——————————————————————–

The core of the article there:

“A few examples, to get the unreality of this across:

One of their goals is “identify pro-liberal terms used in existing bible translations, such as “government”, and suggest more accurate substitutes”. So any verse in the bible that mentions “government” is, automatically, incorrect, because the word “government” is pro-liberal. There’s no discussion of whether “government” is an accurate translation of the original greek or hebrew; it must be wrong, because according to their supposedly “conservative” philosophy, government is always bad, and so any passage in the the text which says anything that might be remotely positive about government is, necessarily, wrong.

One example they give of a “liberal falsehood” is a verse from the new testament: “Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.””. That, they say, must be removed from the bible. Because, you see, that quote only appears in one book of the new testament, and it’s just obviously wrong. Why is it obviously wrong? If you want to contribute to the Conservative Bible Project, you’re not allowed to ask that question. It just is wrong, because they don’t like it.

In their early efforts at translation, they’re trying to get rid of the word “Pharisees”. “Pharisees” is a very specific term; it means a specific group of people. It’s not a generic term for “bad people”, or “liberal people”, or anything like that. They were a group that was distinguished by, among other things, believing in (gasp!) the literal interpretation of the book of Exodus. They were also the grouping that included most of the high priests of the second temple. The conservapedia folks have been suggesting replacing “Pharisee” with “self-selected elite”, “intellectual”, or (cutting to the chase) “liberals”. As a “translation”, that’s absolute garbage. It completely ignores the meaning of the original text, in order to create the appearance that their political beliefs have some sort of divine support, even though the original text can’t support that interpretation.”

—————————————————–

ToddR comment: I think that the Sadducees, not Pharisees, were the “Book of Exodus literalists” during the Second Temple period, so the writer had that wrong. But his point that “Pharisees” has a specific meaning not well-captured by modern terms such as “liberals” stands.

More ironic for the project, Pharisees were distinguished by their strict observance of religious ceremonies and practices, adherence to oral laws and traditions, and belief in an afterlife and the coming of a Messiah.

Again, David R, this is in furtherance of our mutual hope for economic unity.

Larry

Larry

Speaking of changes, at Vanderbilt some years back there was a conclave in the Theology department whose said purpose was changing the Bible.
A talk host was carrying on like it was big stuff so I called in. Say Buddy, do me a fovor; if you bring this up again, say They are Changing THEIR Bible.
And he did ! And then made a talk himself of the ‘timelessness’ in the substance and meaning of the Bible as we have it. Re Vanderbilt Divinity,
What do you think of an unbelieving Jewish lady as as New Testament lecturer ?
There is progress indeed. It’s been a couple of years when there was a public lecture of the female vagina (excuse me ladies) and it was not the Medical School.

And they knew not ”til the enemy came and took them (or their money) all away !

I visited the zoo in Memphis one time and the monkeys’ demonstrated interest in sex and their activities and antics somehow comes to mind during discussions such as this, Larry. If evolution is possibly true for some folks
and their grandparents really ascended, do you suppose this could be a reverse trend. Wow ! Science . . at the zoo . . .

Hate to be nit-picking but maybe you might check out the beginings of the U S Postal service. If you think old Ben was a liberal I’d think that very interesting.

You said,

It is interesting that since the Democrat[ic] Party lost the Southern Whites
and embraced the very fringes of society and has been trying to mainstream and ‘normalize’ almost all the ‘un-values’ conceivable

I was almost tempted to say, “So what’s your point? lol.” But the truth is simply that the movement of sex-positive values into the mainstream of this country turned off many good people that the Democratic Party needs to help support other common values in addition to sex-positive values.

This is an absolutely true story: I recently had occasion, for the first time in 44 years now, to visit one of my main almae matres, Swarthmore College in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania. I have mentioned Swarthmore before. For what it’s worth to this story, Swarthmore College has been consistently rated among the top educational institutions in the county by U.S. News & World Report right up to 2010. Anyway, my wife and I went by the Pennsylvania Turnpike exit for Swarthmore on the way back from an engagement party for a favorite niece of mine. We decided to get off the highway and take a look.

To focus on just one little part of what was a very nice experience, especially for me, on one of the student bulletin boards in the main building was a notice for a seminar on sex toys! Wow! My how times have changed! The notice didn’t even say anything about being for one gender or the other! I was pleased as well as being quite surprised, but I think my appearance at 65 years of age might risk cramping the style of the seminar leader(s) and younger attenders. :-7

Larry