I know who he is, and do not expect anyone on this board to “side” with me, so to speak, over him. God is not a respector of persons, and we are not to show partiality. There is no need to throw around bona fides when it comes to charitable discussion.Dr Duguid is a respected professor and contributor. I read nothing challenging in his question.
It's a reasonable question to ask: You prefer a locked translation for memorization (which is a reasonable desire). However, since this means that by definition the translation can never be altered even when a translational inaccuracy is found, is the conclusion therefore that you prize continuity over accuracy in every single case?
In a perfect world you'd have both, but that's not often the case. It's a good question and I'm curious too. I think I'd prefer accuracy while at the same time recognizing my own desire for continuity. I'm not really a fan of some of what happened to the NIV for example.
If I were being equally as uncharitable as he, I would push back and say that people like him are never content with the version that is in their hands and are always second guessing it. But I didn’t do that. Rather I thanked him for his labors. I was then challenged with the response of accusing me of making a strawman for stating I prefer a locked translation for memorization. Defend that if you wish.