TNIV Truth

BREAKING NEWS: NIV to be updated!

2009-09-02T11:41:00.000-07:00

I (Peter Kirk) just received from Zondervan a letter announcing that the NIV Bible is to be updated in 2011. The announcement is at this website. Here are some extracts from the full text of the announcement:

The global board of Biblica today announced its intention to update the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible, the first time it has been revised since 1984. The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), the independent body of global biblical scholars solely responsible for the translation of the world's most popular Bible, is slated to finish its revision late next year, with publication in 2011. ...

"We want to reach English speakers across the globe with a Bible that is accurate, accessible and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand," said Keith Danby, Global President and CEO of Biblica. ...

"As time passes and English changes, the NIV we have at present is becoming increasingly dated. If we want a Bible that English speakers around the world can understand, we have to listen to, and respect, the vocabulary they are using today."

BBB readers and friends have their opportunity to contribute to the new edition, as explained by Douglas Moo, chairman of the Committee on Bible Translation:

The CBT also reiterated its longstanding openness to receiving input from both external scholars and regular Bible readers.
"The CBT has always proactively sought peer review from qualified biblical scholars, linguists and English stylists and it continues to do so," said Moo. "Every suggestion presented in writing to the CBT before the end of this calendar year will be considered for the 2011 edition of the NIV Bible. The CBT also values the feedback it receives from NIV Bible readers – be they scholars or not – on the comprehensibility of the text as we continue in our efforts to create a translation that offers English speakers across the world accurate understanding and unobstructed access to God's unchanging word."

I understand that this new edition is intended to replace both the 1984 NIV and the 2005 TNIV. I hope to be able to confirm this soon.

UPDATE: There is also an article about this in USA Today, a rather strange article I thought, which concludes with the following:

The T-NIV will be taken off the market when the new Bible is released.

For the 2011 edition, more than a dozen scholars will "review every single gender-related decision we have made and make sure we are putting God's unchanging word into English people are actually using," says Douglas Moo, chairman of the Committee on Bible Translation.

Gender issues aren't the only areas for re-examination, says Moo. "In the 1984 NIV when Paul says (in 2 Corinthians 11:25) 'I was stoned,' we changed it to 'pelted with stones' to avoid the laughter in the junior high row of the church."

While the committee has always called on scholars from numerous faiths and disciplines, they're also now calling for input from the general public at a special new website, NIVBible2011.com.

"I can't predict what will happen with gender usage. My guess would be we made a lot of the right decisions for the T-NIV but every one of those is open for consideration. We may even be returning to what we had in the 1984 NIV," says Moo.

Well, I certainly hope they don't return to what was in the 1984 NIV, which includes clear gender-related errors like this one. But I would be very surprised if they do. Nevertheless I'm sure there will be a lot of wrangling over the next two years about whether to follow NIV or TNIV on debatable matters.

Read The Books of The Bible in 2009

2008-12-30T19:11:00.000-08:00

Today I was invited to "attend" an event on Facebook. I accepted. The event is to join with others in reading the Bible through in a new format during 2009 and discussing it. The format is The Books of The Bible (TNIV text) which we have previously blogged about. This format removes chapter and verse divisions which can hinder us from hearing the text as closely as possible to how the original hearers did (they didn't have chapter and text divisions either). This format arranges the Bible in a more chronological order than the traditional order found in Catholic and Protestant Bible versions. And it arranges the Old Testament more closely to how the books of the Hebrew Bible were arranged.

I invite you to join me at this event. Those of you who are already members of Facebook can attend the event by going to this Internet address:

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=40536860035

If you are not a member of Facebook, you can join for free during a short sign-up process. I do not know if you can attend the event from another website if you are not a member of Facebook and do not with to become one. But I can let you know if there will be any way to attend outside of Facebook.

Here is the invitation from The Books of The Bible folks:

Read The Books of The Bible in 2009: Genesis

Join us in reading and discussing the books of the Bible in 2009! We're starting with Genesis, and we hope you'll join us for as many books as you'd like--hopefully all of them.

We'll be using an edition of the Scriptures called "The Books of The Bible" that the International Bible Society has specially formatted for reading with greater understanding and enjoyment. The text is in a single column, and there are no chapters or verses or section headings. The book of Genesis in this format can be downloaded free as a PDF file at
http://thebooksofthebible.info/sample.php.

(To find out more about this edition, visit www.thebooksofthebible.info. You can order a copy of the complete Bible at http://www.ibsdirect.com/p-574-tniv-the-books-of-the-bible-tbotb.aspx.)

To take part in this event, read through the introduction to Genesis (pp. 5-6) and the book itself (pp. 7-71) any time between January 1-14. Take a break wherever you want along the way. (At an average adult reading speed, it should take about three hours to read the whole book.) Join in the discussion with your questions, comments and observations. What is it like to read Genesis as a continuous narrative? What strikes you as you read? What bothers you? What would you like explained (if possible)?

The discussion of Genesis will be led by the Rev. Dr. Christopher Smith, a consulting editor for "The Books of The Bible."

We look forward to reading and discussing Genesis together! (Please pass this invitation along to others--we'd love to have them join us, too.)

Event Info
Host:	De-versify
Type:	Education - Study Group
Network:	Global

Time and Place
Start Time:	Thursday, January 1, 2009 at 12:05am
End Time:	Wednesday, January 14, 2009 at 11:55pm
Location:	Wherever you like to read

TNIV top Bible

2008-12-21T09:26:00.000-08:00

Blogger Byron has the TNIV at the top of his list of Bible versions he uses most.

Andy Stanley Endorses the TNIV; Calls It His "Standard Text"

2008-12-16T14:30:00.000-08:00

TNIV on the BBC, and at ETS

2008-11-27T08:00:00.000-08:00

The Bible Experience, based on TNIV, has made it into this BBC report on alternative Bibles. The wording in the Lord's Prayer "You're the Boss, God, and will be for ever, innit?" is not from TNIV, but from one of the other featured versions, The Bible in Cockney.

TNIV also features to a large extent in the Evangelical Theological Society talk by Mark Strauss on "Why the English Standard Version (ESV) should not become the standard English version", which has been published at Better Bibles Blog, in 13 parts listed here.

Thoughts on 1 Corinthians 15:21 & Hebrews 2:6

2008-10-24T11:07:00.000-07:00

Greetings Mike,

Welcome to this blog. Let me state upfront that I am a layman. I make my living in the electrical utility business. I am the formally uneducated member of this forum. I am not a scholar. I do all my study in English though I do have many foreign language tools and use them a lot. If I misstate anything about the original languages, Wayne or someone else will come to the rescue and correct me. I say all that to encourage everyone that reads this sight that you don't have to be scholar to determine if the TNIV is a trustworthy translation. I'm at a disadvantage compared to our other contributors here in these areas. However, I'm glad to be a member of this forum as a lay representative.

You stated . . .

Where it changes man to human. So instead of getting a parallel between the first man, Adam and Jesus (obviously also a man) we get something that for me seems a bit more mucked up.

The TNIV is not the first Bible to do this with 1 Corinthians 15:21 nor is it the first with Hebrews 2:6.

In 1 Corinthians 15:21, similar language is used in the:

New Revised Standard Version
New American Bible.

In Hebrews 2:6, the list is even more expansive:

Contemporary English Version
Good News Translation
The Message
New Century Version
New Living Translation (in the front half of the verse only)
New Revised Standard Version

None of these draws as much attention as the TNIV probably because the TNIV has the greatest potential to influence the Evangelical community. Also, only the NRSV has similar changes in both passages as the TNIV has.

1 Corinthians 15:21

I don't think any parallel is "mucked up" by the TNIV. The first rule I would advise anyone of in dealing with the differences in the TNIV and other translations is to never read a Bible verse. Always read at least a paragraph or more. For brevity's sake, let me just include the next verse . . .

²¹For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a human being. ²²For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

The Holy Bible : Today's New International Version. 2005 (1 Co 15:21-22). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Verse 21 speaks of a human being (singular) through which death comes and a human being (singular again) though which the resurrection comes. Verse 22 makes it clear who each of those humans are. Adam is the human through which death came and Jesus is the human through which the resurrection comes.

Along with the concept of never reading a single Bible verse, I'd like to recommend what can be called the paraphrase test. Many people are concerned about the choices in translating gender accuracy. Just because a word is masculine in Greek (or Hebrew) doesn't mean that it applies to males only. It sounds like you've been reading on this a bit and so you are probably aware of this. The paraphrase test is a great test particularly for people, like myself, who are not scholars. When we see man used, even the non-scholar can recognize that sometimes this references the human race, sometimes it refers to males (i.e. a gender reference). With the paraphrase test, use males in every passage in which there is a question and see how if it makes sense. Most of the time this clears up the problem. I'd encourage you to read the entire paragraph from verse 20 through verse 28. The male-ness of Adam and the male-ness of Jesus is not the issue. It's their humanity that it is the issue. This can be seen in theological issues. When he speak of Jesus as the God-man we usually define him as fully God and fully man. The point of calling him fully man is that we are pointing out that he was fully human. The theological point isn't that he is fully male. Jesus didn't come to redeem only males, but both males and females. Thus, it's better to describe him as fully God, fully human.

