Difference between revisions of "Conservative Bible Project"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(added one about "dignifying style")
(Greek and Hebrew sometimes inadequate for expressing powerful new Christian concepts, but modern conservative language can)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
* not denying or downplaying the very real existence of [[Hell]]
 
* not denying or downplaying the very real existence of [[Hell]]
 
* dealing with liberal or random dilution of the meaning of biblical terms, like the term "word" in the first verse of the [[Gospel of John]]
 
* dealing with liberal or random dilution of the meaning of biblical terms, like the term "word" in the first verse of the [[Gospel of John]]
* use a dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and full recognition for the achievements
+
* use a dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and also use glorifying language for the remarkable achievements
 +
* recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, and that modern conservative language can express well
  
 
(add more)
 
(add more)

Revision as of 15:27, August 13, 2009

As of 2009 there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following conditions:

  • full use of conservative terms as they develop[1]
  • conveying evil with its proper liberal language, such as using the term "gamble" rather than "cast lots"[2]
  • excluding the liberal passages of doubtful authenticity, such as the adulteress story
  • avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language
  • not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity
  • explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
  • including notes that credit the young ages and open-mindedness of the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
  • use modern political terminology, such as "register" for a census rather than "enroll"
  • not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell
  • dealing with liberal or random dilution of the meaning of biblical terms, like the term "word" in the first verse of the Gospel of John
  • use a dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and also use glorifying language for the remarkable achievements
  • recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, and that modern conservative language can express well

(add more)

Possible Approaches

Here are possible approaches to creating a conservative Bible translation:

  • identify pro-liberal terms used in existing Bible translations, such as "government", and suggest more accurate substitutes
  • identify the omission of liberal terms for vices, such as "gambling", and identify where they should be used
  • identify conservative terms that are omitted from existing translations, and propose where they could improve the translation
  • identify terms that have lost their original meaning, such as "word" in the beginning of the Gospel of John, and suggest replacements, such as "truth"

An existing translation might license its version for improvement by the above approaches, much as several modern translations today are built on prior translations. Alternatively, a more ambitious approach would be to start anew from the best available ancient transcripts.

Building on the King James Version

In the United States and much of the world, the immensely popular and respected King James Version (KJV) is freely available and in the public domain. It could be used as the baseline for developing a conservative translation without requiring a license or any fees. Where the KJV is known to be deficient due to discovery of more authentic sources, exceptions can be made that use either more modern public domain translations as a baseline, or by using the original Greek or Hebrew.

There are 66 books in the KJV, comprised of 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, and 788,280 words.[3] The project could begin with translation of the New Testament, which is only 27 books, 260 chapters, 7,957 verses, and less than 200,000 words.

Retranslation at rate of 20 verses a day would complete the entire New Testament in about a year. With 5 good retranslators, that would be an average of only 4 verses a day per translator. At a faster rate of 20 verses per day by 5 good translators, the entire New Testament could be retranslated in less than 3 months.

Example

The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[4]

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.

References

  1. For example, in 1611 the conservative concept of "accountability" had not yet developed, and the King James Version does not use "accountable to God" in translating Romans 3:19; good modern translations do.
  2. For example, the English Standard Version (2001) does not use the word "gamble" anywhere in translating numerous references to the concept in the Bible.
  3. http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.html
  4. Quoted here from the NIV.

See also