Monday, June 11, 2007

Important Articles to Read

If you find that reading anti-TNIV material is convincing, I don't think your research is complete until you read Dr. Craig Blomberg's review of the TNIV. This review is provided in a link on the side of TNIV Truth as you scroll down. I think Blomberg's review is the most thorough and unbiased review I've read. Blomberg read the entire TNIV New Testament along side the NIV and his United Bible Society's Greek New Testament. If you read Blomberg first then the reviews at The CBMW, I think you have to go back to Blomberg afterwards. So many arguments about verses that sound convincing at The CBMW reviews are dealt with rather well by Blomberg. I have not read satisfactory counters to Blomberg.

Also, I recommend reading this commentary from Dr. Darrell Bock.

These are both long, but they are worth your time. Print them out and read them at your own pace.

It's obvious, I do not have a problem with the TNIV (I can find a verse or two or ten in every translation that I think is weaker than some other translation). But who am I? I'm not your Protestant Pope. Read both sides and decide for yourself.

This year I've been reading through the ESV. It's a fine Bible. Since the ESV has been known to be an Evangelical revision of the RSV, I've often been reading the RSV while listening to an audio version of the ESV. I've found this summary to be accurate. It reads a lot like the RSV.

Wikipedia states the ESV made changes in 5-10% of the text from the RSV. My Libronix software does verse comparisons and tells the percentage of difference between translations. I tried doing the entire RSV against the entire ESV. My computer doesn't pack enough punch to complete that comparison. However, based on my comparison while reading the RSV and listening to the ESV, Wikipedia may be fairly accurate at that point.

Next year, I plan on reading through the TNIV. I'm hoping to often do so while listening to audio of the NIV in order that I may become aware of all the differences between the two.

My conclusion at this point based on:
  • all the articles (and books) I've read
  • the debate I listened to between Grudem & Strauss
  • carrying around a TNIV and comparing it with what is in other Bibles that pastors read from
  • cross-referencing verses between other translations and the Greek texts I own
is that as people's NIV wears out and they decide it's time to purchase a new Bible, instead of buying a new NIV, I recommend they replace it with a TNIV.

I am enjoying it and am not troubled by the TNIV. The hoopla about it is for the most part generating heat, not light. There are other Bibles that deserve more negative attention than this one.


Jay Davis said...

"Next year, I plan on reading through the TNIV"

Maybe you could take us on the journey with you via the blog. I would join and maybe others as well...

Anonymous said...

Hey Jay,

It's something to consider.

I'll have to see if Wayne would want a day-by-day notation of differences between the NIV & TNIV.

If not, perhaps I'll do it on blaugmenting.

Craig Blomberg said...

Thanks for the kind and judicious words!

Iyov said...

I find your continued references to "protestant popes" as mildly offensive. I certainly respect the right for you to hold your own beliefs, but I don't think it is necessary to mock Catholics -- who have a deep and valuable history of biblical scholarship.

Can you find a more neutral way to make your point?

Anonymous said...

Greetings iyov,

I have no intention of mocking Roman Catholics. I apologize for coming off that way. I'd like to email you to make sure there's no confusion about how I'm using the phrase and my intent.

Grace & peace to you, iyov.

nimrodxi said...

Some of the gender adjustments seem unexceptional to me, but the regular and repeated shift from singular to plural, third person to second, active to passive does seem problematic to me.