There should be serious scholarship behind it conducted by people I have reason to trust. For example, the preface to my NIV says that it was put together by "over 100 scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts". Later it says: "The fact that participants from the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand worked together gave the project its international scope. That they were from many denominations - including Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Wesleyan and other churches - helped to safeguard the translation from sectarian bias". That sounds pretty good to me. :)
MB: What are the standards that you use to judge the Bible by?
FK: There should be serious scholarship behind it conducted by people I have reason to trust. For example, the preface to my NIV says that it was put together by “over 100 scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts”. Later it says: “The fact that participants from the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand worked together gave the project its international scope. That they were from many denominations - including Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Wesleyan and other churches - helped to safeguard the translation from sectarian bias”. That sounds pretty good to me. :)
Ah, so you DO follow traditions of men. What reasons do you have to trust these men? Do you know who they are? Which Anglican branch is represented? One of the branches that are spiraling into self destruction in spectacular form? How did they decide? Did they put the translation of the Bible to a vote? Did they draw lots?
I’m sure that the gender neutral Bible also had many scholars working on it. What sets one apart from the other?