Could the SBC "railed" ON Niv 2011 Because have OWN Bible the HCSB?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by JesusFan, Jul 23, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    read that SBC wanted to use Niv for their own study materials, but refused to pay the price to Zondervan to get rights to use it, so part of reason for getting behing the HCSB

    Any truth in that? Could that be reason why blasted the NIV 2011 for use, as was denied and made own version the HCSB instead?
     
  2. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    This doesn't make sense. How would one be related to the other?
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,416
    Likes Received:
    72
    $$$$$, potentially. Bash the NIV, knock down the sales, potentially open up new sales for the HCSB?

    I don't necessarily buy the argument, but it is theoretically possible. I don't think the rejection of the 2011 revision has anything to do with the negotiations with Zondervan, though. The HCSB was around long before the NIV 2011.
     
  4. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    That would be quite an indictment. However, starting threads about possible reasons for coming against the NIV and then ascribing ill motives is called gossip without any knowledge of the real reason.
     
  5. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's exactly what I heard a few years ago when the HCSB first came out.
     
  6. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    It is true. Zondervan was charging a boat load so LifeWay developed it's own translation to save money. That is fact. As to a conspiracy to hurt the NIV, that is nothing but gossip.
     
  7. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0

    Shameful as it is
     
  8. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    And I'm so encouraged that many, many Southern Baptists continue to use the NIV.
     
  9. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    There is some truth to it. More of the story has to do with the SBC pulling the TNIV from Lifeway stores, a political tug of war over that, then the desire of the SBC to not have to pay exorbitant licensing fees. Also behind the translation was a desire to have an official SBC translation.

    The SBC "blasted" the NIV2010 because it carried a lot of the translation methods of the TNIV. It was a pointless resolution and they shouldn't have passed it.

    Nevertheless the HCSB is the standard translation for all SBC literature now. It's a good one. I use it every day. :thumbs:
     
  10. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why? Why does someone's Bible version encourage you?
     
  11. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    We should be encouraged when anyone uses a Bible for anything more than a dust catcher!
     
  12. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    NO, they "railed" ont the Niv 2011, because #1 There were revisions without a specific renaming (that is, people who don't know will think they are getting the original Niv, when they are not), and #2 some of those revisions include gender non-specific language where gender-specific language is called for...

    Also, on a personal note, [snip - the author doesn't prefer the NIV, inflammatory words removed] NIV as well...WAY too much liberty taken in translation, at times. The HCSB is one of my two preferred translations, with the other being the ESV.
     
    #12 Havensdad, Jul 24, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 26, 2011
  13. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you would encourage someone to read the New World Translation (JW)?
     
  14. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is much closer to the truth than the rampant speculation elsewhere in this thread. The HCSB was produced to fill a gap between the very loose and virtually impossible to concord NIV version well before the TNIV ever was hatched. That the HCSB never really sold or took off is another matter that has little to do with Zondervan. And, I believe that you will find a ton of Zondervan products in Baptist Book Stores and on LifeWay, so that is obviously not a factor.

    I know several of the persons involved in the HCSB project. I also know the theological issues surrounding the TNIV and the revision in the NIV 2011, which works to remedy some of those (valid) issues in translation. When a translator or team takes the plain words in the original text and [snip - offensive to those who prefer that translation], it is time for a new and accurate translation to hit the shelves. That is precisely what the HCSB team intended. It is not gender neutral, it does not make light of God, and yet it does meet the need for a translation that can be read and comprehended by those without a higher level theological education. It is equivalent where equivalent translation works and switches to dynamic where dynamic makes a passage understandable. In that regard, it is unique among current translations.
     
    #14 glfredrick, Jul 24, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 26, 2011
  15. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    If that is the only Bible they have access to, yes. I have seen people led to the Lord using a NWT and I don't doubt that they could even experience spiritual growth through it. I did mighty fine with an RSV and 'Good News for Modern Man' after I got saved.

    As an aside, how come every one just assumes that the NWT is "worse-case scenario" when it comes to Bible Translations?
     
  16. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is not my fight.
     
  17. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Think thru the logic - SBC didn't want to spend $$ in rights to NIV translators so instead spent $$$$$$$$ to translate and publish there own??

    Can we use the word "stupid" on the BB without getting some moderator on my case?? :laugh:

    Not my fight. Enjoy a Holman at my office and an ESV at home. Used the NIV Study Bible for homeschool in the 90's and it was a refreshing loose translation that engendered good discussions with my kids.

    But agree with "M" that this whole thread is gossip at most, and an evil agenda at worst.
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    When some says that they read,study and preach from the KJV does that encourage you?
     
  19. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    So what?

    Examples please.

    You detest the Word of God?! You are going against BB rules by saying that (at the very least)

    At times you disagree with a rendering. No big deal. We all object to the wording of passages in various versions occasionally.

    You like the NIV wanna' be? Aside from the NET Bible the HCSB is closest in translation style to the 2011 NIV.
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Part of the reason for hatching the HCSB was to head-off the Americanized NIVI. The ESV came about in response to same perceived threat.

    The old NIV is not "very loose" as you so inelegantly phrased it. It's a mediating translation between the more formal and the more functionally equivalent versions. I don't even think that the current NLTse could be considered very loose,though it is more dynamic than the 2011 NIV.

    You might want to temper your remarks. Now the TEV,CEV,NCV &Co. all have less form-structured translation styles. They would be more suitable targets for your extreme language.

    What you have said above is reprehensible. And it's a given since it is indeed reprehensible that it is utterly false.

    You're speaking here of the HCSB. and of course the 2011 NIV is also not geder neutral. But the HCSB uses about 12% more inclusive language than the old NIV.

    You're engaging in seriously slanderous stuff.

    Do you even know what you're talking about? What does your use of the word equivalence mean? Does it mean substituting a word or phrase that is in lieu of a more literal rendering? Then that means a functionally-equivalent wording is being employed. IOW,dynamic-equivalence is being used.

    On the contrary,it's rather common place in that regard.
     

Share This Page

Loading...