[sword-devel] some more new Bible modules

[Paul Gear]

Jerry Hastings wrote:

> ...
> >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
> >defects.
>
> I have a copy and use it. It has not lead me into any weird doctrines.

That is indeed true.  I have 40 or so translations on my shelf, and there are
far more bad ones than good ones!  :-)

> ...
> 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.
> ...
> Just take these as suggestions. I am glad it is you and not me that has to
> make the choice.

No translation is unquestionable - i don't agree with everthing in the KJV, NIV,
GNB, WEB, etc.  They all have their good and bad points.  So i think perhaps the
easiest thing to do would be to treat them all as "questionable".  That is, make
an explicit statement that we do not guarantee the orthodoxy of anything
provided on the site.  How about something like this:

"No translation is infallible, therefore we make no special claims as to the
orthodoxy, accuracy, or helpfulness of any of the translations provided here.
Each reader should use the guidance of the Holy Spirit when using the materials
provided and compare the translations against each other in their personal
study."

What think ye, brethren?  :-)

Paul
http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear