Conservopedia takes on the Bible!

[Jon Loomis]

Yep--the geniuses at Conservopedia (the trustworthy encyclopedia!) have decided to edit the Bible, to make it more reliably conservative. Because apparently the King James has, you know, a liberal bias. I can't wait to see what they do with all that camel/needle stuff.

http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project

[Jon Loomis]

It's fucking goofy, is what it is. You can't claim that one of the foundational tenets of your political philosophy is the literal truth of the King James Bible (gay marriage bad, abortion bad, pre-marital sex bad, sex education bad, etc.) and then decide to rewrite the freaking thing because you dislike its evident liberal "bias" (love your enemy, give everything[!] to the poor, don't mix commerce and religion, keep out of politics, etc., etc., etc.). The only explanation is that they've run out of meth and started smoking grandpa's rat poison.

[Naomi Johnson]

And isn't there some sort of condemnation in the Bible reserved just for those who alter any part of it?

[Jon Loomis]

I believe it's in Revelations--it pretty much calls down a plague upon your generations, iirc.

[Benjamin Sobieck]

The Bible has been altered many times. That's why there are so many versions of it. In most cases, the English Bible is a translation from the Greek versions, which is a translation of Aramaic or ancient Hebrew. Since no language translates 100%, alterations had to be in place.

So I don't think altering the Old and New Testament of Christianity will condemn one to hell. But it is disturbing when "Sean Hannity Presents THE BIBLE, with Special Guest Rush Limbaugh and Foreword by Ann Coulter" is presented as dogma.

[Jon Loomis]

Altering the Bible will call down a plague upon your generations if you believe the KJV is the literal, 100% true, received word of God, which conservative evangelicals generally do. If it's divinely inspired in its current form, as fundamentalists believe, then it can't be "improved" upon--except by God himself.

[Carola Dunn]

Wasn't there something called the "sinful" bible--an edition of King James that left the word NOT out of the 8th commandment? Can't find it on google.

[Jon Loomis]

Revelation 22: 18-19

[18] For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
[19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Doesn't get a whole lot clearer than that.

[John Dishon]

Doesn't that just refer to Revelations? It says "book", and Revelations is a book itself.

If it does refer to the whole Bible, than there's still that business of which books are supposed to be in the Bible. Some were not included from the beginning.

[Jon Loomis]

That interpretation has been the source of considerable argument. Your guess is as good as mine.

[Pepper Smith]

One might also look at Deut. 4:2; Deut. 12:32; Prov. 30:5, 6; Gal. 1:8. The thought of not messing with the meaning by adding or taking away is not original to the book of Revelation.

Translations become necessary because of the multitude of languages, but conscientious translators are careful to get the meaning of the earlier texts. Translators with an agenda to push...aren't interested in what doesn't serve their cause. If they go through with this translation, it'll be looked at by Bible scholars who will be very happy to point out where the translation isn't accurate.

[John McFetridge]

Back in the early 90's there was a very funny movie called The Making of... And God Spoke, about a couple of B-movie producers who try and turn the Bible into a movie. They figure since it's the biggest selling book of all time there's a built in audience. Of course, they don't know the book very well themselves so they hire a writer, "A kid from UCLA, genius, but his script is twelve hundred pages." So, they decide to leave out a lot of, "the depressing stuff," and make their movie.

Really worth seeing. At the time people called it the Spinal Tap of movie making because it's a mockumentary ("The making of..." is a bit of a tip off) and there are a lot of jokes about making movies (sadly accurate), especially low budget movies. The woman cast as Eve doesn't havea problem with the nudity but she does have a huge tattoo of a snake. They aren't sure how many disciples there were so they ask one of the teamsters who's wearing a, "save Catholic schools" tee shirt and he says, "I don't know. 10?"

I you can find a copy, it's very funny.

[Michael Matthews]

That does it. I'm moving to Norway.