Fatty.... http://images-2.redbubble.net/img/art/size:xlarge/view:main/2176355-3-jesus-loves-you-but-everyone-else-thinks-youre-a-d******d.jpg
The Huffington article is a few years too late. That site was started in 2006 by Phyllis Schiafly's son Andrew. I tried clicking on the link to conservapedia that Major included, but currently cannot get to it.
eliminate jesus and luke while your at it, those hippie doods. Just keep it old testament. Actually, conservatives have wisely re-edited the bible to people who follow them, by doing things like condemning liberation theology. I guess now they just want to make it official.
No kidding. Some of you get indignant at the most ridiculous things. The Bible has been used as a political tool for over two thousand years now, and much longer if we're only talking Old Testament. So in other words, get used to it. at some of you. Sheesh.
Gah. Sometimes, you're an embarrassment to Tech. Thankfully I'm awesome enough to carry us for the time being. See ya.
"For Fatty so loved the world, he gave his only begotten forum..." "For our sake, he was pwned under D&D. He ascended into Lubbock and is seated on the sideline as a country singer. He will come again in glory to judge the Coogfans and the extremists, and his ego will have no end."
To get back to the original post, it seems like this effort to retranslate the Bible is somewhat uninformed. Of course the original language is sometimes ambiguous, all language is. Recognizing that it wasn't written in English and every translation was done with a set of priorities helps to sort through what was or wasn't in the original text (learning Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic also helps). I would think most people older than 8 would realize that phrases like "brothers and sisters" in some modern texts are a nod to modern sensibilities and that at the time "brothers" covered everyone. The biggest problem I see with this, as a Christian, is that it removes the possibility of using the Bible as an authority if you edit it to say what you want it to say. The Bible is a challenge to people across the entire political spectrum for different reasons and it should challenge you. If you read the Bible and feel like God agrees with all your thoughts and actions, believe me, you missed something. What I am not concerned about is the idea that a new translation of the Bible, conservative or liberal, will lead many people astray. They'd have to take the time to read it first and most people don't.
This is flipping brilliant. Favorite post of the day. Of course it's only 11:01 a.m., but it's a great start. Said another way...if you're busy making sure God is on your side, you're missing the point. Are you on His, is the better question? Are you moved by the things that clearly move Him from the Bible and from what we understand of God through the life and death of Christ??
One more thought... so many people seek to use scripture as weapons to judge people with. remove all context...take away the fact that this is all a narrative from start to finish...and just use bits and pieces to pick people apart. that seems to me to be what this group would be interested in and what they're seeking to do with this translation. as Mrs. Valdez said, the Bible OUGHT to be challenging to you. it ought to piss you off. it ought to make you uncomfortable. it's not to be filtered and tamed to make it how you'd want it to be. we do enough of that already.
I figured that I would get a piece of this cash cow while I could. The new Elmer Fudd Bible Translation: 1 In the beginning God cweated the heavens and the eawth.* 2 De eawf was fowmwess and empty, and dawkness covewed the deep watews. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! And the Spiwit of God was hovewing ovew the suwface of the watews. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! 3 Den God said, “Wet thewe be wight,” and thewe was wight. 4 And God saw that the wight was good. Den he sepawated the wight fwom the dawkness. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! 5 God cawwed the wight “day” and the dawkness “night.” And evening passed and mowning came, mawking the fiwst day. 6 Den God said, “Wet thewe be a space between the watews, to sepawate the watews of the heavens fwom the watews of the eawth.” 7 And that is what happened. God made this space to sepawate the watews of the eawf fwom the watews of the heavens. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! 8 God cawwed the space “sky.” And evening passed and mowning came, mawking the second day. 9 Den God said, “Wet the watews beneaf the sky fwow togethew into one pwace, so dwy gwound may appeaw.” And that is what happened. 10 God cawwed the dwy gwound “wand” and the watews “seas. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! ” And God saw that it was good. 11 Den God said, “Wet the wand spwout wif vegetation—evewy sowt of seed-beawing pwant, and twees that gwow seed-beawing fwuit. Dese seeds wiww then pwoduce the kinds of pwants and twees fwom which they came.” And that is what happened. 12 De wand pwoduced vegetation—aww sowts of seed-beawing pwants, and twees wif seed-beawing fwuit. Deiw seeds pwoduced pwants and twees of the same kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And evening passed and mowning came, mawking the thiwd day.
I agree. You're way better than that other, godless Valdez who'd rather fight about who ruined the D&D first than provide insightful commentary about the subject at hand.
