CONSERVAPEDIA HAS given a new string to the argument regarding the true version of the Holy Bible, one which many percieve has been lost over the years, through multiple translations.

The website in question has started a new Bible translation, known as the conservative Bible project, which aims to translate the text in the manner it was perceived when it was written and not give liberal meanings to it, though, whether is would be pro Christian move or not is a questionable thought.

Bible translation has never been a smooth sailing vocation and has always been bristling with controversy which has even, a few times, tarnished it with violence. Guttenberg invented the moveable type and Luther and many others translated scriptures into local understanding even before that many translations took birth and survived but were scratched with down with arguments.

Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia, a Wikipedia style online encyclopaedia, is inviting collaborators to assist him in writing a fully conservative translation of bible, which would be a countervail to the liberal translation, which he claims to be the “single biggest distortion of the scriptures” today. Andy is the son of a religious right leader Phyllis Schlafly and claims Wikipedia to be a liberal, anti-Christian, and anti-American biased portal.

Schlafly has stated that as liberal bias is the single biggest distortion, there would be many check points in this translation process that would raise a red flag on the contributor's effort. These include lack of precision in the original language such as, underdeveloped terms to convey new concepts would raise a question, “what did Jesus say?”

The founder claims that those terms, which when translated into the modern language, lose their essence were the worst hit by this translation bias.

Conservapedia parameters says that the translation of the holy text should be thought for thought, without corrupting it with modern understandings. This framework would work against liberal bias, non emasculation and dilution of the intellectual force of logical Christianity.

The translator would also have to keep in mind, utilisation of logical and powerful conservative terms, contending harmful addiction by using modern terms, would apply logic in full force by not downplaying the very real existence of Hell or Devil and would also credit the open-mindedness of some of the disciples, who were authors of the gospels.

Its not just the thought of Jesus which was somewhere understood, juxtapose by an interpreted thought and was compelled to be understood in many ways.