Sunday, December 06, 2009
CBP, continued.
I'm back, after two successful concerts and a headache, to finish what I started on Friday-- namely, talking about why the Conservative Bible Project makes my head explode. (Maybe that's where the headache came from.) In case you missed the first installment, I'm referring to Andy Schlafly of Conservapedia's plan to re-translate the Bible in the image of his conservative ideals. So what might a more conservative Bible look like? Its first stated goal is to remove the "liberal bias, which has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations." Their list of methods includes not emasculating the Bible (i.e. removing gender-inclusive terms and adding back in mentions of the unborn, which apparently has some relation to emasculation), combating addiction by using "gamble" rather than "cast lots", including "free market parables" (which ones?), and "accepting the logic of Hell"
The thing about this project that irks me the most, however, is their two examples of liberal fabrications--- the story of the adulteress Jesus saved from stoning and his words on the cross. According to the CBP, the adulteress story is a late addition to the Bible (as is most of the Bible, technically). You may remember this story from the line "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Apparently, this is a problem. "Why is the emphasis on this passage increasing? The answer lies in its liberal message: do not criticize or punish immoral conduct unless you are perfect yourself. Liberals cite this passage to oppose the death penalty, a misuse that has been criticized." Even then I can see where they may be coming from, but the last example takes the cake for me.
The Gospel of Luke states that as Jesus hung on the cross, he said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Bullshit, says the CBP. This contradicts the idea that there is no forgiveness without repentance, which is, they say, a basic tenet of Christianity. This passage is, as far as I am concerned, at the heart of the Christian mystery, partly because you don't need to believe the doctrine to appreciate it. That a man could have such love and mercy for his fellow men that even as they murder him, he intercedes for them-- whether he is the Son of God or not, that's behavior worth emulating. CBP, by removing these passages from the Bible, you remove the mercy, the compassion, the hope. Is that what Jesus would do?
Oh, and I don't know. SCOTT ADAMS, I guess.
Read or Post a Comment
The second Great Commandment Christ gave, after "love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, mind, soul, and strength" is "love thy neighbor as thyself."
I don't know how the conservatives are gonna spin that, but I've got a good idea what the Bible would say about it:
"For 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:
And 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."
--Rev. 22:18-19
The Bible is bipartisan. It has some strongly "liberal" sentiments, some strongly "conservative" sentiments, and some things that are just downright extreme (most of Leviticus and Deuteronomy). No liberal organization that I am aware of has tried to take the Old Testament out of the Bible, even though it's largely contradictory to Christ's message, so I don't know where conservative "Christians" get off reinterpreting the words of their savior to suit their purposes. Hopefully the American public will see the Kool-Aid for what it is, and not drink it.