If we take the church to be a sub-culture of any culture, and we take the Bible to be at the center of that sub-culture because Christ can only be known through the Bible, how seismic is an attempt to replace that Bible with another like it let alone one very different?
On the level of language, the Bible serves as our source of language. We read the same words, memorize the same words, preform weddings and funerals in the same words, and preach from the same words. What happens when we change those words? Assuming no meaning is changed by changing words, the very act of changing the words will change the language of the sub-culture ostensible making for two cultures at least. As such, new Bibles necessarily divide.
Is it not then, that when some have called for different a Bible, they are not merely making a scholastic assertion with ecclesiastical ramifications? They are also making an assertation with cultural ramifications both within and without the church. Based on what authority can the scholar know that he/she is about to make our ecclesiastical culture better by making these kinds of assertions?