Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Time: Conservative Bible Project 'Insane' but 'Green Bible' Evangelical-friendly
Newsbusters ^ | 10-5-2009 | Ken Shepherd

Posted on 10/06/2009 4:41:06 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo

A year ago Time magazine's David Van Biema wrote up a short, favorable take on the so-called Green Bible, an edition based on the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) that placed "green references" in "a pleasant shade of forest green, much as red-letter editions of the Bible encrimson the words of Jesus." But wait, there's more, The Green Bible also includes "supplementary writings" several of which "cite the Genesis verse in which God gives humanity 'dominion' over the earth" and "Others [which] assert that eco-neglect violates Jesus' call to care for the least among us: it is the poor who inhabit the floodplains."

Even though The Green Bible is risible both from a commercial standpoint as a marketing ploy and theologically as a bastardization of the real heart of Christian doctrine, neither charge was entertained as a valid criticism by the Time staffer. Van Biema even hinted that evangelicals, 54 percent of whom "agreed that 'stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost'" might embrace the translation despite strong reservations from conservative theologians.

Yet the same reverent treatment was spared the online "Conservative Bible Project" spearheaded by some folks at Conservapedia. Time's Amy Sullivan slammed the project as "insane" in her October 5 Swampland blog post:

This is insane. The guys at Conservapedia (aka, "the trustworthy encyclopedia") have decided to retranslate the Bible in what they're calling the Conservative Bible Project, because "liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations."

And you thought liberal bias was limited to the evil mainstream media. Apparently the early Church fathers had their own problems, because the Conservapediacs are particularly intent on scrubbing the Bible of "liberal" passages they say were inserted into the original canon and therefore shouldn't be considered sacred. Passages like the story of the adulteress whom Jesus saved from being stoned with the famous line: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Conservapedia complains that liberals have used this story to argue against the death penalty. Plus, this Jesus character sounds like a radical moral relativist.

Also among the goals of the project: replace liberal words like "labor" with preferred conservative terms; use concise language instead of "liberal wordiness"; and--my favorite--"explain the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning." Jesus talks about economics more than any other secular subject in the Bible, so they've got their work cut out for them. I look forward to learning the free-market meaning of "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

While this writer personally disagrees with and finds huge dangers in an explicitly "conservative" interpretation of holy writ, Sullivan goes beyond issuing a warning about tampering with holy writ by suggesting the effort is no more than an attempt to pen a Bible that both the Church Lady and Gordon Gecko would love.

In doing so, she fails to consider some of more legitimate theologically conservative concerns that the project managers point to, such as "gender neutral" phrasing in some translations and language in other translations that glosses over the stark biblical teachings on Hell and eternal punishment.

Both the Green Bible and the nascent Conservative Bible project have room for both scorn and thoughtful criticism. It would be helpful for Sullivan to admit as much to escape the charge of being a hypocrite who should first remove the log from her magazine's eye before picking the speck out of those of conservative online activists.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: antichristianbigotry; bible
I think it's despicable to try to rewrite the Word of God to support a particular political point of view, be it right or left.
1 posted on 10/06/2009 4:41:06 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
I think it's despicable to try to rewrite the Word of God to support a particular political point of view, be it right or left.

I agree. I would really like to see an example of a part they have a problem with and how they would change it.

2 posted on 10/06/2009 4:51:53 AM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
I don't believe I've ever quoted the bible in an online forum before. But this one cries out to be mentioned; my childhood pastor referred to it as the "first copyright."
Revelation 22:18-19 (King James Version)

18For 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:

19And 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.


3 posted on 10/06/2009 4:55:04 AM PDT by RetroSexual
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

You are 100% correct.

Now if I re-wrote the Bible I might leave out all my foibles and proclivities then, of course, I would be perfect and I could look down on everyone who wasn’t the same as me - wouldn’t that be just dandy!

Of course I would go to hell under those circumstances!

