Conservative Bible Project

"Haven't any of you people who agree with her even read it? " Yeah, I read the entire thing. I read the preface twice. There's nothing to be misread. They are advocating writing a version of the bible that appears more conservative in nature. That's exactly what the page says. Up and down, in black in white - it even has their guidelines for re-writing emboldened and numbered 1-10. Not that it matters anyway. It's like arguing over whether or not we should change the text of Harry Potter to have English jargon, and American jargon. From the page: "Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians. For example, the conservative word "volunteer" is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word "comrade" is used three times, "laborer(s)" is used 13 times, "labored" 15 times, and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") is used 55 times. " Heh - paranoid much? These people belong back in the era of McCarthy. Of course, I don't expect anything less from Conservapedia.

Clearly we weren't reading the same web page.

The OP is wrong. She either misread it or as I suspect twisting it to say what she wants it to say. She has yet to come back and defend her position for saying the opposite of what is written. Haven't any of you people who agree with her even read it?

Excellent find!

I totally forgot about that discussion.

Hey, you were ther too!

Well, I was talking more the to point of our own understanding and education. Not that long ago the King James Version of the Holy Bible was used to teach kids how to read. Now high school graduates and even college professors don't have the same reading comprehension as yesterday's elementary students. As far as why I accept the Holy Bible as the word of God, because I have tested it in my life and have proven it to myself. Of course, that doesn't prove it to you. But then again no one has ever proven the existence of element 111 to either of us, yet we still accept it's existence without question.

No, it's more a matter of WHY would we believe, knowing all the changes and modifications that have been made through the centuries to accommodate whatever the political/religious trends were at the time,Knowing the scientific answers to questions that were answered as magical and mystical in times past, WHY would we believe in any of it? To us, religion defies logic.

ah so not true! I can fuse bismuth and nickle to get it.

I'm not sure if she misread it or just twisted it to say what she wished it said.

I feel that what they are doing only further trivializes the book you all seem so smitten with. That same book which has been revised, re-translated (incorrectly at times for certain), and reinterpreted umpteen thousand times. The CBP wouldn't know what is or is not the original word intention/meaning, or what words were "original" to begin with! That they are attempting to put forth a more conservative set of interpretations should be offensive to those who do believe in Christ's message. Do you really WANT more capitalism in your holy book? Do you want your women kept low? You WANT hell fire and brimstone preaching? The bible isn't a text book, a book of texts yes, not thoroughly factual. Also, it is open to far to many interpretations, being openly controversial, discussing it in a public classroom would step on to many toes collectively and is simply not worth the hassle. Religion is best taught in religious institutions and at home.

Probably both Irish. I guess the RR isnt the only ones with an agenda.

Thank you I agree, it further trivializes what's already been written. I see it as a lack of faith. they don't believe in whats there so they will change it to suit the needs at the time. The POLITICAL needs. I'm not surprised, it's been done a thousand times, for a thousand different groups/denominations.

Annie, she misread it.

No, I really don't think I misread anything. But thank you anyway. I had a very similar thought pertaining to Ms. Palin....

I will concur that there is likely very little of the initial story left after the thousands of re-interpretations, rewritings, and amendments. I will not waste my time rereading it. As to FACTS, it's a bible, not a science text. I like proof, and having faith denies one PROOF, thus the reason it's called FAITH (belief in something intangible). The best likening I've heard is "I believe the ice will hold my weight", to prove it, you step onto the ice. That's faith in the thickness of the ice. I can't do that with religion. To stupid to learn English?.... Can I surmise that you have the "Your HERE now, learn the language!" opinion? I have shared this opinion in times past, and might again, but those "stupid" multi-lingual warnings keep the manufacturers from getting sued. Anything that keeps lawyers away is a GOOD thing, IMO. Also, it's a backhanded way to teach uni-lingual people like you and I how to speak (or spell) a few foreign words, could come in handy when traveling.

So how many languages do you speak? Maybe Spanish? Maybe a bit of French? Just about every country has English as a second language except the countries that we cater to when it comes to language. I don't think Hispanics are stupid, we're just treating them like we believe they can't learn. They learned how to speak Spanish. It wasn't their first language. You're preaching to the choir about faith. It still doesn't change that you misread the piece.

Let's just say we don't always disagree and sometimes we agree to disagree. Sometimes we just ignore.

now this will get their HARES up in a lather!

lol....sorry Hair...nothing to worry your pretty head about, dear....hehe

best not to think Italian?