[sword-devel] some more new Bible modules
Sun, 20 May 2001 13:48:39 -0700
At 03:10 AM 5/20/2001 -0700, Chris Little wrote:
>It seemed to just be a
>Universalist arguing with a KJV-onlyist over minutae, with only
>out-of-context (from my perspective, just reading the dialogue) quotations
I didn't mean to endorse the web site. They were just the easiest thing to
find. But it is an example of the controversy that comes with the CLV. Even
if the translation is doctrinally unbiased you will have the controversy
because it is published by Universalists.
>I don't really see an intentional act of deception in this translation. I
>see a number of poorly and non-literally translated words as its primary
I have a copy and use it. It has not lead me into any weird doctrines.
Perhaps it could if I was using it to learn something it may have a bias
for. I use it because the scheme to be concordant has forced things that
raise interesting translation questions and has forced them to use an
>But I'll assume you know a bit more about this translation and the
>perception people have of it than I've been able to glean.
I know that one of the questions I have been asked about the used Bible
collections that Bible Foundation does, is do we screen out the
questionable translations. CLV has come up in that discussion because of
the possibility of someone contacting the publisher from the info in the CLV.
Whether it should be labeled questionable depends on what people expect
from translations being split into questionable or not. If they expect that
a translation, accurate or not, by people outside of the doctrinal
mainstream should be labeled questionable, then I think it should be. If
Scientology produced an accurate translation where would you put it? Still,
it can get complicated when done be an independent group. Some of the
members may be mainstream while others are not. If the mainstream generally
endorses a translation, in spite of its history, then it should probably
not be labeled questionable. Many people would endorse the CLV but I wonder
how many of them know the publishers are Universalists. Just take these as
suggestions. I am glad it is you and not me that has to make the choice.