Mel


4 posted on 10/06/2009 4:55:39 AM PDT by melsec (A Proud Aussie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetroSexual
Well, I went looking for an example and their own website doesn't appear to work. The only clear example I could find was the following:

First Example - Liberal Falsehood

The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[7]

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34829_Conservapedias_New_and_Improved_Non-Commie_Bible

5 posted on 10/06/2009 5:01:17 AM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
The people promoting the "Conservative Bible" would probably be more comfortable studying the fairy tales of Ayn Rand.

Of course, the "Green Bible" is just as ridiculous and blasphemous.

The truth of the Bible can make every one of us uncomfortable. It is up to us to change our lives to conform to it, not to change it to conform to our lives.

6 posted on 10/06/2009 5:06:43 AM PDT by Route797
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetroSexual
I don't believe I've ever quoted the bible in an online forum before. But this one cries out to be mentioned; my childhood pastor referred to it as the "first copyright." Revelation 22:18-19 (King James Version) 18For 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: 19And 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.

Well just in case the reader of the WORD does not make it to Revelation 22:18-19 they can find the same warning in Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your GOD which I command you.

And Deuteronomy 12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

But as Solomon pens in Ecclesiastes 1: 9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, 'See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

7 posted on 10/06/2009 5:21:38 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
While more modern scholarship from older biblical texts may have produced more accurate translations, The King James version still has the best English language. I agree that it is despicable to twist the word of any Bible translation to suite political points of view.

Gee I wonder if there will ever be a politically correct translation of the Koran?

8 posted on 10/06/2009 5:24:33 AM PDT by The Great RJ ("The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
From the people behind the project:

First Example - Liberal Falsehood

The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[7]

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible.

The scholarly justification for including Luke 23:34 is that the weight of numbers of early manuscripts overwhelm the fact that the oldest manuscript omits the verse. While there can be scholarly arguments made for either method, ( I favor the weight of numbers and thus inclusion) picking and choosing on the basis of what verses you think are being used by your opponents is not rightly respecting the Word.

And I take issue with their asserting that some of the people that Jesus was forgiving knew what they were doing. If we look at the immediate context, "they" was referring to the soldiers who physically performed the act and who were casting lots for his clothes.

9 posted on 10/06/2009 5:27:43 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
And I take issue with their asserting that some of the people that Jesus was forgiving knew what they were doing. If we look at the immediate context, "they" was referring to the soldiers who physically performed the act and who were casting lots for his clothes.

Thank you. I couldn't get any of their own websites to come up.

I'm pretty good with taking Jesus at His word. If He says they didn't know what they were doing, then I'm going to assume they really didn't know.

10 posted on 10/06/2009 5:38:55 AM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
I would really like to see an example of a part they have a problem with and how they would change it.

Liberals have a big problem with that, "Thou shall not kill" thing.

Four simple words and yet they think it's alright to kill babies.

11 posted on 10/06/2009 6:02:34 AM PDT by Graybeard58 ( Selah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ
Gee I wonder if there will ever be a politically correct translation of the Koran?

Yes, there is. The English translation given out by pro-Islamic groups as part of their PR efforts are just that - watered down "PC" version.

12 posted on 10/06/2009 6:04:35 AM PDT by TheBattman (Pray for our country...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
They can't handle the "Thou shalt not steal," thing either- they like picking pockets, mandates, taxation and nationalizing other people's property far too much.
13 posted on 10/06/2009 6:05:11 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dianna

The LORD said; “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:..........”(Isaiah 1:18a)

And god said: “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:11)

The Lord Jesus said; “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth.) (John 1:14)

Let us read; Hebrews 4:12, “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

Peter wrote; “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incoruptible, by the word of god, which liveth and abideth forever.” (1 Peter 1:23)


14 posted on 10/06/2009 6:33:18 AM PDT by LetMarch (If a man knows the right way to live, and does not live it, there is no greater coward. (Anonyous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Acts

4:32
And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
4:33
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
4:34
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
4:35
And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need

Where have I heard the 4:35 before? hmmmm,


15 posted on 10/06/2009 8:34:28 PM PDT by socialismislost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: socialismislost
That passage really shoots down the virtue of selfishness gospel. Here's another quote from James 1:27 that ol' Ayn wouldn't like too much about the central place of charity to true Christianity.

