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.
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.
|
So what?
A LOT of things 'appear' in only one Gospel!
As to 'knowing' what they were doing?
No - they did NOT!!
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.
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
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.
Visit? or support for the rest of their lives?
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.
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.
What version, or edition, is that? I might like to get one.
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.
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
self ping
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.
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."
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.
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.