Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegoat  I don't think I would touch this with a ten foot pole. It doesn't look to me so much like a real re-translation, which would attempt to stay true to the actual text and meaning. Rather, they have decided to take out anything they, as moderns, consider sexist, racist, etc. That is, they are imposing their own agenda and then claiming (erroneously) that it is a re-translation.
|
That is my take on it as well. It is a translation with the express purpose of mistranslating the original document. It seems very much like Bowdlerized Bibles, which removed things found offensive by the Victorians.
If these "translators" are wise and enlightened enough to correct the writings of the apostles, they should write their own book of scripture and urge people to read that instead of the Bible.
For those who do think the Bible contains the teachings of Christ and writings of his disciples, and want to learn from them, it is self defeating to alter the wording to fit pre-existing ideas. Besides, we cannot always know when a choice of word is significant. If Christ calls God his Father, we should not assume Parent would apply just as well. There may be many symbolic or instructive reasons why God is called Father rather than Mother, Parent, or something else. "Correcting" the language prevents us from ever taking in that message. The Bible is not necessarily meant to make us feel comfortable or reinforce our entrenched attitudes.
I think I might like it, but I can't decide.)
