Emergent Village has an article by Brian McLaren about the new Bible translation put together by a bunch of authors/artists/writers/scholars, called “The Voice”. Here is a little blurb from McLaren, who translated Luke-Acts, that I found interesting:
We did a lot of vigorous and good-natured arguing about many of these terms. Sometimes my opinions were accepted (as in translating “Christ” as “Liberating King” or baptism as “ceremonial cleansing”) and some weren’t (as in translating “Son of Man” as “New Generation of Humanity”). But the process showed me more than ever that translation can’t be separated from interpretation, and the theological biases of the interpreters are a bigger factor than I had realized. This was another strength of the project—to have a team with differing theological perspectives hammering out how passages should be rendered.
An explanation from “The Voice” website says the following:
A group of writers, poets, scholars, pastors, and storytellers have committed to work together to bring the Scriptures to life in a way that celebrates both beauty and truth. The result is a retelling of the Scriptures: The Voice, not of words, but of meaning and experience.
The Voice is a fresh expression of the timeless narrative known as the Bible. Stories that were told to emerging generations of God’s goodness by their grandparents and tribal leaders were recorded and assembled to form the Christian Scriptures. Too often the passion, grit, humor, and beauty has been lost in the translation process. The Voice seeks to recapture what was lost.
Here is McLaren promoting it in a video:
You can see the writers and artists who contributed here (including Sara Groves, Charlie Hall, Donald Miller, Chris Seay, and Brian McLaren), and the scholars who aided them here (including Darrell Bock, Creig Marlowe, and Sheri Klouda).
I immediately put it on my Amazon.com wish list, but probably not for the same reason that Tony Jones would. What is the benefit and/or danger of a translation like this one?