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.

16 posted on 10/07/2009 8:51:34 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
I totally agree with you and Captain Kangaroo.

Jesus was talking to the soldiers and they did not know who they were crucifying. As bad as it may seem they were obeying legal orders given by the legal authority against a person who had been tried by the legally prescribed judge.

Jesus practiced His own preaching to the very last second of His life.

17 posted on 10/07/2009 11:56:30 AM PDT by wbarmy (Hard core, extremist, and right-wing is a little too mild for my tastes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

IF liberals have deliberately corrupted the Bible in provable, public, examinable ways, why not have an ...

1) annotated
2) public
3) corrected

... Bible? I trust only the King James translators to have done a non “Spin Zone” edition. Every translation to English since I suspect has had deliberate tamperings.

I don’t agree or disagree with the “NetBible”, but check out Psalms 22:16 http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Psa&chapter=22&verse=16. It provides many translations, AND if I am not mistaken, they even had forums where everyone could opine on verses, and I was led to http://www.messianicart.com/chazak/Handbook.pdf where I learned a lot about attempts to corrupt the Bible.

In short, maybe we could ...

1) use the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and the best reasoning for what other sources to use for the Old Testament
2) use the best reasoning for what New Testament sources to use
3) use the best reasoning for what verses to include or leave out
4) justify every decision PUBLICLY, and what competing reasons were left out, for all the world to see
5) use modern, accurate language

Liberals have no qualms with corrupting the Word of God, because they think of it as a football by which to lead Christians. Shameful.


18 posted on 10/07/2009 4:42:22 PM PDT by ROTB ("By any means necessary"=EvilExcusd "The urge 2 save humanity is [often a ruse] for the urge 2 rule")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

That’s absolutely correct.

The best translation would try to get the writer’s thoughts as closely as possible to what they origianlly were.

My bet is that such a Bible translation would still be conservative enough to suit all but the terminally crazy.


19 posted on 10/07/2009 5:11:18 PM PDT by chesley ("Hate" -- You wouldn't understand; it's a leftist thing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
"Others [which] assert that eco-neglect violates Jesus' call to care for the least among us: it is the poor who inhabit the floodplains."

Oh??

NIV Matthew 7:21-28
21. "Not everyone who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22. Many will say to me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
23. Then I will tell them plainly, `I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
24. "Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
25. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.
26. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.
27. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

20 posted on 10/08/2009 3:50:36 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
 
I think it's despicable to try to rewrite the Word of God to support a particular political point of view, be it right or left.
 
...or MORMON!

 
 

 
 

Joseph’s so-called “translation         vs        the King James Version           






 

JST GENESIS 50: 24-38

24 And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die, and go unto my fathers; and I go down to my grave with joy. The God of my father Jacob be with you, to deliver you out of affliction in the days of your bondage; for the Lord hath visited me, and I have obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of my loins, the Lord God will raise up a righteous branch out of my loins; and unto thee, whom my father Jacob hath named Israel, a prophet; (not the Messiah who is called Shilo;) and this prophet shall deliver my people out of Egypt in the days of thy bondage.

25 And it shall come to pass that they shall be scattered again; and a branch shall be broken off, and shall be carried into a far country; nevertheless they shall be remembered in the covenants of the Lord, when the Messiah cometh; for he shall be made manifest unto them in the latter days, in the Spirit of power; and shall bring them out of darkness into light; out of hidden darkness, and out of captivity unto freedom.

26 A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins.

27 Thus saith the Lord God of my fathers unto me, A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren.

28 And he shall bring them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers; and he shall do whatsoever work I shall command him.

