DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
Yeah! Like the New Testament. Bunch of weak-kneed, bleeding-heart, pinko, liberal, hippie, nonsense.
So I looked through his revised book of Mark. I don’t see much of a “conservative” element. There is not a whole lot of “liberal bias” being taken out.
He makes a number of comments about the “grammatical errors” and “archaic phrasing” of KJV. Most of his revisions are simply contemporary translations of KJV, which has already been done many times before and much better.
One of his conservation revisions is to use “no man” instead of “no one”. But he is comparing his text to KJV, which already uses “no man”. I understand he is “correcting” KJV to NIV back to… his translation.
He does use “well-armed man” instead of “strong man”, which may be construed as a kind of NRA pro-gun conservative translation. It works simply as a contemporary translation, although it does take away from the parable feel and the simplicity.
OK. Now the REAL conservative stuff:
He uses “intellectual” a couple of times where I think he really means “evil jewy liberal Jew pig”.
He tries to use “open-minded”, but it doesn’t work. In Mark 6:3 he translates, “The public was not open-minded about Jesus.” This is where Jesus went and got his disciples and he goes back to his homeland and starts preaching. And the people are all like, “Ain’t that the carpenter kid from shop class? Why is he all acting like he’s some kind of high-and-mighty, important, intellectual priest and stuff?” They were offended and upset about what he was doing.
This is sort of like if the local junior high school gym teacher suddenly started walking around town in a white lab coat diagnosing people’s illnesses on the street and giving them prescription medication. People would be offended and upset. It is a long stretch to say that the people were not open-minded about the gym teacher.
That concludes the conservative revision of Mark, so far.
