NIrV

I haven't read it myself except to glance over it maybe in a store, but all the reviews I've ever read of it said it was excellent. It's also reviewed by customers at Amazon, and has been endorsed by various ministries. And with the NIrV, you don't have to worry about the gender issue: after the flack over the TNIV heated up several years ago, Focus on the Family discovered that the NIrV was gender-accurate and pulled its endorsement, so the publisher withdrew the NIrV from the market until it could be rewritten. The NIrV was revised and reissued with instances of gender accuracy in translation replaced by the misleading generic masculine language that children today take to be exclusively referring to men. From all that I've read, that downgrade is the only major flaw in the NIrV and the only aspect that hinders its readability for children--but since you agree with it, it should present no problem for you, and you should be very pleased with it. In fact, I believe that, since its revision in the late '90s, the NIrV is the only major children's translation that isn't accurate in translating gender, so you'd have few if any alternatives other than selecting an adult version far above a child's reading level. (I can remember reading my KJV gift Bible before third grade, but since it reads at a 12th-grade-to-college level, I cannot vouch for how well I understood it.) So you should probably read a few recent reviews on Amazon and elsewhere, and look through it yourself a bit, and then you'll probably determine that the NIrV currently on the market is the best choice for you.

 

Another one?

Sorry Lorelei, I don't trust anything outside the King James Bible.

 

WARNING, WARNING: HomeBound is attempting to hijack this thread.

HomeBound, just let this nice, friendly discussion (so far) go by.

 

HomeBound said:

Sorry Lorelei, I don't trust anything outside the King James Bible.

Well, since you just put yourself in the "untrustworthy" category, hows about you just stay quiet and let the grownups have a thread without the KJVers getting in the way?

 

For our first preschool / toddler Bible, I just bought the picture Bibles with stories and moved into the New King James Version when Nick was a little older. Do you have a Lifeway near you? If not, check online.

Diane

 

Lorelei said:

Do any of you think it hold up theologically enough for children? I am looking for a Bible for preschoolers and young children, that is why I ask.

Like Taufgesinnter, I have heard nothing but good things about this translation.

Intuition tells me that in making a simplified-English Bible for children, there is a necessary trade-off between simplicity and accuracy. That's probably nothing to worry about, though - by the time kids are old enough to digest systematic theology, they're old enough to read a more mature translation such as the NIV.

 

A 12-year-old of average reading skill should have no difficulty with an NIV or an NKJV, I would think. Of the two, I have a personal preference for the NKJV, but the NIV would be closer to regular English prose.

Also, the NKJV, being a revision of the KJV, tends more toward traditional religious jargon than the NIV. The latter is not free of Christianese, but sometimes uses plain English instead of the jargon (e.g. "atoning sacrifice" instead of "propitiation," and so forth).

 

My child has been reading the King James Bible since 4/5 years old, she's 8 now. She quoted Hebrews 11:1-3 to me yesterday and it was beautiful. Praise God that kids can read God's word and have the truth, from the age they learn to read to forever. Kids will learn what you teach them, try teaching from the King James Bible and I guarantee you, both of you will learn and grow in the Lord together. It's wonderful, try it.

 

While we're at it, let's stop teaching kids to read from primary-school readers, and start with Shakespeare, Joyce, and Faulkner right from kindergarten.

 

Someone would try and change it then, but good idea.

 

Homebound, you just couldn't resist hijacking this thread. Here we go.....................

 

Warning! Some passages in modern versions contradict each other concerning doctrine.

 

Thanks for your response, I, however do trust other versions and am interested in finding out more about the NIrV. I already am aware of the KJV only arguments and do not need them re-iterated in this thread. Your opinion has been duly noted. Thanks again for sharing your opinion.

~Lorelei </font>[/QUOTE]Your welcome. BTW Ransom and others, I didn't start anything, you did, but I will finish it. The End.

 

Oh good, now here's Askjo to join in the fray.....

 

The NIrV used to be gender accurate, but has been revised. All the copies currently available, published since 1998, are traditional "generic" (masculine) gender--maybe not 100%, but the editors made a determined effort in that direction.