chance to read and comprehend it. Raising the reading level does nothing but leave many behind while forming an elite group of know-it-alls.
I will have to add this to the list of Bible "translations" that I pray will not make in impact.
Young Earth Creationist intrigues aside, this development illustrates the three-card Monte game into which some theologians (orthodox and heterodox) draw us.
When cornered by a paradox or an "absolute truth" found in a modern-language Bible (from Geneva on) the liberal or conservative theologian dons a toga and sandals and lectures us on the Hebrew-Aramaic substrate that informed the Koine Greek of the "original" texts.
Suddenly we are transported to a medieval Catholic mass, the priest's murmured Latin liturgy sounding like birdsong in our barbarian ears. How the hell am I supposed to know whether or not to believe that the Koine Greek words for "abominable" and "nontraditional" were nearly interchangeable in the first century but not in the third century? (made-up example)
One way we can educate ourselves and others on this issue is to apply the same three-card Monte approach to contemporary non-religious Koine Greek texts. If a theologian's method of translating a given verse is would also cause "Let us march against Philip!" to read "Let us end winter in preparation for Philip!" then we know that the conservative or liberal theologian is blowing incense in our faces.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.