NIV in the News

But didn't they promise to keep publishing it?

 

Not a promise. They kept publishing the NIV when the TNIV came out for those that did not want to switch. Remember the hysteria of some?! Now they are going to just publish the NIV updated 2011. Everything else will stop

 

It was a promise.
With a capital P.

Baptist Press

Official press release:

 

Jerome, you're quoting a presser from 1997, and out of context I might add. I have a feeling you know this. http://www.bpnews.net/printerfriendly.asp?ID=3382

www.biblica.com/niv

So they did keep the promise made a year and a half ago to cease publication of the 1984 NIV. The '84 is no more.

 

Please elaborate.

 

It appears you are taking the phrase to mean something the context didn't mean.

 

What do you think they meant when they announced they were "unequivocally committed to continue to publish" it?

 

The presser you quote says that in May of 1997, there were no plans to revise the NIV which was in reaction to the Colorado Springs statement/accord. Plans to revise the NIV were abandoned. Thus, a new translation was later born (though they promised to revise the NIrV, etc.). For a myriad of reasons the TNIV was not well received, so they pledged to abandon the TNIV in favor of revising the NIV which was due for revision anyway according to the original charter.
If you want to say the TNIV was somewhat duplicitous based on the Colorado Springs accords, fine (many have, including me). It's been established and admitted that the TNIV was in the works despite statements otherwise. But to say that they've "crawfished" because in 1997, they said they wouldn't revise the NIV, but decided to do so 12 years later in reaction to something completely different is a stretch.

 

You want context?

Here's context:

I puzzled by your insinuations and "feeling" about "what I know".

Why did they say they had no plans to pull it/revise it.

Because your "original charter" provision sure sounds like a plan.

Had they misplaced it/forgotten about it then?

 

The context was in response to the Colorado Springs Statement.

If you want to know what the translation team is/was thinking, ask those who are still with us. The list is available at Biblica's website.

 

I am with you too. I went into the SBC bookstore (Lifeway--scuse me) in Tulsa and asked for a TNIV. The clerk told me they would not be on the market for over two years. He failed to mentioned that just across the street and three stores less than a 1 mile area carried them when I asked for it.

I thought this was a form of dishonesty and obviously, it came from Lifeway, because I have heard the same story from other Lifeway clerks in other stores.

Being this is obviously a Lifeway standard for their clerks, I am very disappointed in Lifeway, but I have been disappointed with Lifeway's huge prices except for their VERY CHEAP gift BIBLEs. The only thing I got from Lifeway worth the money was a paper-back ESV NT for $2.00. I bet they were given to Lifeway or they wouldn't have handled them for the price of moving them from the loading-dock. I think ESV was very smart in putting out their NT at a very reasonable price. I was first in line for a full ESV and I bought it from Amazon at 40% off of Lifeway and free two day shipping.

 

I wouldn't say it's duplicity at Lifeway. They just largely don't know what they're talking about. Few Christian book stores do, Lifeway or otherwise. I see examples every single day.

 

I always liked the 1984 NIV. The so-called improvements in the TNIV and now the 2011 NIV seem to me to be a mistake. I have pretty much stopped using these translations now and use the NLT and the NKJV instead.

 

You're so inconsistent Robert. If the 2011 NIV is a mistaken venture why would the NLT be any better? The very criticisms which were levied against the TNIV apply to the NLT as well. (BTW,I'm not saying I agree with the substance of the crticisms.)

I'm glad you are using the NLT -- it's very good in its place. But don't speak out of both sides of your mouth.

 

Sweet mercy. This is madness.

 

Your assertion does not follow. The NLT and TNIV are different animals altogether. One can be critical of one and appreciate the other. Now, I don't know all Robert has said about the TNIV, so add an asterisk. I'm just saying that, in theory, one can find fault with one yet appreciate the other because the two are different resulting products with a slightly different methodology/result

 

I recently bought a copy of the 2011 NIV I havent read a lot of it yet but what I have read I found the text to be kind of clumsy to read and I did not like what they did to the oarable of the unjust judge in Luke 18:5 Luke 18:5 (New International Version, ©2011)

5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually come and attack me!’”

There is no other translation that I know of that has translated it this way. as an example: Good News Bible Luk 18:5 yet because of all the trouble this widow is giving me, I will see to it that she gets her rights. If I don't, she will keep on coming and finally wear me out!' "

this makes me suspicious of what ele they may have completely changed. I am going back to using the KJV and the NKJV together. If I decide to get another critcal text version bible I think I will go for the ESV.

 

I know they are different. But the TNIV/NIV are lumped together in the minds of many detractors as being too dynamic --even to the point of calling it a paraphrase.

Another thing was that they called it an egalitarian,gender-neutralizing liberal concoction.

The NLTse has been under the radar while the TNIV bore the brunt of harsh criticism. I find that inconsistent thinking.

Sure some can. But the detractors were kind of blind about things.

He probably was exposed to TNIV toxic criticism and believed it. Rarely did the critics address the NLTse. If they were really upset with the TNIV they would have been just as angry about the NLTse. There wasn't much actual critical thinking involved.

 

okay. maybe I was hasty in my criticism of the NIV 2011. I will continue to read it with the other translations that I use