Hebrews 2:6

Hebrews 2:6 can be solved in similar fashion. First of all, read the context. I would encourage you to read all the way from 2:5 to the end of the chapter. Is Jesus' male-ness the issue, or is it his humanity that is the issue? I think it becomes obvious that his humanity is the issue here.

The Greek in this passage even bounces back in forth in its gender use. In verse 14, παιδία (children in English) is in the neutral. In the very next verse it tells us he will free those who were held in slavery (look at a TNIV or even the very formal NASB). Those is the Greek word τούτους, which is masculine.

One other bit of research a person can do in this passage is look at the Old Testament passage which is being quoted. It is Psalm 8 in this case. Since the TNIV is what is in question here, let's look the Psalm from the NASB . . .

1 O Lord, our Lord,

How majestic is Your name in all the earth,

Who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!

2 From the mouth of infants and nursing babes You have established strength

Because of Your adversaries,

To make the enemy and the revengeful cease.

3 When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,

The moon and the stars, which You have ordained;

4 What is man that You take thought of him,

And the son of man that You care for him?

5 Yet You have made him a little lower than God,

And You crown him with glory and majesty!

6 You make him to rule over the works of Your hands;

You have put all things under his feet,

7 All sheep and oxen,

And also the beasts of the field,

8 The birds of the heavens and the fish of the sea,

Whatever passes through the paths of the seas.

9 O Lord, our Lord,

How majestic is Your name in all the earth!

New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (Ps 8:1-9). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.

It is clear to me that in Psalm 8, man is a reference to humanity, i.e. the human race, not just the males. Thus, I have no problem with the TNIV rendering of the quote in Hebrews 2.

This is a good point to stop and let you comment or ask questions.

Grace & peace to you.

questions from a visitor

2008-10-24T09:30:00.000-07:00

My wife and I returned home a couple nights ago from two weeks of travel. This morning I transferred my email messages received on the trip to my desktop computer. Among the messages I discovered the following questions from a visitor named Mike:

Hi everyone, I somehow stumbled on this blog from the accordance web forums, to Rick's site, to this site.

And a long story short, I had been noticing on Bill Mounce's blog how he seems to praise the TNIV for it's adept translation. I know all the hoopla over the gender issues and why I would say (IMHO) I don't agree with some of them. But I am curious about specifically:

1 Corinthians 15:21 (which also seems to have a similar oddity in Heb 2:6)

Where it changes man to human. So instead of getting a parallel between the first man, Adam and Jesus (obviously also a man) we get something that for me seems a bit more mucked up.

I have, for the life of me, tried searching the entire internet (though I probably fell a little short) and so that is where this email is coming from. The TNIV.info site is all about worthless unless I just want to read it - while not bad, it doesn't seem to retain the various "question verses" any more.

I'm just curious to your understanding (or any available material one why this was done that way) for these verses. I also tried searching the blog but couldn't find any instance of this being addressed - my apologies if it was.

Thanks,

Mike

Let's answer Mike here on this post to benefit others, as well.

NIV vs. TNIV in the Minor Prophets

2008-10-03T15:06:00.000-07:00

You'll want to read Mike Aubrey's analysis of revisions the TNIV made to the NIV in the Minor Prophets.

What Does Rob Bell Think of the TNIV?

2008-09-20T21:22:00.000-07:00

Craig Blomberg on recent CBT meetings

2008-08-08T07:30:00.000-07:00

Craig Blomberg has just blogged on the recent meetings of the CBT in his post titled Demystifying Bible Translation and Where Our Culture Is with Inclusive Language. The CBT meets annually to consider further revisions to the TNIV.

TNIV Renaissance Bible

2008-07-19T15:04:00.000-07:00

Deborah Fulthorp is going to receive one of the free TNIV Renaissance Bible Rick blogged about in the preceding post.

Renaissance Fine Leather TNIV Reference Bible Giveaway

2008-07-01T18:15:00.000-07:00

This November, Zondervan will release a new edition of the TNIV Reference Bible with a much higher grade of leather binding. I have a preview of this edition over at This Lamp.

Would you like to get a free copy? Zondervan is giving away ten copies of the Renaissance Fine Leather edition of the TNIV Reference Bible through This Lamp. For details and to see if you qualify, see my post.

Logical connectors in the TNIV

2008-06-06T12:27:00.000-07:00

TC Robinson has blogged about "translation elements" (called logical connectors in my tradition, but either term is fine) in the TNIV. He points out how these have been improved in several passages, in revision from the NIV to the TNIV. Click here to read TC's post.

John 14:23 & Genesis 3:16

2008-05-15T03:58:00.000-07:00

I've been having a discussion in another place in the internet world with someone who called the TNIV heretical. I thought I'd share some of that here so you can see how to have a conversation with someone and attempt to bring light into the conversation without heat. This conversation is still going on. Sometimes it can be hard, if not impossible, to convince people. However, we need to conduct ourselves properly.

Heretical, the term this other individual used, is a strong term. It's not one I use often of anyone or anybody. I have a book that is out of print entitled Orthodox and Heresy by Robert Bowman. On page 50, Bowman presents a definition that I defer to:

A teaching which directly opposes the essentials of the Christian faith, so that true Christians must divide themselves from those who hold it.

I think that is fair and useful. For what I believe to be essential or non-essential check out this post at my personal blog. I don't think Bible translations is in that category.

When he stated that the TNIV is heretical, the first thing I did was ask how do you define heretical? He defined heresy as that which opposes traditional church doctrine and then he told me that the TNIV makes God gender neutral.

I could have made a declaration at this point, but often the best way is to proceed with questions. I asked him How did you come to the conclusion that the TNIV makes God gender neutral? Can you show me some verses where it does this?

He backed off that position at that point. He came back saying that in the original version it did but not in the current edition. Now Wayne and the guys can correct me, but usually translations have extra copyright dates when they do revisions. The TNIV I have has only two dates and it isn't due to revisions being made. One date is the New Testament and the other was the Old Testament. I have, to my knowledge, the first published edition. Anyway I let that point slide. Sometimes you have to pick and choose what points to discuss.

He held on to the heresy charge and brought up three verses: John 14:23; 1 Corinthians 14:28; Revelation 22:19. These are passages where the third person, singular, masculine terms in the NIV and other translation are changed to third person plurals (John 14:23 & 1 Corinthians 14:28) or second person singulars (Revelation 22:19). The point being as you all know to demonstrate that these verses in their application don't apply only to males, but to females also. For this he claims that the TNIV is heretical.

My counter has been to ask him if the KJV is heretical when it translates masculine terms in the original languages as gender neutral terms in English. I've been doing this by talking about John 14:23. The TNIV reads . . .

Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.

The Holy Bible : Today's New International Version. 2005 (Jn 14:23). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

The NIV reads . . .

Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

The Holy Bible : New International Version. 1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (Jn 14:23). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

The KJV is even more masculine by translating τις as a man rather than anyone at the beginning of the verse. Even the NASB and NKJV use anyone at that point.

I asked a couple questions. One was to ask him if females love Jesus and obey his teaching, will the Father love them and make his home with them? He said he was 99.99% sure that He would. His counter was to ask if I believe the Holy Spirit and if He needed correction from 21st century scholars. He claims it changes meaning.

I asked how he can possibly justify the KJV. In Genesis 3:16, the KJV tells us that in sorrow Eve would bear children. The Hebrew is masculine. I asked him if the Holy Spirit needed correction from 17th century scholars. By his own approach the KJV should read that in sorrow Eve would bring forth sons. If I used his approach, then the KJV changed the meaning. Maybe Eve would not bring forth daughters in sorrow. Yet, the KJV translators translated that masculine term as the gender neutral term children. I think the KJV translators made the correct choice and that the TNIV translators are just continuing by making careful choices as to whether a text is applicable only to males, or both males and females.

So how can he charge the TNIV with heresy but not the KJV? Now he claims it's the motive. At that point I asked him if he knows who the translators of the TNIV are, if he's tried corresponding with them, and how did he determine their motive. Judging motives is dangerous ground to cover. I can look at a finished product and judge the product. Judging motives is something I think we should leave to Jesus.

There is no heresy. I hope this helps illustrate how to counter someone who opposes the TNIV. When someone attacks the TNIV, step back and let them make the claims while you ask questions. It keeps the other person in the hot seat and keeps you out. It makes them do all the work. You can relax and enjoy yourself. The only time I brought data into the conversation was to use examples from the KJV to demonstrate that if he wants to be consistent then he must charge the KJV with heresy.

de-versify chat

2008-04-30T10:50:00.000-07:00

We have blogged in the past about The Books of the Bible (TBOTB), an edition of the TNIV which formats the text without verse numbers and arranges the text more in chronological order as well as closer to the order in the Hebrew Bible.

