| | If the idea is to compare a conservative and a liberal translation, I would recommend comparing [[ESV]] (conservative, Evangelical) to [[NRSV]] (liberal, NCC, "mainline protestant"). These two translations have different politics, but they are at the same reading level. Here we are comparing an easy-to-read translation with two translations that require a higher reading level. It is hard to tell which, if any, differences are can be attributed to politics. As for NIV, who cares what the old version said? The current edition is enough. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:30, 18 January 2014 (EST) | | If the idea is to compare a conservative and a liberal translation, I would recommend comparing [[ESV]] (conservative, Evangelical) to [[NRSV]] (liberal, NCC, "mainline protestant"). These two translations have different politics, but they are at the same reading level. Here we are comparing an easy-to-read translation with two translations that require a higher reading level. It is hard to tell which, if any, differences are can be attributed to politics. As for NIV, who cares what the old version said? The current edition is enough. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:30, 18 January 2014 (EST) |
| − | :NIV has dropped its "gender neutral" edition, so there is now only one NIV translation that we need to deal with. I replaced the two NIV columns with the current translation. The current version of NIV is not considered feminist, as least not by the feminists. I added NRSV to make sure there is still a bible on the chart that liberal scholars actually use. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 06:40, 4 July 2014 (EDT) | + | :NIV has dropped its "gender neutral" edition, so there is now only one NIV translation that we need to deal with. I replaced the two NIV columns with the current translation. This version is not considered feminist, as least not by the feminists. I added NRSV to make sure there is still a bible on the chart that liberal scholars actually use. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 06:40, 4 July 2014 (EDT) |