abkaiser

Anyone been following this story?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/25/rol....ap/index.html

While the turnaround from Rolling Stone is interesting, the bit that caught my eye was the advertised bible being "written in today's language".

"Today's language" would make some potentialy interesting interpretations from the KJB (or whatever source was used). Has anyone ever read these new-translations-for-the-new-generation bibles? Are there the same sheep and leprosy themes? How about treatment of women? Does the "God is vindictive and angry" theme leave the OT? What's Revelation like? ...Well, I guess Revelation doesn't need to change much.

worm

some time ago there was a modern translation of the bible released here in holland.

the difference is that some outdated words and phrases were modernized. some christians complained that it reduced the pleasure of reading it, because it sounded too common...it apparently lost it's 'spark'.

i think it's a good thing. maybe now people will see through the bullshit a little easier.

Stacey Melissa

I guess the regular NIV wasn't a shoddy enough translation for them, so they're making an even more inaccurate version.

Boo on Rolling Stone, the magazine that used to be a bastion of commercialized deviant secularism.

Cynthia of Syracuse

This topic is more BC&H material, so off you go..

Diogenes the Cynic

I haven't seen this new translation so I can't comment on it specifically, but..

I have yet to see a "contemporary" attempt at translation that wasn't a total abortion. The ones I've seen aren't really honest translations at all but massively biased attempts to paraphrase, in contemporary language, a specific interpretation of the Bible. They are largely sanitized, and they are filled with dishonest renderings of countless passages. The ones I've seen are con jobs, not anything a real Bible scholar would take seriously.