May 9 there will be on online chat by the Bible Design Group that has been designing TBOTB and promoting de-versifying. The chat will be on Facebook at this Internet address:

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=16104361781

The chat will take place between 4-5 pm Mountain Time (6-7 Eastern).

If you are not a member of Facebook, it takes only two or three minutes to become one. You are invited to join the chat and ask questions of the Bible Design team, or give them other comments and ideas which can help promote de-versified Bibles for better Bible study.

Bibles which say what they mean

2008-04-16T10:46:00.000-07:00

David McKay blogs about Psalm 7:12, 13 where the TNIV translates more literally than the ESV:

Gontroppo's Blog: Bibles which say what they mean

Mark Bertrand on Allan's TNIV

2008-03-15T10:29:00.000-07:00

Mark Bertrand is a connoisseur of Bibles that are packaged well, good bindings, page layout, etc. He has found an edition of the TNIV that meets his high standards. Mark writes:

there is an edition of the TNIV I can recommend wholeheartedly -- and not surprisingly it comes from R. L. Allan's. The Allan's TNIV is a 4.5 x 6.5 inch hardback, about .875 inches thick, featuring a small print, double-column text. The cover is available in four styles: black highland goatskin, imperial purple highland goatskin, cardinal red goatskin, and British tan calfskin. These sell for £50. There's also a French morocco edition for £40. A tabbed closure keeps the silk-lined cover secure. According to the description at Bibles-Direct.com, these editions have two ribbon markers; mine only came with one.

Mark goes into a lot more detail about this edition and then concludes:

Having said all this, the question is: would I recommend the Allan's TNIV? I would. If you're using the TNIV extensively, then you'll probably want the TNIV Reference Bible as a main edition (you can always have that bonded leather cover replaced, and the font isn't as ghastly as I make out once you're used to it). But for everyday use -- especially carry -- the Allan's TNIV is the best available. If you don't use the TNIV but would like to check it out, perhaps the thought of an Allan's edition is such an usual yet practical format will sway you.

All I know is, the next time I get an e-mail complaining there are no "nice" editions of the TNIV available, I will have to disagree. The Allan's TNIV is superb. I'll be reading a lot of more of the TNIV, I suspect -- assuming my wife doesn't confiscate this edition first!

Karen Jobes paper

2008-02-14T10:45:00.000-08:00

The Zondervan blog has a new post about a 2007 ETS paper written by Karen Jobes, a member of the TNIV translation team. The paper is titled "Bible Translation as Bilingual Quotation" and is available as a PDF download.

For a summary of the paper, read the Zondervan blog post and a followup post by John Hobbins.

TNIV sales rank

2008-02-08T10:21:00.000-08:00

TNIV sales continue in the top 10 for Bibles sold each month at Christian booksellers. Here are rankings for Bibles sales last month:

FEBRUARY 2008

BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - Based on Dollar Sales

1 New International Version
2 King James Version
3 New King James Version
4 New Living Translation
5 New American Standard Bible update
6 Today’s New International Version
7 Holman Christian Standard Bible
8 The Message
9 English Standard Version
10 Amplified Bible

BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - Based on Unit Sales

1 New International Version
2 King James Version
3 New King James Version
4 New Living Translation
5 English Standard Version
6 Holman Christian Standard Bible
7 New American Standard Bible update
8 The Message
9 Today’s New International Version
10 Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish)

updated bookshelf

2008-02-06T10:32:00.000-08:00

I have just updated our bookshelf in the margin of this blog. Blog visitors Mark and Julie let us know that a book on New Testament theology by I. Howard Marshall uses the TNIV as its Bible text. Also, some of the images of books I had previously posted were no longer available from their original Internet addresses. I think I have all the images fixed now.

If you know of other books, not on our bookshelf, which use the TNIV as their default Bible text, please let us know. You can contact us at the e-mail address listed in the margin: bible dot tniv at gmail dot com.

The Bible Experience so far . . . Part 2

2008-02-02T05:57:00.000-08:00

Check out Rick Mansfield's review of the historical books as he listens to The Bible Experience (TBE).

Rick's been listening to chunks at a time in his commute. I've been listening to TBE while I read through the Bible. Thus Rick has listened from Genesis through Esther. I've listened to:

Genesis - Exodus 32
Psalms 3-8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 21, 88
Luke
Acts 1-8

Rick and I have both enjoyed TBE. I enjoyed Rick's criticisms in his new post and I can sympathize with him. I also like how he puts the most positive spin on his criticisms that he could and I think he did a good job doing so.

As I've listened, I've found some words omitted and others added. Nothing that changes any meaning. But I'm kind of nit-picky. An example of something they often do is that if a person is speaking, and then mid-stream of their dialogue the TNIV records a phrase such as the LORD said and then continues on with what the LORD said, TBE will omit the phrase the LORD said and just allow the dialogue to continue. For the theatrical element I understand them eliminating the phrase, but I'd prefer if they left it in. However, if that's the worst thing they do, then I still must admit it's the best dramatized audio Bible I've heard to date.

TNIV Added to Logos Base Packages

2008-01-31T22:02:00.001-08:00

Logos has just upgraded all Logos users who have a base package with the NIV to get a free copy of the TNIV.

From Logos employee Phil Gons' blog:
Logos just released a new round of base packages labeled ND. No, that’s not an abbreviation for anything. They serve merely to distinguish the various versions of the base packages. The previous base packages were OC, the ones before that were QB, and the ones before that were RA. You can upgrade from your current OC package to the corresponding ND package for free (you pay only for the media and shipping). They’ve added the TNIV and NIrV to all of the base packages that include the NIV (i.e., all but Christian Home and Original Languages).

This is a fairly significant move since for the longest time, Logos actually kept a disclaimer on its TNIV add-on page as if it were a dangerous pack of cigarettes. Then in March of last year, Logos suddenly did the right thing and dropped the disclaimer.

Who would have thought that less than a year later, the TNIV would be standard fare in many of the base packages! Logos, you've come a long way.

For more on the Logos upgrade that includes the TNIV, go to http://www.logos.com/upgrade.

Keeping Up with Harran

2008-01-23T16:29:00.000-08:00

Folks often overlook one of the other new features of the TNIV--that is, the revised spelling of certain proper names. The TNIV breaks with traditional spellings--or more precisely, Anglicized spellings--for certain names leftover from the KJV and other English translations.

For instance, Evil-Merodach is now Awel-Marduk and Succoth is now Sukkoth. Such changes are welcome for the sake of accuracy, but will no doubt frustrate some who attempt to look up certain individuals and places in Bible dictionaries and other reference works, at least until Zondervan and other publishers updates their references to reflect the spellings found in the TNIV.

There is a listing of revised spellings at the back of every edition of the TNIV.

Recently, while teaching in Genesis at church, one of the new spellings caught my attention:

"Terah took his son Abram, his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter–in–law Sarai, the wife of his son Abram, and together they set out from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to Canaan. But when they came to Harran, they settled there." (Gen 11:31 TNIV)

Note the geographical location, Harran, traditionally spelled with only one R. Why the change? Does the Hebrew justify the change in spelling? Well, no and yes. Technically, there is only one resh in ‏חָרָן, however the Hebrew Haran/‏חָרָן is actually a Hebrew rendering of
the Akkadian harranu. More importantly, the change brings the spelling into line with the city of Harran in modern-day Turkey, which is almost universally believed to be the same city as the Haran/Harran mentioned in the Bible.

And as a consequence, now there is a slight distinction between Haran, the brother of Abraham and Harran, the city where Terah traveled with his family. Although the two names are in the same context in Genesis 11, the person and the place do not have anything to do with each other (and are spelled differently in Hebrew). In fact, Haran, the brother of Abraham and son of Terah died before the rest of his family left Ur.

No other major translation that I know of besides the TNIV has updated the spelling of the biblical Haran/Harran to match that of the known city.

However, there is one more interesting aspect to the change in spelling that caught my attention. When I looked at the maps at the back of my TNIV Reference Bible, I noted that the spelling in the maps had NOT been updated!

I'm assuming that the maps used in the back of TNIV Bibles are the same ones used in NIV Bibles, but one would think that Zondervan would want to update them to reflect the spellings of the TNIV. Leaving them the same can only cause confusion.

One final interesting tidbit about Harran. According to the Wikipedia article on Harran, legend has it that this is the location where Adam and Eve first stepped when they were first expelled from the Garden. Granted it's just legend, but isn't it fitting that it was in Harran where Abraham first heard his call from God to go to the promised land? From the point of expulsion and alienation from God, the journey began to enter into God's rest. I find this very appropriate--regardless of how one spells the location.

CORRECTION: As pointed out by Elshaddai Edwards in the comments, the Revised English Bible also includes the spelling, Harran. Upon further checking, I have also discovered the spelling Harran in the recently published New English Translation of the Septuagint, although it should be noted that the spelling of the city's name in the LXX is Χαρραν.

