A question re: NIV/TNIV - for a member.

IBS: TNIV : Passages explained

If you select the "All Passages" option in the "Select Passages" drop down menu, you can see the primary differences between the TNIV and NIV with explanations for those differences. I consider to the two translations to be virtually the same although I have not used the TNIV very much.

 

I had asked someone on the TNIV website about what percentage of changes were made from the NIV O.T. to the TNIV O.T. No definitive answer was forthcoming . So a couple months ago I did a little digging in Proverbs and Psalms .

The changes were anywhere from slight to significant . By slight I mean instead of "upon" the word "on" is now used . Most of the changes are minor . I misplaced my notes from some of the chapters on Proverbs . I can get more detailed at a future time .

Chapter 17 -- 22 out of 28 verses have been changed ( I'll just use 22/28 to signify )

Chapter 18 -- 20/24
Chapter 19 -- 22/29
Chapter 20 -- 18/30
C. 21 -- 18/31
C. 22 -- 20/29
C. 23 -- 13/35
C. 24 -- 22/34
C. 25 -- 19/28
C. 26 -- 22/28
C. 27 -- 19/27
C. 28 -- 26/28
C. 29 -- 21/27
C. 30 -- 16/33
C. 31 -- 8/31

I do remember that altogether ( with the missing first 16 chapters taken into consideration ) the pecentage of change was about 60% . But , again , the "changes" range from insignificant to major -- most were minor .

For the Psalms :

Ps. 1 - 4/6
2- 9/12
3- 5/8
4- 8/8
5- 9/12
6- 7/10
7- 13/17
8- 7/9
9- 15/20
10 - 16/18
11- 3/7
12 - 8/8
13- 3/6
14- 5/7
15- 5/5
16- 8/16
17- 12/15
18- 18/50

I realize that a lot of you are focused on the NT changes , but the revisors did a lot more revision in the OT .

 

GD,

Great post. I looked up the difference between the two on Hebrews 2:7.
TNIV claims that this passage is not messianic. I think that it is.

Yes, son of man in Hebrew refers generically to human beings, but the writer of Hebrews is applying it to Jesus. TNIV says that the writer isn't. So we disagree. I would rather know that the text says "son of man" and then let me wrestle with what that means then having the TNIV decide that for me.

It is enough of a difference that I will continue to use the NIV, though in places the NIV could have used words that were more inclusive because the Hebrew/Greek text allows for it.

But I grew up with the generic he and don't know why we have to change that now. Nothing throws me off more than when a writer uses "she" and I'm thinking "a woman" only to find out later that what the writer meant was he or she. ugh!

 

I don't want anyone to get the idea that the TNIV uses the word "she" in that manner . When "she" is used it always refers to a female only .