1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

NIV update now online

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by TomVols, Nov 1, 2010.

Top Posters
  1. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are your thoughts? First, as rumored, the TNIV is no longer available at the Bible Gateway or at the TNIV's website.

    Second, after scanning for about 30 minutes, it's fairly identical to the TNIV. In some instances this is a vast improvement over the old NIV. IN some others, this is a disappointment since these were areas the TNIV needed an update. But I need more time to look and compare, so this is nowhere near a final judgement (sorry to you extremists on both sides). There are one or two improvements I saw immediately. One is the one BobinKY mentioned. The other is 2 Tim 3:17's "Servant of God" is better than the TNIV's "All God's people." I am still not wild about either since "Man of God" is a pregnant phrase used in Scripture. That said, the new NIV rendering beats the pants off of the TNIV.

    1 Cor 7:1 is an improvement. v. 2 retained the free TNIV rendering and I disagree with it. I think it best to leave it to "have," though I understand the contextual reasons why. I just think that same argument swings both ways.

    1 Tim 3:2 - fantastic translation. Here is where the free is actually literal!
    v.11 - also an improvement over the old NIV. "The women" is much preferred over "their wives" and much more consistent.

    ! Pe 5:5 - I'd prefer to leave out the "your" since that's not there (the ESV's "the" is just fine), but that's not a hanging offense prima facie.

    Galatians - I prefer the old NIV rendering of "Peter" instead of the more literal "Cephas" for clarity sake. So the new NIV took a step back, just like the TNIV.

    Rom 8:28 - Good work.

    Anyway, I didn't mean to get into shotgun blasts, but these are just some quick observations. More detailed analysis is necessary.
     
    #1 TomVols, Nov 1, 2010
  2. BobinKy

    BobinKy New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Took a 1-minute look at the updated NIV at Biblica.com.

    Genesis 1:26-27
    I think "mankind" (update NIV, Amplified Bible v. 26) is an improvement over "human beings" (TNIV, NLTse, Message, GNT), "humankind" (NRSV), or "humans" (CEV).

    I am undecided--at this point--about "mankind" (update NIV, Amplified Bible v. 26) compared to "man" (NIV 1984, HCSB, ESV, KJV, NKJV, NASB, Amplified Bible v. 27, NEB, JB).

    Anyone else have any comments on this verse?

    ...Bob
     
    #2 BobinKy, Nov 1, 2010
  3. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,499
    Likes Received:
    1,241
    Faith:
    Baptist
    From Bibilica:

    The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) has completed the translation process. The text was made available online for public viewing at www.Biblegateway.com [LINK] and www.Biblica.com [LINK] on November 1, with print products scheduled to release in March 2011.
     
    #3 Deacon, Nov 1, 2010
  4. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,499
    Likes Received:
    1,241
    Faith:
    Baptist
    #4 Deacon, Nov 6, 2010
  5. go2church

    go2church Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Initially it seems to be fine, they did retain most of the TNIV, which I like, but I will have to study it more to see. I don't like "mankind" I would go with humanity, God created humanity, male and female, he created them both. Mostly it seems as if they made a few adjustments to become more palatable to those who objected when the TNIV first came out.

    Once I get a chance to get online read some of the fantastic comparisons that have already been done, I will have a better idea if I am going to like it overall. Because no translation gets it absolutely right, absolutely 100% of the time.
     
    #5 go2church, Nov 6, 2010
  6. Nazaroo

    Nazaroo New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sadly, they had a real chance to remove some 70 boners from the Nestle/Aland-UBS text, but did not do it, except in two places.

    We have updated our chart to include the new NIV-2010 here:

    http://adultera.awardspace.com/AF/Omissions.html


    Secondly    , many footnotes have been removed.

    This is a mixed blessing: on the one hand, these annoying and all but useless footnotes do little but cast doubt upon many authentic passages.

    On the other hand, many of the changes are now undocumented in this version, even though some of the omissions are substantial, including whole and half-verses.

    peace
    Nazaroo
     
    #6 Nazaroo, Nov 7, 2010
  7. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not surprisingly,I really like the new NIV. I appreciate the fact that a lot of TNIV renderings have been retained.There are a few places in which the TNIV wordings have been altered where I preferred the former. However, that negative is vastly outweighed by its many improvements over the TNIV.

    I will have more to say about the issue in the near future. I think that the NIV will keep its #1 spot for a long,long time to come.
     
    #7 Rippon, Nov 7, 2010
  8. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Juts a public reminder since we haven't put it up in a while; this section of the board is a Baptist only section. Thank you for your contributions Nazaroo, but please refrain from posting in this particular section of the board.
     
    #8 NaasPreacher (C4K), Nov 7, 2010
  9. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rom 8:9. TNIV wins in this one. New NIV's addition of "realm" is unnecessary at best.
     
    #9 TomVols, Nov 11, 2010
  10. TC

    TC Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,244
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Romans 8:9

    You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.(NIV 1984)

    You, however, are not controlled by the sinful nature but are in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.(TNIV)

    You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.(NIV 2011)

    IMO, NIV 1984 is best here.
     
    #10 TC, Nov 11, 2010
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...