 ratilfar says: 4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] 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". 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 Among the words to be eliminated: "government." A conservative columnist at Beliefnet described the effort as "just crazy ... like what you'd get if you crossed the Jesus Seminar with the College Republican chapter at a rural institution of Bible learnin'. Accurate translation ought to be the goal of any work originally written in a different language. This Huffington article is obvious spin-craft, for you only need compare a Geneva, King James, or older translation to the newer ones to see who exactly has been doing the revising, and what has changed. To imply that the Jesus Seminar, a 20th century group with a definite agenda, is to be compared with Wycliffe, Huss, Luther, or the Puritan versions (taken directly from the best manuscripts of the original language, or the Latin Vulgate), is absurdity in the highest degree. More revisions than the atlas, each aimed at increasing someone's power, usually a man's. Doesn't matter what it says, most aren't able to interpret or read the bible anyway, and have to learn from the pulpit, which has the power. Zackery Nester I personally think the Bivle does not need to be changed at all. It is GOD's Word and His son Jesus Christ's Word. I grew up on the KJV and I DO NOT THINK THE BIBLE IS TO LITERAL!!! They've just got a bug up their butts over the fact that when you boil it all down, Christianity is a left-leaning ideal. It's called the Social Gospel. It also invalidates the whole point of believing in the Bible completely and without question. If you can manipulate the text like that, it loses a bit of it's divinity, unless your claiming to be God or something. Which would be blasphemy, of course. The bible has been manipulated and rewritten/reframed hundreds of times over the centuries. This is hardly the first time. And yet, there are still things of value to be found in many of the contemporary interpretations of the bible. Just don't read it without expecting to find a lot of blatant and shameful humanism in it. Someone deciding that the bible needed to be re-interpreted is pretty much inevitable. This one just happens to be the most ludicrous and self-serving attempt in hundreds of years  Yes darkeforce, this attempt is ludicrous and self-serving and so is the editor-in-chief, [url="http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Andrew_Schlafly#Disrespect_for_academic_qualifications[./url] Andrew Schlafly[/url], son of Phyllis Schlafly So far in the proposed edites, Pharisees are Liberals and scribes are intellectuals, ergo, Christ's enemies were liberal, intellectual Jews. Mark 3:6 King James Version And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him. woops: Andrew Schlafly Andrew Schlafly Well isn't he a lovely piece of wor  |
View the Top Clips from October 5, 2009
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|
