Bible Translation by Tribes

Scot McKnight recently (Sept. '09) came right out and said it-- 

We do Bible translations by tribe:

“NRSV for liberals and Shane Claiborne lovers;

ESV for Reformed complementarian Baptists;

HCSB for LifeWay store buying Southern Baptists;

NIV for complementarian evangelicals;

TNIV for egalitarians;

NASB for those who want straight Bible, forget the English;

NLT for generic brand evangelicals;

Amplified for folks who have no idea what translation is but know that if you try enough words one of them will hit pay dirt;

NKJV and KJV for Byzantine manuscript-tree huggers;

The Message for evangelicals looking for a breath of fresh air and seeker sensitive, never-read-a-commentary evangelists who find Peterson’s prose so catchy.”

I think this is funny, insightful, and something that, until I saw it this week, I thought I was among the few that noticed.  I don't know if McKnight meant to be funny or serious, but it goes forth working to prove that sheep seek a flock.  (Now atheists, don't get so haughty; I see the same thing in the types of authors/books people read, which music bands people follow, which websites/blogs people visit, and which 'kind' of science with which people choose to argue/agree.  Humans seek gregarity.)

For the record, I own a copy of each one of these--except the Amplified--and use many at a time seeking to actually get to what the Word is truly saying.  Yesterday, I just picked up a 'Catholic' Bible even.  I find, however, that my daily reader is the HCSB, which seems to me most precise while still reading as smoothly as the newspaper.  My church has landed on the NLT--eh, could be worse.

I quite like people--it's why I am in ministry--but have typically been averse to stereotypes about me or by me (however, I submit that anyone who says they don't stereotype/generalize is a liar).  We all wish to be seen as an individual, but then we want to be a part of a group...it's sorta paradoxical, eh?

But I still don't like the Message.