October 7, 2009


King James is surely spinning somewhere.

Just when I thought Christian Fundamentalists couldn’t further propagate their extremist agendas, I learn there is a project underway to re-write the Bible in an attempt to eliminate its “liberal bias.” I never knew the Bible was conservative or liberal. How is it that after nearly four hundred years, the King James Version of the Bible is suddenly not written properly?

I first came across this information at HuffingtonPost.com. I thought, “Surely, this is just one of those articles whose headline is more interesting than the actual story.”

Not so.

Here’s some of what you’ll find on the home page of Conservapedia.com.

“Conservapedia is a clean and concise resource for those seeking the truth. We do not allow liberal bias to deceive and distort here.”

“No other encyclopedic resource on the internet is free of corruption by liberal untruths.”

Directly from the project’s webpage, The Conservative Bible Project, you see these lines:

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning:

  • lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts introduced by Christ
  • lack of precision in modern language
  • translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one

Here’s are samples of what this project wants to re-write.

Liberal Falsehood:

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

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.


Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the “social justice” movement among Christians. For example, the conservative word “volunteer” is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word “comrade” is used three times, “laborer(s)” is used 13 times, “labored” 15 times, and “fellow” (as in “fellow worker”) is used 55 times.

Thank God there are level-headed religious conservatives.


Rod Dreher, of BeliefNet.org, certainly a conservative on both politics and religion says,”…the insane hubris of this really staggers the mind. These right-wing ideologues know better than the early church councils that canonized Scripture? They really think it’s wise to force the word of God to conform to a 21st-century American idea of what constitutes conservatism? These jokers don’t worship God. They worship ideology.” Here’s the rest of his post.



Mark Shea, a writer and devout Catholic, writes, “Right wing dementia marches on apace. Some of this has a grain of sense to it, as ideological madness always does. For instance, the dumb attempts to feminize Scripture are pernicious and need to stop. But seriously: the story of the woman taken in adultery is “liberal”? Free market as Sacred tradition? Liberal wordiness?” More from Mark here.

Assimilating scripture to fit an agenda will not feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and otherwise help the least among us, as Jesus taught us to do.

We would do well to adhere to His teachings, rather than re-write them.







  1. Hate to break it to ya… but that’s all the bible is. Constant re-writes by people wishing to further their agenda. Studying the history of how the bible has come together is a pretty eye-opening experience. We’re actually pretty overdue for a new widely accepted version…

  2. True, but…

    Removing passages that have been part of nearly all Christian denominations for hundreds of years because you think they aren’t conservative enough by today’s standards?

    Come on.

    Are we going to eliminate all continuity among Christians? Shouldn’t there be some semblence of congruence?

    Just my 2-cents worth.

    Thanks for the comment.


  3. That’s the problem with the bible to begin with. You think King James didn’t eliminate whole passages and change things to fit his agenda? Two THOUSAND years. It is a document that does still have universal truths, but have been filtered and filtered. This is just another filter by those who seem to care most about it. If you don’t like it, you can read your version. It actually isn’t shocking to me in the least – what is shocking is that the fringe right hasn’t done this earlier. ‘Cause as we’ve said before, what they preach has little to do with what Jesus taught. Seems they’re aware of that too…

  4. I’ve attended many different services. Most quote the King James Version (the accepted standard since 1611) and then they may read the same quote from New International Version or the American Standard Version, but the KJV seems to be the foundation.

    Granted, there are 50 different versions. But what Conservapedia is doing is not making the original text more understandable, as the NIV and ASV and even the New KJV have tried to do. They are deleting what they refer to as “liberal” text and replacing it with “conservative” text, or no text at all, based on today’s POLITICAL definitions of those terms. That’s the ridiculousness (is that a word?) of what they’re doing.

    Again, just my 2-cents worth.

    Thanks for the dialogue.

  5. […] and both of us more than live up to our name.) We simply state our views and leave it at that. Here’s an example in the comment section of one of my […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: