So What's The All-Purpose...?

The 'agenda' is to be as faithful as possible to the original TCG .

Let me quote 1 Timothy 3:11 : " In the same way , the women are to be worthy of respect , not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything ."

What is the problem you see with the above ?

Here is Romans 16:1 : "I commend to you our sister Phoebe , a deacon of the church in Cenchrea ."

The Emphasized Bible , and God's Word has 'deacon' . The Amplified has 'deaconess' . Young's has 'ministrant' . Darby , Tyndale ( 1526 ) , Coverdale and the Bishop's Bible have 'minister' . Are these egalitarian versions ?!

The HCSB has 'servant' . In its footnote : "Others interpret this term in a technical sense : deacon , or deaconess , or minister ."

The NET Bible has 'servant' in the text . At the end of a lengthy footnote it says : "The view accepted in the translation above is that Phoebe was a servant of the church , not a deaconess , although this conclusion should be regarded as tentative ."

Let's look at the following verse in TNIV , verse 2 : "I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you , for she has been the benefactor of many people , including me ."

HCSB has 'benefactor' also . She was a financial supporter of Paul .

Scripture does not contradict itself . Here is what 1 Timothy 2:11,12 says : " A woman should learn in quietness and full submission . I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet ."

So the translators of these various versions ( including TNIV ) are trying to be true to the language of the original -- there is no other agenda . Whether you feel the word 'servant' is more justified is your personal belief . We know that whatever English word is put in the text of any version it can't mean that she has an office and is in authority over men .

 

Well , there are some old codgers like me who appreciate the TNIV . I'm not a fan of snazzy covers and the like . TNIV is an acceptable version for ages 13 -- 103 in my estimation . I'm 54 and read at the age level of a 41 year old BTW .

 

Amen Bro webdog!

If I could have another it would definitely be the NASB.

I don't like free translations for "study". In my view they seem a bit inadequate in that department.

 

Are you sure Schreiner has been involved with the TNIV ?

From what I've heard not many men who are authorities on the Greek New Testament have anything against the TNIV .

I'm Reformed , but so many Calvinistic 'names' leapt on TNIV bashing bandwagon without proper investigation . Tis a pity . I pray for a turn around after the commotion has settled . Too many bashers just don't own a copy which is intellectually dishonest .

 

You are aware , aren't you TCG , that TNIV was virtually boycotted for years ? Mountains of bad publicity , vitriol aplenty ad infinitum . It was hard to get people interested in something which wasn't even sold in many Christian bookstores . Some are continuing the same policy . Yet these bookstores are being inconsistent because the NLTse is on their shelves . If they have certain complaints against TNIV , then those most of those grips should be leveled at the NLTse . The hypocrisy is striking .

I was at a Christian bookstore tonight and this woman ( 40's ) had never heard of TNIV . The marketing arm of TNIV has not been aggressive enough . I know they thought they should lay low for a time -- but now is the perfect opportunity to let the public know about this fine , conservative Bible . They need to phase-out the NIV and instead , stock shelves with the more accurate TNIV .

 

Most people I know use the NIV or NKJV. Most older people use the KJV.

 

I am no where near being reformed in theology but I have come to love the ESV. I am now using the HCSB as my reading Bible and I am, to be quite frank, disappointed. The translators seem to have gone out of their way to make the text more difficult to read in places if you do not look at the footnotes. For example- Leviticus 16:8 in reference to the scapegoat. The HCSB refers to it in the text as 'Azazel' and you have to go down to the footnote to find out that 'Azazel may be the name of a demon; traditionally, scapegoat'.

That confuses the reader more than anything. I have found several other places that (at least to me) were confusing. But I am going to stick with it and maybe I will warm up to it.

 

You're right. I missed that. Thanks for correcting me.

 

My HCSB Apologetics Bible showed up a week ago and I think I like it a lot. I do prefer it over the NIV.:godisgood:

 

This is a luxury,to have spoken on things in the past so that I don't have to rewrite.

 

Definitely slippin'!

Only a year on this one!

Ed