UPDATE: Some TNIV Bibles do have the updated spellings, specifically the TNIV Study Bible for one. Also, Zondervan has looked into the matter with the TNIV Reference Bible and will include a newer, updated set of maps in a later printing.

The Bible Experience so far

2008-01-23T13:46:00.000-08:00

Rick Mansfield and I are both listening through the The Bible Experience - an audio dramatization of the TNIV. I've enjoyed it very much so far. Rick apparently does too. In fact, Rick has already written a review for the portion he has listened to - the Pentateuch. Check out Rick's review.

TNIV revision suggestions submitted

2008-01-03T10:47:00.000-08:00

Well, it was a lot of work but our TNIV revisions suggestions were submitted to the TNIV team on time, by the deadline of Dec. 31. This project was very successful. Several people submitted suggestions. Some submitted many. Often they were things in the translation which I had not noticed. Thank you very much to each person who submitted suggestions, especially those who worked many hours on this project.

All suggestions are posted now on the TNIV links website. Included there are suggestions submitted in previous years, as well as a file with suggestions made during this new year, 2008.

You are welcome to submit a revision suggestion whenever you find a wording in the TNIV which you believe can be improved.

A few days ago I received a box from IBS (International Bible Society), which holds the copyright to the NIV and TNIV. In it were several nice gifts: copies of TBOTB (The Books of the Bible) (the TNIV in a more chronological order than the traditional biblical order, and without verse and chapter numbers), teeshirts with the phrase DE-VERSIFY on them, and a copy of the book Beauty Behind the Mask (about the TBOTB). There was also a note from Glenn Paauw, one of the men on the TBOTB team at IBS. He thanked me for promoting the TBOTB on this blog. I intend to share the gifts in the box with those who submitted the most number of suggestions for revision of the TNIV during 2007.

Read With Me Through the TNIV

2008-01-01T19:43:00.000-08:00

Every year I read through a different translation. While I've done some research on the TNIV debate, I have not read the TNIV cover to cover. I am doing that this year.

Come with me on the journey. Here's the link over at my blog to what chapters I'm reading each day. I'll try to post every week what chapters I am reading. I will also attempt to point out differences between the TNIV and NIV that stand out to me.

Review: The TNIV Reference Bible

2007-12-10T23:24:00.000-08:00

I had a nice little surprise waiting for me when I got home today: an advance copy of the TNIV Reference Bible. I'm pleased to say that it was everything most of us who have been waiting for it hoped it would be.

I've written a full hands-on review at This Lamp, and I encourage you to read that and post comments either here or there.

If you don't have time to read the full review right now, let me simply quote my last paragraph:

In the final analysis, the TNIVRB is the edition of the TNIV I wish I had been using from the very beginning. Nevertheless, late is better than never. Everything about it says this is a quality product, and while it isn't everything I finally want in an edition of the TNIV (I'm still holding out for wide margins), it will replace my TNIV Study Bible as my public TNIV of choice. I know a lot of people have been waiting for this Bible, and I'm glad to say there are no final "gotchas." The TNIVRB is everything it was promised to be. I can readily recommend it to anyone wanting a regular reference edition of the TNIV, and it will be the edition that will receive the majority of my use.

2 1/2 weeks to go

2007-12-10T22:51:00.000-08:00

There are 2 1/2 weeks to go before the deadline of Dec. 31 to submit revision suggestions for the TNIV. During the last few weeks I have almost completed checking the minor prophets.

As I have flagged verses for the TNIV committee which could benefit from revision, I have also flagged verses which strike me as having nice, idiomatic English. Those get flagged with green highlighting. If you would like to read my comments so far, click here.

Today I merged all the pages of comments submitted up to today from others into a single file. (I'll add further suggestions to that file.) That will make it easier for me to send all the revision suggestions to the TNIV committee by Dec. 31.

I am pleased with the comments others have been suggesting. I suspect that the files I will forward to the TNIV committee will include the largest number of suggestions given to the them at any one time, at least from non-members of the committee.

There are still a few books of the TNIV Old Testament which no one has volunteered to check. There is still time for people to check them, even if there is only time to skim a book, before the deadline of Dec. 31.

word alone: TNIV will gain trust and readership

2007-12-10T11:51:00.000-08:00

word alone: TNIV will gain trust and readership

Witherington on the Bible Experience

2007-12-04T21:39:00.000-08:00

Click here to find out whether Bible scholar Ben Witherington likes The Bible Experience, with all of the TNIV dramatically rendered on CD or MP3.

Mark Strauss on TNIV revision suggestions

2007-12-03T08:42:00.000-08:00

The TNIV committee (the CBT) is always willing to examine specific suggestions for improvements. Just last year we examined dozens of Wayne's suggestions (and accepted many).

Referring back to earlier posts [in discussion lists] would not be helpful for me, since I don't really have the time to read through archives. However, if you have specific suggestions for improvements, and want to cut and paste your exegetical arguments from past posts for these suggestions into a list of proposals, I would be more than happy to present these to the committee.

List the present reading of the TNIV, the proposed reading, and then the argument for it. [WL:Use the webpage form provided for your suggestions.]

As Wayne noted, December 31 is the latest we can receive proposals. Many years we do not get to all the proposals at our June meeting, but they are kept in a chronological list when they are received and will eventually be examined by the committee.

Hope this helps.

Blessings,

Mark
CBT member

English idioms in the TNIV

2007-11-30T12:01:00.000-08:00

I have just posted on the Better Bibles Blogs about idiomatic Bible translation in the TNIV.

TNIV the Basis for New Edition of A Reader's Greek New Testament

2007-11-29T07:48:00.000-08:00

Earlier this month, Zondervan released the second edition of A Reader's Greek New Testament. Like the first edition, the second edition contains a Greek text of the New Testament with a vocabulary apparatus at the bottom of the page listing all Greek words that occur 30 times or less along with a brief English definition. The goal of the RGNT is that a person with at least a basic knowledge of the language can simply read the New Testament in its original language without having to constantly consult one of the standard lexicons.

The RGNT differs from standard UBS/NA Greek texts in a number of places. The original first edition was based on the Greek text underlying the New International version of the Bible. The copyright page of the RGNT2 contains this statement:

The Greek text used in this edition of the Greek New Testament was originally developed for the Portland Index Project by Edward W. Goodrick and John R. Kohlenberger III, and subsequently reviewed and modified by Gordon R. Fee.

The first edition contained the same statement, but without the mention of Fee, which makes for speculation that Fee, a member of the TNIV committee had a hand in modifying this new edition which is based not on the NIV text, but rather the TNIV. There's also a brief forward by Fee immediatly following the title page.

What many people don't realize is that the so-called "standard" Greek text is an amalgam of readings from many different ancient manuscripts in an attempt to sort through discrepancies and find what is probably the original reading. Many people may not also realize that often strong cases can be made for the reading of another variant over the one accepted in the standard text. Almost all English translations have readings in which a variant has been chosen over the "accepted" text. In the past, unless one chose to compare a translation very closely and systematically to the Greek text, there was no way to discover how many places that a translation committee chose to follow a variant text.

When the first edition of the RGNT was published, it was based upon the NIV and it listed exactly 231 places where this translation diverged from the standard text. This new second edition has been modified to match the TNIV, and according to the introduction, 285 divergent readings are found in this translation. Everyone of the divergences are indicated in the text at the bottom of the page in both editions.

Until now, it's been very interesting to compare translation renderings between the NIV and TNIV texts. Now, however, we have access to something more interesting--the underlying Greek texts themselves. Now we can spot and confirm alternative readings such as that found in Mark 1:41 which I've written about on This Lamp.

I'm also pleased to see Zondervan make a bold step away from the NIV and to the TNIV as it is time for the older to become "lesser" and the newer to become "greater" (to borrow from John 3:30). I've suggested to my contacts at Zondervan that should consider publishing a diglot containing the RGNT2 text on one page with the TNIV on the facing page.

If you're interested in further information about the second edition of the Reader's Greek New Testament, see my full review at This Lamp. I welcome all of the new features except the new typeface, which I don't care for any more than I did that of the original.

TNIV revision deadlines

2007-11-27T22:11:00.000-08:00

Gladness has come to my heart (does that sound biblical?!) since some others have been contributing revision suggestions for the TNIV. If you click on the "View" button at the bottom of the green poll in the margin of this blog, you can see which books of the Old Testament have been, or are in the processed of being, reviewed for the TNIV translation committee (CBT).

I got an email today from someone wishing that that deadline for suggestions were not so close as it is, January 1. I realized as I responded to that email that I have not made something clear: that deadline is an annual deadline. Suggestions which do not make it into the suggestions files for the CBT by January 1, 2008, can still be suggested for their next annual deadline, January 1, 2009.

So if you have wished you could submit revision suggestions but are overloaded at this time, there is always next year, and the year after that, and ...