29 And I will make him great in mine eyes, for he shall do my work; and he shall be great like unto him who I have said I would raise up unto you, to deliver my people, O house of Israel, out of the land of Egypt; for a seer will I raise up to deliver my people out of the land of Egypt; and he shall be called Moses. And by this name he shall know that he is of thy house; for he shall be nursed by the king’s daughter, and shall be called her son.

30 And again, a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins; and not to the bringing forth of my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have already gone forth among them in the last days;

31 Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall grow together unto the confounding of false doctrines, and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to a knowledge of their fathers in the latter days; and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.

32 And out of weakness shall he be made strong, in that day when my work shall go forth among all my people, which shall restore them, who are of the house of Israel, in the last days.

33 And that seer will I bless, and they that seek to destroy him shall be confounded; for this promise I give unto you; for I will remember you from generation to generation; and his name shall be called Joseph, and it shall be after the name of his father; and he shall be like unto you; for the thing which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand shall bring my people unto salvation.

34 And the Lord sware unto Joseph that he would preserve his seed forever, saying, I will raise up Moses, and a rod shall be in his hand, and he shall gather together my people, and he shall lead them as a flock, and he shall smite the waters of the Red Sea with his rod.

35 And he shall have judgment, and shall write the word of the Lord. And he shall not speak many words, for I will write unto him my law by the finger of mine own hand. And I will make a spokesman for him, and his name shall be called Aaron.

36 And it shall be done unto thee in the last days also, even as I have sworn. Therefore, Joseph said unto his brethren, God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land, unto the land which he sware unto Abraham, and unto Isaac, and to Jacob.

37 And Joseph confirmed many other things unto his brethren, and took an oath of the children of Israel, saying unto them, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.

38 So Joseph died when he was an hundred and ten years old; and they embalmed him, and they put him in a coffin in Egypt; and he was kept from burial by the children of Israel, that he might be carried up and laid in the sepulchre with his father. And thus they remembered the oath which they sware unto him.

KJV  GENESIS 50: 24-26

 24.  And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

               and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.


 25.  And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.


 26.  So Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old: and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.
 


21 posted on 10/08/2009 3:53:29 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing.

So what?

A LOT of things 'appear' in only one Gospel!

As to 'knowing' what they were doing?

No - they did NOT!!

22 posted on 10/08/2009 3:55:45 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
The scholarly justification for including Luke 23:34 is that the weight of numbers of early manuscripts overwhelm the fact that the oldest manuscript omits the verse.

Implying that the verse NEVER existed before SOMEone added it; while ignoring the premise that it ALWAYS existed and SOMEone choose to leave it out in the old writing.

23 posted on 10/08/2009 3:58:17 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dianna
If He says they didn't know what they were doing, then I'm going to assume they really didn't know.

Yeah. No one will convince me that the killers of JESUS 'knew' that He was the Son of GOD, and that He would arise in 3 days, and that He would ascend to Heaven to confirm prophecies and that He was able to forgive men of their sins... yada yada yada

24 posted on 10/08/2009 4:00:26 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: socialismislost

Note that GOD did not tell them to do those things, and later on in Scripture the non-workers are admonished for sponging off of the workers.


25 posted on 10/08/2009 4:02:16 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction

Visit? or support for the rest of their lives?

26 posted on 10/08/2009 4:03:00 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chesley
My bet is that such a Bible translation would still be conservative enough to suit all but the terminally crazy.

I have a Jewish bible, that puts the Anglicized words that we all know in a reference in the back, and uses the orginal JEWISH words in many places.

It's a bit hard to read at first, as you have to keep looking back to get a definition, but soon, many things are added to your vocabulary and your comprehension rate goes way up.

27 posted on 10/08/2009 4:07:05 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ROTB

Why worry about ‘corrupting’ the bible when one can very easily omit things you don’t like or modify things you do.

