The Conservapedia (no, I’d never heard of it either; I’ll not link to it, you can find it for yourself if you want to) is calling for a new ‘conservative translation’ of the bible which meets the following guidelines:
Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, “gender inclusive” language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level
Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop; defective translations use the word “comrade” three times as often as “volunteer”; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as “word”, “peace”, and “miracle”
Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as “gamble” rather than “cast lots”; using modern political terms, such as “register” rather than “enroll” for the census
Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness (whatttt???): preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities
These guidelines are not conservative! They will produce a tendentious version that will may well fall into heretical byways. Don’t believe me? The ‘adulteress story’ referred to is John 7.53–8.11. Yes, it probably wasn’t in the original version of John, but it’s in the canon now. They’ll remove it. And Luke 23.34 (the ‘Father forgive them…’ verse) will also be excised. As a ‘liberal’ addition.
Some books are underway. John 1.1 becomes, ‘In the beginning was Truth, and the Truth was with God, and the Truth was God.’ (Though they accept ‘Word’ may be the best word to use). But then, John 1.14 becomes ‘And the spirit was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as the only child of the Father, full of grace and truth.’
I’m amazed. Gobsmacked. And amused. In that order.
h/t Episcopal Cafe