The ‘conservative bible project‘ has as its goal, among other things, to
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.
Bad news, you ‘conservatives’ – casting lots IS gambling and ‘registering’ IS enrolling. Your paranoid fear of neutral terms demonstrates your clear agenda is eisegesis and not exegesis. That is the worst sort of dilettantism.
And
Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning.
The New Testament parables don’t even know what you mean by ‘free market’. Again, you are eisegeting, badly.
Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story.
The ‘adulteress’ story may well be a later insertion, but it is hardly ‘liberal’ and not only melds quite nicely with the purpose of John, but also with the purpose of what we know of the Historical Jesus. Your politics are showing. If you want to shed a clearly later addition which is utterly meaningless, dump the longer ending of Mark which you fundamentalists treasure so much!
The rest of the page is so absurd and so driven by a fundamentalist agenda that it doesn’t merit remark. I can only suggest that this project deserves to die a slow, miserable, painful death. It is, again, the lowest sort of dilettantism (as can be shown quite pointedly by their plan to base their translation on the KJV). Be ashamed, conservatives, be very, very ashamed.
(Mark Chancey told me about this and as a consequence, I’m not speaking to him again for a few days…)
Ah, yes.
It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.
The Conservative Bible Project must be run by politicians or marketing agents.
Besides, don’t conservatives already have the ESV and the KJV (1769, most likely. That 1611 has too many variant readings in the margins, not to mention -gasp– Apocrypha!).
By: Chuck Grantham on 10/02/2009
at 11:02
This sort of thing needs to be stopped before it threatens the livelihood of honest satirists everywhere. I kept waiting for the punchline, the point where they revealed the joke. Apparently they are the joke.
Full disclosure: I think of myself as conservative.
By: Mark on 10/02/2009
at 11:13
im conservative too- in so many things. and find it just outrageous when the bible is misrepresented. oh it steams me!
By: Jim on 10/02/2009
at 11:33
Is Steven Anderson behind this?
By: Jason on 10/02/2009
at 12:09
It’s a vast right wing conspiracy.
By: Chuck Grantham on 10/02/2009
at 15:08
you mean rush ‘400 pound’ limbo is the guy doing it???!!!!
By: Jim on 10/02/2009
at 15:10
Jim,
Of course. Rush beams instructions straight into his conservative robot listeners’ minds. Rush is the source of all conservative action, anywhere around the world, 24/7/365.
The world is really a big comic book battle between the mind-numbed robots of Rush Limbaugh and Barack Obama. You decide who’s Ahriman and who’s Ahura Mazda.
But Rush has been on a big time diet lately.
By: Chuck Grantham on 10/02/2009
at 15:32
i’m with the growing consensus that thinks Conservapedia must be a joke. they’ll wait till they get a few thousand conservatives clamoring about how great it is and then post on the front page that it’s all satire and the joke’s on the fools that like it. it’s gotta be a joke. gotta be… what is NT Wrong up to these days?
By: Mark Begemann on 10/02/2009
at 23:11
[...] Jump to Comments Ran across the so-called “Conservative Bible” in a post on Jim’s blog. I went and had a quick look, and though it is clearly as ridiculous as Jim says I don’t [...]
By: Conservapedia… « Random Colin on 10/03/2009
at 13:52
[...] Colbertian Contribution to Conservapedia Surely most of my readers are aware of Conservapedia’s recently announced “Conservative Bible Project,” which aims to [...]
By: The Colbertian Contribution to Conservapedia « The Voice of Stefan on 10/08/2009
at 00:05