Now 'Conservatives' Are Twisting Scripture

By Joseph Farah

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book – Revelation 22:18

I've seen some incredibly stupid and misguided initiatives by "conservatives" in my day, but this one takes the cake.

Because the Bible has been rewritten to conform with the agenda of "liberals," a self-described "conservative" is spearheading an effort to rewrite it to his liking.

If you think I'm joking, read on.

Andy Schlafly, the son of the heroic Phyllis Schlafly, has begun the Conservative Bible Project, an effort to rewrite the Bible to the tastes of conservatives online, Wikipedia-style.

What does he have in mind?

Here are some examples:

He doesn't like what Jesus said in Mark 10:25 about it being "easier for a camel to go through the eyes of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." His "Conservative Bible" changes "rich man" to "a man who cares only for money." I'm sure Jesus will appreciate this politically incorrect update. He was probably confused when he made that statement. Schlafly explains:
"I don't think Jesus is saying 'Let's all be lazy so we can get to heaven.' That's not the message. And, if you translate the word rich as simply rich, some people are going to get the message that 'I am going to be lazy so I can get to heaven easier.'"
How's that for scholarship?
He is cutting out the ending of Mark's gospel altogether. Why? Because he says it is not found in the oldest texts. But that's not true. It is not found in manuscripts doctored by Gnostics in Alexandria – manuscripts that form the basis of the most "liberal" translations of the Bible. So, in effect, he is emulating the enemy here. The end of Mark has already been eliminated in the New International Perversion, as I like to call it.
He also recommends cutting the adultery story in which Jesus says:
"He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her."
What's wrong with that? Well, apparently, Jesus was showing Himself to be soft on crime!
He doesn't like the idea of the Bible talking about wine. He turns it into grape juice.

It's nutty.

Basically, those "conservatives" participating in this idea weren't really upset when liberals messed with the Holy Scriptures. They were upset only with how they messed with them.

I'm almost too embarrassed to write about this kind of trivialization and politicization of the Scriptures, but something needs to be said.

Either the Bible is the Word of God, or it's not.

If it is, how dare anyone rewrite it?

If it's not, why bother?

Personally, I am very comfortable with the King James Bible. I know how scrupulous the translators were. I know they spent hours in prayer over their work. I know they used the best resources available to them. I know they didn't assume that the "oldest" manuscripts available were always the most accurate. I know they took into consideration that heretics were busy editing Scripture – probably as early as the first century.

Enough of this foolishness!

Rewriting the Bible to fit man's ideas is always a bad idea – no matter who the man is or what his beliefs.

It's also a profoundly dangerous practice spiritually.

There's certainly nothing "conservative" about rewriting the Bible. The "conservative" thing to do would be to preserve, or conserve, the Scriptures as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

A plague on the houses of anyone and everyone who would tamper so frivolously with God's Word.

Related Links