I hope that the TNIV will have enough support from the public so that it will continue to be revised for a good number more years, or, using "biblical language", until it is full of years.

:-)

Christmas presents for the TNIV team

2007-11-21T09:19:00.000-08:00

There are few things in life that bring me greater joy than helping a Bible translation team improve its translation. Others might not experience that same joy that I do, but I do know that people experience joy when reading a better Bible. All around the world people marvel (and are spiritually impacted) whenever they hear God's Word translated as they speak and write their own language.

For several years I have been sending revision suggestions to the CBT, the TNIV translation team. These days I am checking TNIV Psalms. My regular job (checking Bible translations in other languages) does not allow me time to check the TNIV as thoroughly as I would like, but I am still able to skim read and spot wordings which could be improved.

But I am not going to be able to complete my check of the TNIV before their annual deadline, January 1, for receiving revision suggestions. Would you consider giving a Christmas present to the TNIV team by suggesting revisions which would make their translation even better? Perhaps you could skim read books of the Bible which I have not yet been able to check, so that as many books of the Bible will be covered as possible before the CBT deadline. In my latest push the past few weeks I have checked Ruth, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, and I will soon finish Psalms. BBB and TNIV Truth reader Tim Carr is expecting to complete checking the New Testament by the deadline. If you prefer to check New Testament books, check Tim's suggestions on the TNIV revisions suggestions webpage to see if he has not already suggested a revision for a wording you are interested in.

I realize that there is barely a month to go, but if you would be willing in that time to skim one or more books which Tim and I have not been able to check yet, it would be a big help. I will post a survey in the BBB (and TNIV Truth blog's) margin where you can mark down which book, God helping you, you hope to check for the TNIV team.

Do you need to be a Greek or Hebrew scholar to check an English translation? No, in fact such scholarship can often be an impediment to the kind of TNIV checking most needed at this time. You just need to be a native speaker of English, with a good sense of whether or not some wording sounds like good English, whether it follows the standard rules of English syntax and lexicon.

To help you see what kinds of things you might find, here are few examples I have spotted in the TNIV Psalms, along with explanatory words about the translation issue:

Ps. 38:3 "there is no health in my body" – unnatural; consider natural: "my body is not healthy

Ps. 68:17 "The chariots of God are tens of thousands" – improper English with "are" connecting the noun subject and the number of them; consider: "The chariots of God number in the tens of thousands", or "God has tens of thousands of chariots"

Ps. 75:1 "Name" – This is the only capitalized instance of "name" (including for God's name) I have found in the TNIV. I suspect it is a typographical error.

Ps. 82:1 "gives judgment" – unnatural; I don't think we "give" judgment in English

Ps. 84:7 "from strength to strength" – unnatural English; I don't know what it means.

Ps. 89: 13 "endued" – not a well known word today

Ps. 89:15 "acclaim" – not a well known word today

Ps. 90:12 "Teach us to number our days" – I've heard this Bible phrase since childhood but I do not understand it. It sounds like the psalmist is asking God to teach him how to count the number of days he has done something, perhaps how many days he has lived.

You can record your revision suggestions on the TNIV revision suggestions webpage. There are further instructions on the webpage. There is also a link there to download a free copy of the TNIV if you do not have this Bible version yet. I will forward suggestions to the TNIV team by their deadline, January 1.

Please consider indicating which TNIV books you would like to check in the new survey in this blog's margin. And if you cannot skim an entire book, if you can submit even one suggestion that can be a help.

Who Is the World Subject To?

2007-11-19T08:31:00.000-08:00

Joe Myzia discusses how the TNIV translates a difficult passage in his latest post, Who Is the World Subject To?

Wayne Grudem on the State of the Gender Debate and the Way Forward

2007-11-17T15:26:00.000-08:00

Sorry, folks, this post was intended for the Complegalitarian blog, not this blog. I thought I had deleted it from this blog after I discovered my mistake, but I was mistaken about the deletion of the mistake! :-)

The post content didn't belong here on the TNIV Truth blog. I won't delete this space on the blog since there are now two comments, but I invite you to read the post where it was intended to be in the first place.

Spiritual gifts are not just for men

2007-10-28T08:51:00.000-07:00

The NIV wording of Rom. 12:6-8 sounds like spiritual gifts are only given to men:

6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. 7 If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; 8 if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

All other English versions that I am aware of, including KJV, RSV, ESV, NASB, TNIV, and HCSB do not insert the word "man", as the NIV translators did. There is nothing in the underlying Greek which corresponds to the word "man". The TNIV removes "man", creating greater accuracy:

6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; 7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; 8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

There are several other places in the NIV text where the word "man" is used in a way that is not accurate, and other translations, including those conforming to complementarian standards such as the ESV, HCSB, and NASB, have an accurate translation of the Greek.

One of the points missed in debates over the TNIV is that it was necessary to revise the NIV to remove such inaccuracies. The ESV and HCSB, two recent versions which specifically follow the male-oriented Colorado Springs Guidelines, are more accurate than the NIV for those verses where the NIV translators used the word "man" when the Greek is not referring to a male adult.

HT: Christian Bible on Wikipedia Deletions blog

Mike Aubrey's series on NIV/TNIV differences

2007-10-25T22:48:00.000-07:00

Mike Aubrey is continuing posts on differences between the NIV and TNIV. Today he posted on differences he finds in the Pentateuch.

Mark Strauss on NIV/TNIV degrees of literalness

2007-10-22T22:14:00.000-07:00

In response to recent posts about whether the TNIV is more or less literal than the NIV, Mark Strauss, a member of the CBT, has emailed the following and given his permission to post it:

I cannot say statistically whether the TNIV is any more literal than the NIV. That is never in issue in discussing translation possibilities among the committee. It is always the question of what is more exegetically accurate and what communicates most clearly in English. I think at times the TNIV is more formal equivalent than the NIV and at times it is less. But there is no intention to go either way.

Was this written in your behalf?

2007-10-21T22:21:00.000-07:00

My eyes landed on part of a verse in the TNIV today which had a preposition that didn't sound right to me. I read it to my wife and it didn't sound right to her either. I later checked a dictionary and discovered something. But before I tell you what I discovered, would you please read the following words and vote in the new poll in the margin whether the bold italicized words sound good to you in your dialect of English. Please do not check a dictionary before you vote:

and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry

(UPDATE: Commenter Martin Shields discovered the same thing I did: some dictionaries state that there has been a difference observed by some people between "in behalf of" and "on behalf of". As you can see from the results of Martin's googling and the poll results for this issue, that distinction has been lost for a large majority of English speakers. I am nearly 60 years old. I was taught English by a prescriptivist mother and prescriptivist teachers at school, but I had never heard of the dictionary distinction until a few minutes before I wrote this blog post. Oh, the wording in question is from Is. 58:10, in both the NIV and TNIV.)

NIV/TNIV Comparison

2007-10-19T16:00:00.000-07:00

Mike Aubrey ran his computer all night last night, as it checked for differences between the NIV and TNIV. Read his post to learn the results.

The TNIV translator vs. the TNIV boosters

2007-10-14T15:51:00.000-07:00

Iyov continues the discussion about whether the TNIV is more or less literal than the NIV in his post The TNIV translator vs. the TNIV boosters. I have emailed Mark Strauss and Gordon Fee, co-authors of "How to Choose a Translation For All Its Worth," ~~in which they speak to this point (cited in Iyov's post),~~ to find out more definitively whether they think the TNIV is more or less literal than the NIV. (UPDATE: Mea culpa: Iyov actually quoted from the earlier book, updated since publication of the TNIV, which Fee co-authored with Douglas Stuart, "How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth.") Both Fee and Strauss are also members of the CBT which has revised the NIV to become the TNIV, although Strauss became a member after the TNIV was published. He has, however, followed issues concerning production of the TNIV very closely and will be part of future TNIV revision decisions (toward which each of you can also contribute).

And you, too, can weigh in on this issue, both in comments to this post, as well as in a new poll which I have just put in the margin to this blog.

complete Bible Experience

2007-10-13T19:00:00.000-07:00

Pat at kata ta biblia blog has posted on The Bible Experience now being available as both the Old and New Testaments. He also reacts to what he hears in the recording.

super discounted TNIV price

2007-10-13T16:20:00.000-07:00

Jeff at Scripture Zealot has wanted a copy of the TNIV. He was delighted to locate one at a 77% discount price. And you, too, can purchase this thinline Italian leather edition for only $5.99 (U.S.) plus shipping.

Is the TNIV more literal than the NIV?

2007-10-12T09:56:00.000-07:00

A blog visitor comments on the preceding post:

The problem that I have with statements that the TNIV is more literal than the NIV is that I have found no proof of this. All the Bible charts that I have seen have listed the NIV as being more literal than the TNIV such as this chart

This is an important enough issue that I have decided to reply in a post rather than a comment.

The degree of literalness charts, such as the one linked to by the visitor, are subjective, based on what the opinions of the chart maker are. In general, such charts are accurate, but we need objective proof, to help us break away from the subjectivity of opinions. Objective evidence has to come from extensive comparison of specific wordings among Bible versions.