For instance: how did a yearly feast to remember GOD’s blessing and salvation (Passover) get morphed into ‘holy communion’ that we see today?

Some churchs stuff the wine and bread in you every time the doors are open, while others that do it when the pastor thinks he needs to scare the congregation in a certain direction.


28 posted on 10/08/2009 4:10:59 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

What version, or edition, is that? I might like to get one.


29 posted on 10/08/2009 6:41:11 AM PDT by chesley ("Hate" -- You wouldn't understand; it's a leftist thing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Because a sound, well-reasoned, thorough base of ...

1) why scripture is inspired, preserved, inerrant
2) why a particular translation included certain verses, and excluded others
3) what tradeoffs were made in choosing the particular rendering of a word/phrase/sentence
4) how to read scripture to minimize apparent contradictions (there are none per )
5) a doctrinal creed based on all the above
6) a systematic theology based on the above
7) a format for church, evangelism, “letting light shine” as Christians

Once done, then it is the task for liberals to pretend it does not exist. If you’ve spent any time debating liberals, you know that ...

1) they only buffalo the ignorant
2) they know they can only buffalo the ignorant
3) only a few sit around to scream and whine after you’ve exposed them as a fraud

This is a “good thing”. Why should liberals “re-translate” the scriptures every generation, and have yet more opportunities to introduce doctrinal dreck?

If a church “decides” not to do something, let them dance around and pretend a solid argument has not been made.


30 posted on 10/08/2009 3:02:40 PM PDT by ROTB ("By any means necessary"=EvilExcusd "The urge 2 save humanity is [often a ruse] for the urge 2 rule")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: chesley

I saw it at the bible book store and looked at it and was instantly intrigued by the idea of it!

Complete Jewish Bible

Translation by David H. Stern

ISBN 965-359-018-9

website www.messianicjewish.net


31 posted on 10/08/2009 3:10:44 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: chesley

32 posted on 10/08/2009 3:11:53 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

self ping


33 posted on 10/08/2009 3:28:30 PM PDT by tang-soo (Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks - Read Daniel Chapter 9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Visit? or support for the rest of their lives?

The original Greek word translated visit, episkeptomai, means more than a mere social occasion the English word would imply. According to Thayer's NT lexicon, this word means "to look upon or after, to inspect, examine with the eyes". Thayer's secondary definition, the Hebrew oriented definition probably more relevant in an epistle addressed to "the twelve tribes scattered abroad", defines the word as "to look upon in order to help or to benefit...to look after, have a care for, provide for..." In the 1st Century AD, widows and orphans truly were in a perilous situation, and this verse in James states that pure religion involved a responsibility to do what it took for as long as it took. Now that's a long way from 21st century state socialism, but it's also a long way from Ayn Rand's virtue of selfishness and greed.

34 posted on 10/09/2009 7:10:04 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I am amused by the truth in your tagline, but then ashamed I am not doing more.


35 posted on 10/13/2009 12:11:28 AM PDT by ROTB ("By any means necessary"=EvilExcusd "The urge 2 save humanity is [often a ruse] for the urge 2 rule")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ROTB
I am amused by the truth in your tagline, but then ashamed I am not doing more.

I think most of us fall into this category.
But remember Martha, who was caught up in DOING so many things that she was distracted, and appealed to the Lord for Him to make Mary help her...

NIV Luke 10:38-42
38. As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him.
39. She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord's feet listening to what he said.
40. But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, "Lord, don't you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!"
41. "Martha, Martha," the Lord answered, "you are worried and upset about many things,
42. but only one thing is needed. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her."

36 posted on 10/13/2009 4:53:58 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Thank you for the correction ... again!

I actually “sat” in the presence of the Lord on Sunday, and received an unexpected blessing during that time.


37 posted on 10/13/2009 10:20:28 AM PDT by ROTB ("By any means necessary"=EvilExcusd "The urge 2 save humanity is [often a ruse] for the urge 2 rule")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson