[sword-devel] Freeing up modern bible text

Kirt Christensen sword-devel@crosswire.org
Mon, 05 Feb 2001 19:09:52 -0500

I appologize for starting the name calling of the NIV as the "Nearly 
Inspired Version" of the Bible.  I get carried away.  I should have focused 
on my points about the pallete of the hungry and distribution practices 
instead of pokeing at its "translational" weak points.  I cut my teeth on 
the NIV and stubbed a toe or two as well.

My point on packaging for the cultural pallete and distribution stands.  The 
Sword project is more like a technology soup kitchen in its ministry than a 
franchise like Zondervan.  In the same way that a soup kitchen can't make 
copies and freely distribute the Big Mac and still call it the Big Mac, so 
The Sword project needs to forget about freeing the NIV.  This ministry is 
not about the free distribution of the NIV.  Lets concentrate on what we can 
control and can do and not be frustrated by what we can't.

This project is a tremendous Christian work and will have a lasting 
evangelistic impact in the years ahead.  An impact that will not be hindered 
by the NIV being owned and sold in anyway.

(By the way.  The recipe for the Big Mac is: 2 all beef patties, special 
sauce, lettuce, cheese, on a sesame seed bun.  If the bible where that easy 
to duplicate and repackage for distribution we would have no problem... and 
then again no point in doing it.)

>From: Paul Gear <paulgear@bigfoot.com>
>Reply-To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
>To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
>Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Freeing up modern bible text
>Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 06:04:30 +1000
>Trevor Jenkins wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Leon Brooks <leon@brooks.fdns.net> wrote:
> >
> > > fred smith wrote:
> > >
> > > >> I mean, calling it
> > > >> the biblical equivalent of McDonalds (McBible? ;-) is a but much, 
> > > >> it?
> > >
> > > No. Well, maybe a *bit* much, but Westcott and Hort, and to a lesser
> > > extent the NIV committee (and I'm sure they're not alone in this) in 
> > > end gave us what they thought was best for us, not what God thought 
> > > best for us. The parallel is pretty exact if you compare Genesis 1:27
> > > with a Maccas ingredient list. (-:
> >
> > Interesting that you deride W&H and then cite a passage outside the New
> > Testament to back your argument.
> > ...
>This has gone way too far.  My point in raising the issue above was that
>this is *not* a Bible translations discussion list, therefore
>name-calling (or even good-natured discussion) about the benefits or
>drawbacks of *any* translation should be considered improper.
>"He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com