I have tried to do such quantified comparisons. There is more work to be done, but the general trends on my charts accurately reflect relative degrees of literalness among Bible versions:

TNIV is 2% more literal than NIV for translation of accusatives.
TNIV is 3% more literal than NIV for translation of datives.
TNIV is 3% less literal than the NIV for translation of genitives; progress has been made since the NIV was published in understanding how better to translate genitives to English.
TNIV is 8% more literal than NIV for translation of New Testament idioms.
My comparison of Old Testament idioms is in progress so figures are not reliable.

There is more research that needs to be done, but I am rather sure that further empirical studies will affirm the claim that the TNIV is more literal than the NIV. Bible scholar Craig Blomberg agrees. He has shown that the TNIV is more literal than the NIV in a number of specific passages:

Non-gender-related revisions [in the TNIV], however, move from a less literal to a more literal rendering of the Greek approximately three times as often as the reverse.

Contrary to popular lay opinion, the TNIV is more literal than the NIV. The translators of the TNIV have "tightened up" a number of NIV wordings which had been criticized over the years for being too interpretive or dynamically equivalent.

Can the TNIV Be Used for "In-Depth" Study?

2007-10-11T06:38:00.000-07:00

In the comments of the previous post, a reader asked this question: Can someone please explain to me how you can use the TNIV for in-depth study? I love the TNIV, but I am having a hard time using it for deep study because of the dynamic equivalence. I don't know if this is a mindset or an actual problem.

Well, I don't think it's an actual problem (for which I'll make a case below). However, if it's mindset, it may come from using formal equivalent translations for so long. I know because I've been there. Some days I'm still there, but I've made lots of progress!

Really, it may be difficult to answer your question definitively because (1) I don't know what you were using before the TNIV, and (2) I don't exactly have a definition for what you mean by in-depth or deep study. Nevertheless, I'll make some assumptions and answer the best I can.

First, let me make a clarification at the very beginning. In my reading of the TNIV, I don't consider it a pure dynamic equivalent translation at all. I consider it a median translation, sometimes more literal and sometimes more dynamic according to the decisions of the translators (and all translation requires such decisions, even interpretive decisions). On one side of the spectrum, one can find fairly literal translations such as the NASB or the NKJV. On the other end, one can find good examples of dynamic equivalency in translations such as the GNT and the CEV.

In the middle are translations such as the NIV/TNIV and the HCSB. The NRSV is a bit closer to that median range than was the RSV, and the NLT2 is not quite as far down the road of dynamic equivalency as was the NLT1.

You might even want to check out an old post of mine, "TNIV More Literal than the NASB?" where I point out renderings where the TNIV is more literal. It's so not throughout, but the TNIV is more literal in some places meaning these categories are not always hard and fast. And I've also demonstrated a number of times that the TNIV is much more formal/literal in its renderings than the NIV.

As for doing in-depth study, let me point to the example of the NIV. The reality is that there are more commentaries and reference books in the modern period based on the NIV than any other translation, and as I've pointed out, it's more dynamic than the TNIV is!

Granted most of your more "in-depth" commentaries will deal directly with the original languages, sometimes offering the writer's own translation (WBC) and sometimes not (ICC). But a number of mid-level commentaries will use the NIV and still interact with the original languages to a certain extent. The NAC is an example of that. The body of the commentary itself is based on the NIV, but the writers are free to interact with Greek and Hebrew in the footnotes, allowing the reader to go more in-depth as he or she wants to based on knowledge and ability. I might also point to the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, another mid-level series, and this based on the NLT2 (much further along the dynamic path than the TNIV) which is an attempt to facilitate serious study using a non-formal/literal translation.

Another reason for the success of the original NIV for serious study was the early development of the Goodrick-Kohlenberger numbering system which connected the translation back to the original Greek and Hebrew. If you've ever spent any time with it, you know that the GK system is more than simply the NIV version of Strong's dictionaries. It not only fixed Strong's but improved it since the GK system takes the connections of homonyms and related words into account in its system. The development of the GK numbering system for the NIV allowed access to the underlying Greek and Hebrew of the translation to anyone whether they had studied original languages or not. This gave access to significant technical works such as the NIDOTTE to all, even if the user hadn't studied Hebrew.

So, what about the TNIV? Well, keep in mind that it's a new translation. But I do know that a project is well underway to apply the GK system to the TNIV. Once that is done, the reader can have instant access to numerous reference works tied directly to the TNIV, even taking advantage of those older works written in relation to the NIV. Plus we'll be able to have tagged electronic editions of the TNIV in computer software. Currently, I still use the NASB as my default translation in Accordance because it's tagged, but I'll gladly switch the default to a tagged TNIV when it becomes available. [Note: I don't use an original language text for my default in Accordance because I prefer to have the software open to a text containing both testaments].

Also the forthcoming second edition of the Readers Greek New Testament is going to reflect the Greek text of the TNIV, a welcome update to the current edition.

All of this to say, I believe the TNIV is set quite well for serious study. So, is it a mindset issue, after all? Well, maybe. There's still a popular notion that literal = more accurate, and that
simply is not true. I've tried to demonstrate this a number of times, too. I would especially recommend two blog posts I wrote a while back:

And for a significant study of the issue, I still like the book Challenge of Bible Translation edited by Scorgie, Strauss, and Voth.

Finally, while it's good to have a primary translation (I'm working very hard to make the TNIV mine), truly in-depth/deep study is going to require reading multiple translations in parallel. Since I usually pursue any significant study of the Bible in front of Accordance these days, I have a "first tier" of sorts that I have open before me as I study. This includes either the Greek or Hebrew and then my preferred English translations: NASB, TNIV, HCSB, and NLT2. The original languages plus a variety of translation approaches help me to study and understand the passage better. I also have a second tier that I examine if I have time including the ESV, NRSV, JPS (which sometimes moves to the first tier on OT passages), NET, KJV and others.

I hope I've helped to answer the question. Further questions and your comments are welcome and encouraged.

Dig deeper and compare

2007-10-05T09:12:00.000-07:00

A few days ago I learned how to compare three versions of the Bible produced by the CBT (Committee on Bible Translation): NIV, NIrV (reader's version), and TNIV. And you can compare them as well by clicking on this link.

Recently I have become more interested in the NIrV due to the work of Tim Carr. Tim Carr is an English teacher who submits more TNIV revision suggestions than anyone else to the online form for those suggestions. He often finds that an NIrV wording sounds better to him than a TNIV wording. (You can read Tim's suggestions, and those of everyone else who has posted them, by viewing TNIV revision suggestions submitted so far.)

Here is a screen shot of Rom. 12:1 in the three versions:

Dig Deeper

2007-10-03T13:25:00.000-07:00

The advertisement above ran in a recent issue of Christianity Today. You probably cannot make out the actual copy in the ad, but it says:

There are many reasons the Today’s New International Version Study Bible from Zondervan is the first choice for serious students of Scripture. Verse-by-verse notes. Detailed historical and archaeological commentary. The incredibly detailed topical index. Satellite-generated maps. The clarity and accuracy of the TNIV translation. For digging deeper, there’s no better choice than the Zondervan TNIV Study Bible.

I like this ad for a number of reasons:

I'm glad to see Zondervan promoting the TNIV in an Evangelical publication like Christianity Today. This is yet another move by the publisher that directly addresses one of the concerns I voiced in my "open letter" earlier this year.
As it says in the ad, the TNIV can be used by "serious students of scripture," going beyond any assumption that it is strictly a popular translation. My reading of the TNIV, especially in some of its choices away from its predecessor, the NIV has demonstrated some very significant wrestling with texts on the part of the translators. Wayne Meeks' choice to use the TNIV in his second edition of The Writings of St. Paul, a scholarly and essentially non-evangelical work, also confirms the strong academic potential of the TNIV. But more will have to be done, which I'll mention in a moment.
Ultimately, this ad is not simply highlighting the TNIV, but more specifically, The TNIV Study Bible. This is currently the Bible I teach from at church, and find it to be the best choice for that task among the current options. I've never carried a study Bible with me before the TNIVSB, but it's a good choice until I can get a wide margin text edition from either Zondervan or Cambridge one day. When I first saw the picture above, I wondered if someone from Zondervan snuck into my house and took a picture out of my copy. Nevertheless, the TNIVSB is worthy of this kind of exposure. If you haven't already, see my review here.

Perhaps now that the TNIV has been out a while and can be evaluated on its own merits as opposed to the rhetoric of an uncharitable disinformation campaign, ads like this may spur potential readers to take another look. This is all well and good, but where do we need to go from here? How do we dig even deeper, to borrow from the theme of the ad?

