No, really. You cannot make this shit up. It's not allowed. We have standards.
For some in the Rightard Religious extreme, their Bible had "gotten" too "Liberal." Scott Horton delivers a concise, trenchant dismissal (N.B.: pun) at his Harper's blog, No Comment:
Writing at Belief.net, Rod Dreher highlights a new initiative on the religious right: the Conservative Bible Project. The effort aims to rewrite the Bible to remove its notorious liberal bias and clarify the gospel basis of free-market economics. It follows a ten-point guideline:Horton does Dreher a bit of disservice, because Dreher begins his description by exclaiming "It's just crazy..." But heither he nor anyone of the literalist school can (0or wants to) address just how ANY "new" translation" squares with the whole "inerrancy/literal TRUTH-word-of-god thing? Who among the Xianist hermeneuts is now conversing with God?1. Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal biasWrites Dreher: “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’.”
2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, “gender inclusive” language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
3. Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the [New International Version] is written at only the 7th grade level
4. 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”.
5. 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
6. 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.
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.”
I have two great sins to expiate, the second of which was not trying to talk Rod Dreher out of journalism and into accounting or theology when he was a student in classes I taught at in the J-School at LSU in the mid-'80s.
1 comment:
I read about this on Huff's post. I think these people should take it all the way back to Aramaic or Hebrew if they want a viable translation. Come to think of it, isn't rewriting the Bible to suit one's own beliefs slightly sacreligious? Damn, I sure hope so. That way all these fuckers are gonna be sitting right next to me on the coals, and I am gonna laugh my ass off!
Post a Comment