A Brief Look at the "An Inclusive Version" of the New Testament

"If every man's humour were followed, there would be be no end of translating."Richard Bancroft -Bishop of London(1604)

The foreword of this Bible makes reference to Star Trek. Like Star Wars, this Inclusive Version is a pop (culture) Bible that, unlike Star Trek, no one talks about anymore after 2 decades. 

Sample translations:

"Ruler" or "Sovereign" is substituted for King (because that sounds too male).

"Kingdom" is now "Dominion" 

Lord is removed(ie...1 Corinthians 6:14)

Sarah is added to John 8:58

"Father" is now "Father-Mother" John 1:18

"homosexuals" changed to "male prostitutes"  1 Corinthians 6:9,10

"Son of Man" is the "Human One" Luke 17:26

I already knew the Trinity was plural, but John 10:30 pretty much proves it, "The Father-Mother and I are one."

The Comma Johanneum at 1 John 5:7,8 (footnote) introduces to a Quadrinity, "There are three that testify in heaven, the Father-Mother, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one."

While the NRSV has "blood of his own Son" this Inclusive NT instead has "Child" in place of "Son."

This Bible is under copyright protection and does not permit quoting from it in any manner (unlike most Bibles that allow up to 500 words). So...exactly what good is this useless version of the Bible?

This version also removes the term "darkness" such as in Psalm 107:10 and substitutes it with "captivity". Why? Because "darkness" might discriminate against Black people.

The term "Jews" are altered when it is used in a less than favorable sense. 

References to the handicapped are slightly altered too at Matthew 11:5 and "slaves" changed to "those enslaved to him."

While at Psa 109:26 the ASV has: "Help me, O Jehovah my God" the Inclusive Version replaces "Jehovah" with "GOD" which seems unnecessarily awkward.

This Bible substitutes GOD for Jehovah/Yahweh, but I can still find instances of them using the male term LORD, such as at Psa 86:1. If you were really interested in being gender-inclusive, why not just keep the original YHWH/Jehovah/Yahweh in the text?

About the word MAN:

Anthropos is a Greek word which is often meant in a gender-inclusive sense, especially in the plural. However, the use of anthropos has a masculine sense in certain contexts, and the Greek-speaking world of the early Christian era would presume that anyone who is called an anthropos is male. This may be seen in the following examples from the RSV:

Matthew 19:5 "For this reason a man (anthropos) shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'."
Matthew 19:10 "If such is the case of a man (anthropos) with his wife, it is not expedient to marry."
I Corinthians 7:1 "It is well for a man (anthropos) not to touch a woman."

Many other examples could be offered that shows that the word MAN/anthropos has masculine connotations. However, in general usage when "Man" is used in a larger sense, such as "mankind" it is already gender-neutral. (Rev. 14:4)

Conclusion:

This Inclusive Version is a revision of the New Revised Standard Version, which is a revision of the Revised Standard Version, which is a revision of the American Standard Version which is a revision of the King James Version. What an odd legacy of a once grand Bible.