I would suggest that we need to see more advertisements like this, but we need to see some specifically with newly written testimonials from academics like Don Carson on the Evangelical side of scholarship and perhaps even someone like Wayne Meeks representing the non-evangelical world as well. I've found that many who want to have nothing to do with the TNIV simply go on the rhetoric they've heard. When I start mentioning names like Carson or Timothy George or even TNIV translators such as Doug Moo, Bruce Waltke, and Gordon Fee, those who think they won't like the TNIV often have to stop and really consider why they think this way. Throwing respectable names around doesn't solve the issue of whether a translation is reliable or not, but would hopefully cause others to examine why these individuals have endorsed the translation.

There have been rumors, denials, and maybe's floating around a while, but I'd really like to see the TNIV expanded to include the Deuterocanonicals. Let me reiterate to those who haven't heard me say it, that I do not consider these books to be inspired Scripture. Nonetheless, the Deuterocanonicals are essential for a comprehensive understanding of the context of the New Testament. Further, there's a long Protestant tradition of including the Deuterocanonicals, or "apocrypha" in Bible translations, often in a section between the testaments. These writings were in Luther's Bible, the KJV, the RSV and many others along the years. If we want to see more works like that of Meeks' using the TNIV, this will be essential.

Finally, while I like the ad above, I immediately noticed that only a small section of a TNIVSB page appears. If the camera had zoomed out, we would immediately see that there's no space to include notations to go along with those highlights and markings. One can highlight a Bible as much as one wants, but highlights alone are useless (in my opinion) without accompanying notes. I know that regular readers will perceive me as a broken record by this point, but I still suggest that a small percentage of TNIV users, specifically teachers and pastors want wide-margins in which to write their own notes. Yes, I know the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible is designed for teachers and pastors, but it will not have margins wide enough to completely fulfill this need. Those who want a wide margin TNIV will continue to look for something more. Hopefully publishers realize these users are the gatekeepers' gatekeepers.

new url for TNIV revisions suggestions

2007-10-02T11:59:00.000-07:00

We've been getting some helpful suggestions for revising the TNIV. I will forward them to the CBT by the end of this year. But we could be getting many more suggestions. Whenever you are reading the TNIV, if you spot a wording which you think could be improved. please consider posting it to the list so it can be forwarded to the CBT.

You can click on the posting link in the margin of this blog, or if you prefer, you can use a new url which will redirect you to the revision suggestions form:

http://get-me.to/tniv-revisions

(UPDATE: If that url doesn't work for you, click here. Also see the TNIV revisions links in the margin of this blog.)

Please feel free to distribute this new url widely on your own Internet websites or blogs and in email messages to friends.

The form does not ask for your email address, so you will not be spammed by the Bravenet service which hosts the form.

The Bible Experience - Another Reminder

2007-09-26T19:59:00.000-07:00

While I have not checked out The Bible Experience, Wayne has and he liked what he heard. I do like audio Bibles. I like memorizing whole chapters and audio Bibles are fantastic for that. This is especially true if you have a 45-minute or longer ride to work as I do.

Before attempting to memorize, I read the passage along with the audio to note any differences. Just as scribes have made scribal errors, so readers make errors on audio Bibles. Once I note any differences, I proceed with memorizing with the audio version.

I plan on picking up the MP3 version. CBD offers it for $49.99 plus shipping. Not a bad price in my mind. Scheduled date for release at CBD is October 17th. I'm looking forward to it.

Whatever translation you use, I cannot recommend an audio version too much. Taking the Bible in by another sense, and hearing it read by another person other than yourself, can often bring things to your attention that you may not have noticed before.

Zondervan promotes a less precise and less readable Bible?

2007-09-20T15:14:00.000-07:00

This is, I see, post number 100 at TNIV Truth. I would like to celebrate this milestone by posting a link to a post by ElShaddai Edwards (yes, his real name), Gen-X Bible thumper seeks TNIV… In this ElShaddai endorses TNIV but regrets the limited choice of editions available, most of which seem to be targeted at the younger generation. He surmises that in the view of Zondervan, as someone just older than the target 18-34 age range,

Presumably, I should be using the less precise, less readable and less advanced, but more popular, uh… traditional, NIV.

Surely not! I am quite a bit older than ElShaddai and happily using TNIV, but then I am not as fussy as he is about the look and feel of my Bible. Indeed here in the UK none of us are as fussy as many Americans seem to be, partly because we don't have the chance - there are far fewer Bible editions available here, although still plenty of choice. But I share ElShaddai's frustration that Zondervan and others are continuing to promote NIV despite their claims that TNIV is better. If they really believe that TNIV is “more precise” and “reflects the most recent advances in biblical scholarship” (but this text is from an IBS site, not a Zondervan one), they should instead gradually phase out NIV, keeping just a few editions in print to satisfy continuing demand (and fulfil their Colorado Springs promise), and promote TNIV as their preferred Bible for all.

TNIV revision suggestions service ready

2007-09-18T16:58:00.000-07:00

There is now a service in the margin of this blog for accepting your suggestions for revisions for the TNIV. Please be as professional and gracious as possible when submitting suggestions. Please base your suggestions on sound biblical scholarship, translation theory, or your sense of proper literary English. Be sure to include the Bible book and verse reference for any wording you are discussing. Include only one verse per post. You may post suggestions as often as you like.

Before you post, check to see if the TNIV team has already addressed a concern that you have about a verse. If they have, do not submit your suggestion for that verse.

Avoid any suggestions about motivations for TNIV translation wordings.

Suggestions will be moderated. Suggestions which follow each of the submission guidelines will be forwarded to the TNIV CBT (Committee on Bible Translation).

The links for this service appear immediately below the daily TNIV Scripture verse in the blog margin.

Colossians

2007-09-16T22:13:00.000-07:00

New Testament scholar Scot McKnight has just posted Colossians on his Jesus Creed blog. Literally, he posted Colossians, the entire book. The Bible version he chose to post is the TNIV, which he likes to use, including in books he has authored (see the Bookshelf of this blog). A number of biblical scholars have been finding out how good the TNIV is.

I highly recommend his blog post. I have already commented on it. You might want to also.

Does this melt your heart?

2007-09-15T21:14:00.000-07:00

In several passages in the Old Testament there is a Biblical Hebrew idiom which literally refers to the heart of someone melting. For example, notice this TNIV translation of Is. 13:7:

Because of this, all hands will go limp,
every man’s heart will melt.

Now read the next English sentence which I could easily have uttered on four occasions:

When I first saw my newborn granddaughter in the hospital my heart melted.

The wording "my heart melted" is an English idiom. But it has a very different meaning from the Hebrew which refers to a heart melting.

I haven't fieldtested literal translations of the Hebrew idiom, but I suspect that many current English readers will assume that a wording in an English Bible referring to a heart melting means what I meant when I referred to my heart melting in the hospital nursery, namely, I felt in awe, very joyful, deeply touched.

The TNIV is a good translation. It has far fewer wording issues like this one, compared to some other English Bible versions. But it can be made even better. Fortunately, the CBT is a good group of biblical scholars who not only want the TNIV to be accurate but to have good English. I doubt that they would want misleading English which is what we have with a literal translation of the Hebrew idiom in Is. 13:7 and similar passages (e.g. Josh. 2:11).

I am compiling a list of problem wordings in the TNIV for the CBT. The CBT requests revision suggestions by the first of each year so that they can organize them for their annual meeting which is in the middle of the year. I invite you to send me your suggestions for improving the TNIV, and I will forward them to the CBT. I am also trying to make available a website facility where we can click on Bible reference buttons and enter our suggestions that way for the CBT so that they are easier for the revision team to access the material. I will keep you posted if and when that facility becomes available.

In the meantime, keep reading your TNIVs. It's a good translation. And I trust that your own heart will be moved, if not melted, as you read it. And when you come across a wording that you think could be better, let us know so that the TNIV can become even better.

Psalm 34:20 in the TNIV

2007-09-05T12:01:00.000-07:00

Ken Schenck blogged on the TNIV translation of Psalm 34:20 last year. It is still worth reading.

The Beauty Behind the Mask: Rediscovering the Books of the Bible

2007-09-02T10:14:00.000-07:00

That latest post at The Books of The Bible Blog notifies us of a new book, The Beauty Behind the Mask: Rediscovering the Books of the Bible, by Christopher R. Smith. This book gives background and rationale for The Books of the Bible, recently published by IBS, as described on amazon.com:

Christopher R. Smith is a member of the team that worked with the International Bible Society to develop this new edition. In this book, he traces the history and effects of the traditional elements that have shaped the customary presentation of the Scriptures. He describes how the new format was developed to help overcome these effects. And he explains how The Books of The Bible can be used effectively for personal devotions, group studies, sermon preparation and the other disciplines by which we apply the teachings of God's word to our lives. The Rev. Dr. Christopher R. Smith is pastor of the University Baptist Church of East Lansing, Michigan. He has a B.A. in literature from Harvard University, an M.A.T.S. in church history from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. in theology from Boston College. His articles have appeared in such publications as The Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, New Testament Studies, Novum Testamentum, and Vigilae Christianae.

