NIV in the News

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Deacon, Mar 18, 2011.

  1. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,968
    Likes Received:
    127
    New Bible draws critics of gender-neutral language
    U.S. News on msnbc.com LINK


    March 17, 2011

    Before the new translation even hit stores, it drew opposition from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, an organization that believes women should submit to their husbands in the home and only men can hold some leadership roles in the church.

    The council decided it would not endorse the new version because the changes alter "the theological direction and meaning of the text," according to a statement. Similar concerns led the Southern Baptist Convention to reject the NIV's previous translation in 2005.

    At issue is how to translate pronouns that apply to both genders in the ancient Greek and Hebrew texts but have traditionally been translated using masculine forms in English.
     
  2. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,608
    Likes Received:
    152


    That is a very interesting statement. It sounds as if ancient Hebrew and Greek are like Chinese in that the word tā, when spoken, can mean a man or a women. It is in the context of the sentence that gives you the gender. And if the context is not clear it can be either. Chinese is different from ancient Hebrew and Greek in that there are two characters for tā. One denotes a man 祂 and the other a woman 他. Too bad the Hebrew and Greek are not the same as it would be clearer what the writer really meant.

    I tend to believe, give this is true in ancient Greek and Hebrew, that the gender given when translated into English reflects the time and culture of the translators.

    For instance the word for deacon is translated at least 20 times in the NT as deacon. In some translations when Phoebe is mentioned the word is translated as servant. Does it not seem strange that over 20 times the word is translated as "deacon" and for Phoebe or Phebe the same word is traslated as "servant."

    Of course the word deacon means servant ... but in the minds of most Christians they see a big difference in the two words.
     
    #2 Crabtownboy, Mar 18, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2011
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    This isn't new news. The organization issued the same kind of statement back in November. They have tempered their tone somewhat. Hopefully they will not repeat the same nonsense with which they attacked the TNIV especially since Mounce was on the 2011 NIV team. (He also worked on the ESV)
     
  4. BobinKy

    BobinKy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
  5. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    That's beneath you Bob.
     
  6. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably more truth there than you think.
     
  7. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like what I've seen from the new NIV, although I don't plan to use it in favor of the TNIV.

    At least LifeWay is carrying this one. I lost the little respect I had for them (and most of the SBC leadership) when they threw a fit and stood up like pious windbags and denounced one of the better translations that has come along. They should be ashamed of the way they handled the TNIV. Hopefully they will see their errors and embrace the NIV update.
     
  8. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    I'm with you all the way on this.
     
  9. sdonahue1

    sdonahue1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    The TNIV is ______, and I wouldn't allow it in the house. I am siding with the Council on this one.


    Moderator note: Please refrain from using disparaging comments about Bible translation. You are free to hold your opinions, but they need to be expressed in less inflammatory words. As you are new to the forums, not penalty points are being given.
     
    #9 sdonahue1, Apr 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 4, 2011
  10. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    I flagged your utterly disparaging comment so the mods can take note.

    You're new,but some things are just off-limits sd.
     
  11. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    I think the flag should go unregarded. He is entitled to think a translation is not good, and use strong language isn't he?

    As I have studied, so briefly now, the principles of textual criticism I am becoming far more patient and gentle towards both schools of thought. First, there isn't likely a single member on this discussion board that has the ability to do the actual work of the textual critic.

    It has been 130 years since the critical text was published. And new research isn't that comforting my friend. For example, Codex W is a late fourth or fifth century Greek manuscript that contains the "longer" reading of Mark. It also includes an addition account of Jesus called the "Freer Logion" and is missing the account of the woman caught in adultery.

    I find this faciniating as I have been told that the ending of Mark isn't contained in "older more reliable manuscripts." But here is a specimen of no small weight in age that contains it. And obviously the textual critics of the CT didn't think the Free Logion was part of the original reading else their new texts would have some new account of Jesus.

