Comments on: Answers about the NIV update

By: Joel H

Joel H — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 22:59:44 +0000

Andrew: Do you have information about how the two issues of gender accuracy and gender inclusivity are playing out with the Spanish translations? -Joel

By: Gentle Wisdom» Blog Archive » Why no NIV Apocrypha?

Gentle Wisdom» Blog Archive » Why no NIV Apocrypha? — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 22:30:55 +0000

[...] my post Answers about the NIV update I wrote the following: Some people will be disappointed to read that The Committee on Bible [...]

By: Qohelet

Qohelet — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:19:39 +0000

The CEB is targetted at mainline churches, but academics might give the translation a pass, since it’s dynamic-equivalent and will contain “emotive language”. NIV2011 looks promising (with the acknowledgement that it will be similar to the TNIV) but the exclusion of the DC books is definitely disappointing. We’ll wait and see.

By: Retraction on NIV2011 Update « Participatory Bible Study Blog

Retraction on NIV2011 Update « Participatory Bible Study Blog — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:52:11 +0000

[...] an tip of the hat to Peter Kirk, I withdraw objections to the NIV2011 update project. Peter in turn links to this NIV 2011 [...]

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:39:01 +0000

Andrew, that’s interesting. I suspect (from my knowledge of French and Italian) that gender issues in Spanish are very different from those in English, and probably less complicated and less controversial. But I’m sure that there are still some issues to resolve.

By: Andrew Roycroft

Andrew Roycroft — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:09:43 +0000

Thanks for this post Peter, and the link to the FAQs re the 2011 NIV. It’s ironic/significant/coincidental(?) that this new edition will emerge in the very year that 400 years of the KJV will be celebrated!

I’m currently working as a missionary in Peru, South America. Here the versions issue is just as complex in some ways – with the 1960 Reina Valera holding sway while the more recent NVI (Spanish NIV) is slowly gaining ground. I’m still getting to grips with Spanish and Spanish Scripture specifically, but will be interested to observe what gender decisions were made in the NVI – which followed the same translation guidelines as the NIV but has obviously been completed a lot later. For a lot of people the NVI came as a relief aside from gender concerns. The Reina Valera has used a continental form of the second person plural which isn’t used at all in Latin America, whereas the NVI renders with the normal conjugation.

Anyway this is a rambling comment! Thanks again for this info.

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:58:54 +0000

Mick, it can be a nightmare to find neutral understandings. Most Bible colleges, seminaries, university theology departments etc try to push their own line, more or less subtly. I wish I knew what to advise.

By: Mick whitty

Mick whitty — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:22:45 +0000

Thanks for replying. I think I must be a bit naive not taking into account the traditions that people come from. I do remember being told as a young christian that the NIV was the best translation and just went along with it. After being on your site for a while now I’m having to reassess where I’m at as the English words I’m reading may not hold the same nuances of meaning contained in the original. I have onsidered taking a couple of years out to bible college but considering that the people you’re debating with and the people I’ve heard speak have been, I’m not sure if each of them will have their own traditions to push. Keep on going your good to read…

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:50:38 +0000

Mick, my point is not that there is anything specifically evangelical about the NIV as a translation. True, there were some subtle things in the 1984 NIV, less so in TNIV. But the point is more that NIV has been promoted, translated and published by evangelicals. It is probably largely for those reasons that mainline churches and the academic community have been suspicious of it. Of course the absence of the DC books hasn’t helped. For the same kinds of reasons evangelicals have been suspicious of RSV, NRSV, TEV and CEV. Yes, there have been some translation issues (Isaiah 7:14 is an important one) but the real point has been suspicion of where the translation has come from.

By: Mick Whitty

Mick Whitty — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:24:00 +0000

From your discussion would i be right in reflecting that the translation of the Bible can be geared to an evangelical ear as it where or is it that the marketing of the NIV attracts the evangelical ear.