I am impressed with your series of lectures on KJV Onlyism.
Praise GOD for your liberation from this disease.
I have two quibbles with it though. In the fourth lecture, you referred
to the Living Bible and it's weaknesses. However, you opined that it was
translated by a "Liberal Christian". I have the Living Bible, and Ken
Taylor, wrote in the preface that he wrote from a "rigid evangelical
position." I doubt this is liberal. However, he may have changed his
views since the Living Bible's release in the 70's.
Another point you spoke of is a distrust of translations from Europe.
Amongst these was the Revised Standard Version. It was translated in the
USA and not Europe. - Joshua H.
It is my profound desire to be as accurate as I can be and I never wish to pass along
misinformation of any kind, even if it is unintentional, so if and when I make a mistake,
and I am alerted to it by a listener, I want to take a moment make any necessary corrections
for the benefit of all.
The comments about translations can be heard at the end of 5th audio lecture entitled "The
Historical Revision of the KJV only Advocates." Toward the end as I was wrapping up my talk,
a few folks asked questions pertaining to Bible translations. Now the problem of answering
questions from off the top of my head can be dangerous for the very reason that Joshua pointed
out: there is a big chance of throwing out misinformed statements. In my case, The Living Bible
being a liberal translation and the RSV being an european translation.
It is true that Ken Taylor is not a liberal as we would understand liberal. His paraphrase
edition of the Bible is frought with many theological problems, however; but Mr. Taylor's
intention was not to provide a Bible that departed from sound orthodoxy. A fuller discussion
about Mr. Taylor and his Bible can be found here:
[The Living Bible] What I had in mind as I answered that question was "The Good News for
Modern Man," also known as "Today's English Version." It is a translation, not a paraphrase
like The Living Bible, but it was translated by a man who was opposed to conservative
evangelicals. You can read more about the Good News Bible here:
[Today's English Version] I remember the "Good News
Bible" well, because it was the version of choice used by the Methodist Church I attended when
I was a kid.
As for my comments about the Revised Standard Version being a European translation, I am
partially correct, but I still need to make a clarification. The original Revised Standard
Version was meant to be a revision of the American Standard Version, which in turn was an
American revision of the Revised Version published in the 1880s by the KJV only boogey men,
Westcott and Hort. The RSV was initially translated and published in the United States, but,
it also has a handful of editions that were prepared by a consortium of American and European
translators. Those editions included a Roman Catholic edition, the Ecumenical Edition, and
eventually the New Revised Standard Version that included the use of gender-inclusive language.
The RSV and its off-spring are thoroughly and unashamedly liberal. There is more on the RSV to
found here, [Revised Standard Version] and also here,
[More on the Revised Standard Version]