Oh and I just wanted to make note that as often as we have been accused here of being totally lockstepp with all things 'conservative'...

I can count 5 posters in this thread who are unapologetically conservative who say


!!

I am one of those five!

Make it six. While I agree that there are translations out there that appear to have a liberal agenda, there are also plenty of solid translations out there that conservatives can hold to and two wrongs would not make a right. Besides, a translation should not be conservative or liberal, it should be accurate. For the most part that can be accomplished though a solid word for word translation, but occasionally equivalency does need to come into play due to differences in what something meant in a certain context and at a certain time, as opposed to it's common modern use. We also have notations which advise of us of the differences between the later manuscripts and those which tend to be considered older and more reliable.

I also agree with making the Bible more accessible by relating to the common modern languages. This has been done since the time after the exile when most of the Jewish people were speaking Arabic. So I think, for the most part, we have been on a pretty good course with biblical translation. Responsible people will weed through the ones with an agenda, whether that agenda is liberal or conservative.