TNIV --- The GOOD the BAD

There is a website you check out

TNIV information

I would recommend that NIV users buy a copy and do a bit of comparing, you will see the changes are in my opinion good ones and not near as extreme as has been reported, nor as many.
Remember that the TNIV takes a more dynamic approach rather then a formal approach when it comes to translating which is like the ESV or NASB. Trying to pit one against the other is a bit like comparing Ford's and Chevy's, both are cars but they have a different translation philosophy. I think that there is a place for both in the study of any bible student.

 

Just one more step downward!

 

This is my problem. If the Greek is NOT gender neutral, do we use DE to correct it because we have to be "politically correct"?
</font>[/QUOTE]From what I read in earlier versions of the TNIV debate, I undestood the issue being that the Greek WAS neutral in some places, but in English the male gender was used. I'm not an expert, so i'll leave the more exact details to those who know more than I.

 

The TNIV is gender accurate not gender neutral. In places where the languange specifically dictates either a male or female gender, it is translated as such. When the language is in reference to everyone, but has been traditionally translated man or men, it is now translated anyone, brother and sister or everyone. Also references to God are not changed.

 

I think that would be the contention of the translators. But that would not be soley based on the gender treatments of the TNIV.

 

Here is a link to about 100 links to the TNIV for those who want the facts and have the time to do a whole lot of reading.

http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/tnivlinks.htm

 

I personally do NOT trust TNIV at all. I looked at the website that go2church listed above, and after looking at just a few verses of the many they decided to change, much (most) are judgemental calls on their part on what "they" think the "meaning" of certain words "should" be, and in many cases adding in phrases not in the mss. The following verse in particular (one of many) stood out to me as a big red flag on TNIV.

The below is copied from http://www.tniv.info/bible/sample_resultsingle.php?rowid=25&category_select=PAUL&order_by=biblicalorder&up_down=ASC

1 Timothy 3:11

NIV
In the same way, their wivesa are to be women worth of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
a 11 Or way, deaconesses

TNIV
In the same way, women who are deaconsa are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
a11 Or way, deacons’ wives


***NOW NOTICE THE "JUDGEMENTS" ON THEIR PART ABOUT WHY THEY CHANGED THE VERSE****

The TNIV gives the most likely meaning of 1 Timothy 3:11 while noting an alternate rendering in a footnote.

In 1 Timothy 3:1-12, the apostle Paul lists the necessary qualifications for two special functions or offices commonly found in local churches—the “overseer” (Gk., episkopos) and the “deacon” (Gk., diakonos). In the midst of this section (v.11), Paul states that the gynaikas (usually “women” or “wives”) are to be “worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.”

Perhaps the biggest question concerning 1 Timothy 3:11 has to do with the meaning of gynaikas. According to BDAG, the standard lexicon for New Testament Greek, gynaikas can refer to “women” or “wives.” The context of 1 Timothy 3 is the most important factor in determining how best to translate gynaikas in verse 11.
Paul already discussed in 1 Timothy 2 his expectations for the congregation at large, including the women of the church. Beginning in 3:1, he has moved on to specifically discuss his expectations for people who hold office in the church. Given Paul’s progression of thought, it is unlikely that he goes back to addressing women in general in verse 11—especially since he is discussing the qualifications for deacons in the surrounding passages (vv.8-10 and v.12).
How, then, should the text be understood? Careful interpreters have to consider the possibility that verse 11 refers to “wives” (i.e., in the context, “wives of deacons”), since the Greek word for “women” is often used in this manner. Hence the TNIV includes a footnote alerting the reader to this possibility.
At the same time, the structure and grammar of Paul’s statement suggests that the women referred to in verse 11 are themselves deacons. The entire section (3:1-12) is introduced with two verbal phrases: “it is necessary” [Gk., dei] and “to be” [Gk., einai]. These phrases occur only at the beginning of the section (3:2), and they govern what Paul has to say about “overseers” (3:1-7), “deacons” (3:8-10) and “women” (3:11) alike. The grammatical linkage of these three categories suggests that in each case Paul is referring specifically to positions of service within the church. The structure of this passage can be visually represented as follows:
3:1-7: It is necessary for the bishop to be: without reproach, etc.
3:8-10: In the same way, [it is necessary for] deacons [to be]: worthy of respect, etc.
3:11: In the same way, [it is necessary for] women [to be]: worthy of respect, etc.
3:12: A deacon must be: faithful to his wife, etc.

Paul uses identical language in 3:8-10 and 3:11. It is necessary for both “deacons” and “women” to be qualified for service in the same way (Gk., hosautos) that “overseers” are. Likewise, both “deacons” and “women” are commanded to be “worthy of respect.” Given the strong connection between 3:8-10 and 3:11, Paul is likely referring to deacons in general in verses 8-10 and specifically to female deacons in verse 11. This interpretation is further supported by the fact that Paul continues his discussion of the qualifications for deacons in verse 12.

Had Paul intended to refer to deacons’ wives, he likely would have used either a possessive pronoun (autōn) or a possessive article (tōn) to say, “their wives.” No such pronoun or article appears in 1 Timothy 3:11.




That is hogwash to me. Who are they to think that they can decipher what Paul meant to say? Time and time and time and time again the TNIV team makes their own judgement calls on what "they" think the scriptures "should have said" or what was "meant to be said", but all they are actually doing is changing it to suit their own agenda. THIS IS SBVIOUS THAT IT IS SICKENING!!!

Seems to me that TNIV is treading in dangerous waters!!!!

I personally have never trusted the NIV, but the TNIV really makes the bad NIV to even worse TNIV!

IMHO!

In Christ,
Deborah

 

Interesting thoughts Deborah...of note John MacArthur agrees with the TNIV translators

 

I just want to add another point. I believe God has certain roles for men and certain roles for women. I believe some roles are for both male and female, but I think there is no doubt for true Bible-believing Christians that God gives us different roles. Faithful bibles plainly state so. I believe a "true Bible" is inerrent. If the scripture was written "man", then as a woman and guided by the Holy Spirit and reading the text in context, I can understand when it is referred to us "all". At the same time, I believe the some scripture is intended for just "males". The Holy Spirit guides us and opens are minds, eyes, and ears of the scriptures. It should never be up to man (or should I be more gender neutral here for "better clarity" and say "anyone") to speak for God or correct God. God forbid! God makes no mistakes! If He wanted it to be gender neutral, He would have had it written that way.

Am I the only one who sees the real danger in what the TNIV and other gender neutral translations can cause?

In Christ,
Deborah

 

It matters not to me which humans agree with the TNIV. I am not conformed by any opinion of man.

In Christ,
Deborah