Besides the difficulty of not finding them in general bookstores, they’re not on the Web, either. (In case the reasons aren’t obvious, all the Jewish translations are either new enough to be still under copyright, or old enough that the language is to archaic to be worthwhile.)
Personally, when I need to look up something on the Web, there are plenty of KJVs and NIVs online for finding the cite and getting general context, and then I go to http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t0.htm to read it in Hebrew.
Urban Ranger, having a particular set of beliefs, even those, does not preclude accurate scholarship. In fact, you can even see where it might be an impetus to accuracy – if you believe that God directly commanded you and the people who’re going to read your work to carry out a bunch commandments written in Hebrew and Greek, wouldn’t you be anxious that you get it as accurate as possible?
Not that I’m buying that POV, of course – but think it through.
Here is an excellent article from the February 1985 Atlantic Monthly which discusses the history and merits of various Bible translations, and some of the choices faced by the team creating the NRSV at that time.
If they really believed that it was God who commanded to make an accurate translation, sure. That was not what represented by what it’s said in the preface I quoted, however.
I’m afraid I’m not following your point. If the NIV translators “were united in their commitment to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as God’s Word in written form” then it seems to me to follow
that. assuming God’s word ought to be propagated, translating the bible is a good thing, and
that God’s word matters, and therefore the translation should be as accurate (as in “accurately reflecting the text being translated”) as possible.
They don’t say that God has commanded them to make an accurate translation, but it seems to me to be the logical inference from the premise. Certainly, making an inaccurate translation of “God’s word in written form” is unlikely to please God, is it?