    Of course, this is one MSS of many. But if we are to be persuaded by the age of a document, why is this not given equal weith with B or N? I know there are answers for this. But the average Christian doesn't understand these things. And I am an average Christian. It takes me time to read and re-read some of the books I have on the subject just to gain a basic understanding.

    While the brother may discard a translation not really knowing why, let's give him some slack. How many are familiar with all the issues?

    Mr. Comfort may be an easier read, but he is not the only voice on this subject. While the KJVonly crowd would like to have John Burgon for themselves, this scholar should not be set aside for that reason. Burgon would have never been a part of any KJV only crowd. And what I have read of his work shows great scholarship and sound reason.

    Tell me, those who are confident in the Critical Text, did your teachers mention the seven notes of truth Burgon set forth as principles of textual criticism? Maybe they should be rejected. Maybe not. I honestly don't know.

    But I do get a bit frustrated when I am taught something as if it is the only logical and educated view, when, in fact, it is not. I saw an author renounce F.H.A Scrivener because he had not done first hand collation with the Greek texts. Of course, he didn't mention the fact that Scrivener held a PhD in Textual Criticism from Harvard. Once the truth was known to me, it threw that author's credibility into great question as to how much of his own bias was truly influncing his judgments.

    I have raised more points here than the reply called for, but at least let it add weight to my plea: Cut this brother some slack. Textual Criticism is NOT an easy subject. All most of us are looking for is some comfort that what we are holding in our hands is the very Word of God.
     
  12. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    Scrivener held a PhD in Textual Criticism from Harvard.

    Correction: B.A and M.A from Cambridge. Honorary doctorates from St. Andrews (LL.D) and Oxford (D.C.L.). See Dictionary of National Biograpy:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=Rmt...ivener&f=false

    Ziggy, thanks for the PM on the correction. I do not mind being correctly publically brother. I was going by memory and should have pulled out my copy of his intro to textual criticism.
     
  13. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    I for one welcome the update to the NIV, though I won't be giving up my TNIV any time soon. The hysterics that some went to drag the TNIV through the mud would have been funny had it not been so sad to see the hypocrisy of those involved.
     
  14. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    Well,thankfully it was not disregarded. His remarks was deleted by a Mod/Admin.

    No he does not have the right to disparage the Word of God. There are rules about that sort of thing which he was violating.


    The W&H text is what you are talking about. There were even earlier critical texts before that one.

    There is one manuscript containg the longer ending from back in the 2nd century.

    That is a true statement. The longer ending is not found in the older and more reliable manuscripts.

    The slack given him was he was not given the penalty due to more senior members of the board who have made similiar comments.

    It's not a matter of knowing about textual criticism. It's a matter of being a decent Christian when posting.

    I have already answered that above.


    And the 2011 NIV is the Word of God as much as the ESV,NASB etc. The Word of God should not be denigrated by professing believers.
     
  15. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    The man speaks the truth!
     
  16. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    I suppose then a real scholar, unlike you or me, such as Burgon would be banned from the BB. Interesting. He referred to the CT text as a mutilated copy.

    I disagree with you regarding the CT. And your replies Rippon, sound like you only have read one side of the story.
     
  17. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    I suspect that Dr Burgon would 'play by the rules' if he were posting here. If he did not his posts would be edited, and if he refused to comply he would indeed be banned.
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    ReformedBaptist,what in particular to you disagree with in the above? Go line-by-line and have at it.
     
  19. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,603
    Likes Received:
    44
    Is the (old) NIV still going to be published?
    I seem to recall the publishers vowing to keep publishing it. Have they reneged on that?
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    Neither the 1984 NIV nor the TNIV will be published again. Copies will still be sold from over-stock.

    The English Revised Version is not being published.
    The American Standard Version of 1901 is not being published.
    The pre-95 NASB is not being published.
    The RSV isn't being published to the best of my knowledge.
    The 1611 KJV is not being published except in rare cases.

    That's the nature of things Jerome. Out with the old -- in with the new.But I'm still keeping my several copies of the TNIV.
     

Share This Page

Loading...