I have added Smith's book to this blog's TNIV Bookshelf (right margin). I also pushed the 1-click button at amazon.com to order my own copy.

biker Bible

2007-08-31T11:11:00.000-07:00

Garin at scooterism.com has blogged on an edition of the TNIV for bikers. It is called Hope for the Highway.

TNIV, James Dobson and the Church of the Nazarene

2007-08-30T09:34:00.000-07:00

Dennis Bratcher has written an interesting article, from a Nazarene and Wesleyan perspective, reflecting on the controversy about TNIV and what lies behind it. The issue is clearly not quite as simple as that all Baptists and/or Calvinists are anti-TNIV, but the main opposition does seem to come from that direction.

To start with I was puzzled by the reference to

several high-profile members of the Church of the Nazarene ... openly and aggressively advocating ideas and theologies that are alien to the tradition of which they claim to be a part.

But I understood this when I discovered that (if Wikipedia is to be trusted here) James Dobson is a member of this church.

Hat tip: Henry Neufeld.

Adam did what?

2007-08-28T14:36:00.000-07:00

A recent post on the Coded for Worship blog asks: "Adam did what?" The blogger, Andy, compares the ESV and TNIV translations of Gen. 4:1:

I’ve decided to read through the Bible twice before the end of the year. Once for story’s sake with the TNIV. The second time to be a content-focused (more in-depth) reading using the ESV, the Bible version that I use 95% of the time. By the time I’d reached chapter 4 of Genesis, I began to think that I’d put the TNIV back on the shelf. I thought this because, as I took as sip of my coffee and started reading verse 1 of chapter 4, I stopped dead in my tracks.

Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain.
-Genesis 4:1 (TNIV)

Adam did what?! I mean, I know what Adam did (he knew Eve), but do you really have to tell me that they made love? Does it really need to be correctly stated that they consummated the first marriage in history? I’m sure there are entire papers written on both the defense and criticism of this one verse in this particular translation. I’m not going to add to that collection. But I will say this: I’m wondering if the TNIV is going to be worth my time.

Then again — I suppose that for someone who didn’t grow up in an area so heavily influenced by the Christian sub-culture that exists here in “the south,” reading the phrase “Adam knew his wife” might make about as much sense as a hearing kid asking his mom if he can help her “salt hay” in front of a skillet full of fried eggs.

The ESV translation of Gen. 4:1 is:

Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, "I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD."

I think that for most current speakers of English, the word "knew" communicates far less accurately what Adam did than does the wording of the TNIV. Another win for the TNIV!

Other bloggers on The Books of the Bible

2007-08-13T09:15:00.000-07:00

Some other bloggers have posted about the new Bible format, The Books of the Bible, which uses the TNIV text. Check out the following posts and comments on them:

Review of changes in the TNIV

2007-08-12T21:14:00.000-07:00

Suzanne McCarthy at Better Bibles Blog has posted a Review of changes in the TNIV. As she points out, many of the helpful revisions which make the TNIV more accurate than the NIV, which is/was already an accurate version, are not gender language related. Read Suzanne's post for specific examples of good revisions the TNIV makes to the NIV.

Psalm 23: The Bible Experience

2007-08-06T12:31:00.000-07:00

Zondervan has just emailed us with news of progress on the Old Testament of The Bible Experience, dramatized TNIV audio:

Hey guys! I’ve got some Old Testament tracks hot off the presses! You can use these on the various blogs etc. where you would like to. We actually got the first complete Bible TBE off of the boat last week, and it looks incredible to see it all done. In some ways it’s hard to believe it’s really done. And now the fun stuff begins: the promotions and introducing people to the world of the Bible in a fresh, new way!

Click here to listen to Psalm 23.

We've got some other OT TBE samples we can share, also, as time goes on.

Enjoy! And pass the word around that it will not be long (November 2007) before the entire Bible in TBE format will be available. It would make great Christmas or Hanukkah gifts -- hint, hint!

The Books of the Bible is shipping

2007-07-31T18:09:00.000-07:00

I just received email notice from the IBS (International Bible Society) that they have shipped my copy of the new format of the Bible, The Books of the Bible (TNIV). Unfortunately, I will not be home to receive it and report on it when it arrives. My wife and I are still with our daughter and her family, helping them after the birth of their daughter on July 13. We will be back home August 9, for a few days, and then off on another trip.

An odd quirk of gender neutral language

2007-07-27T11:46:00.001-07:00

Psalm 7:14 NIV: "He who is pregnant with evil ..."

Psalm 7:14 TNIV: "Those who are pregnant with evil ..."

Of course TNIV is right to be consistent in its gender language policy here. But by dropping the striking gender clash of NIV, which is in the original (one of only two places in the Hebrew Bible where the verb "be pregnant" is used in a masculine form, the other is Isaiah 33:11), TNIV seems to have lost something.

Actually there is an advantage of the TNIV reading here: it avoids the possible misunderstanding in NIV that this verse is still about God, the "he" of verses 12-13.

Philemon 6: TNIV improves on NIV

2007-07-25T03:57:00.000-07:00

Lingamish has looked at Philemon 6 and noted several inadequacies in the NIV rendering:

I pray that you may be active in sharing your faith, so that you will have a full understanding of every good thing we have in Christ.

As I commented there, there are substantial improvements in the TNIV version of this verse:

I pray that your partnership with us in the faith may be effective in deepening your understanding of every good thing we share for the sake of Christ.

NIV wrongly suggests that Philemon is not yet properly "sharing [his] faith" and that Paul is praying that he should do so. TNIV rightly clarifies that Philemon already has this.
NIV is often understood as referring to evangelism, at least when read by evangelical Christians for whom "sharing your faith" is jargon for evangelism. It is unclear to me whether the NIV translators really intended this verse to refer to evangelism, but it seems rather unlikely that this was Paul's meaning. And so TNIV is correct to avoid this evangelical jargon and use words which point to a more probable understanding of the Greek text.
NIV's "full understanding" goes beyond what the Greek text says, and suggests that we humans can aspire to completely understand matters which are surely beyond our full understanding. TNIV's "deepening your understanding" is much better.
NIV closes with a rather bland "we have in Christ", for a literal "(which is) in us into Christ". This is not even the regular "in Christ" phrase, so there is little excuse for using this difficult to understand wording. Also it fails to note that the Greek word en here probably means "among" rather than "in". The TNIV rendering "we share for the sake of Christ" seems to capture the main point far more clearly.

This verse is a good example of TNIV being substantially better than NIV, in ways unrelated to gender language. Since there is no possibility of NIV itself being revised, it really is time for publishing and marketing efforts to be put into TNIV rather than NIV so that improvements like these can be widely distributed to the Bible reading public.

TNIV on the iPhone

2007-07-19T19:09:00.000-07:00

Earlier today on This Lamp, I reviewed three different Bible applications for the iPhone. One of those applications is from 3onesix Ministry Tools. In my review, I noted that this app only accessed the NIV, in spite of the fact that it is based upon eBible which has multiple translations.

Well, evidently there's a little trick for accessing other translations, including the TNIV. Simply add a translation abbreviation as a prefix in the search field such as shown above.

This little trick works not only with the TNIV, but also the ESV, HCSB, KJV, NASB, NCV, NKJV and a few others.

Thanks goes to Tom Krush of 3onesix for this tip!

Youngblood on TNIV

2007-07-17T13:16:00.000-07:00

I have just got round to start reading the ETS papers to which Wayne provided a link on BBB nearly two weeks ago. The first of these papers, by Ronald Youngblood and entitled TRANSLATION VERSUS TRANSLITERATION: THE TRIUMPH OF CLARITY OVER OPACITY (direct link to the PDF), in fact dates from 2003, and is largely an explanation of some of the translation decisions in TNIV Old Testament, from a reasonably scholarly viewpoint, including a defence of singular "they". This is important reading for anyone who finds some TNIV renderings hard to accept.

Unfortunately the way in which this paper was prepared for electronic publication, by a poorly configured OCR scan, makes it rather difficult to read in places.

My apologies if this has been mentioned before on this blog. I seem to remember a mention of it, but I can't find it with a search.

Clay tablet proves TNIV correct!

2007-07-11T06:30:00.000-07:00

According to an article by The Times (London), an ancient clay tablet has provided evidence for the existence of a person named in the Bible - but only in NIV, TNIV and NLT, not in KJV, NAB or ESV, as mostly pointed out by Claude Mariottini. The tablet names Nebo-Sarsekim, an officer under Nebuchadnezzar, who is also named in Jeremiah 39:3, NIV and TNIV. For once we have clear and new archaeological evidence that TNIV is more accurate than ESV!

UPDATE 12th July: The Telegraph has more on this (thanks to Gary Hedrick for the link, note also, among others, my reply to him), including a photo of the tablet, and a complete translation in which Nebo-Sarsekim is called "the chief eunuch". This title ties up well with his Hebrew title rab-saris, "chief officer" in TNIV but saris generally if not always means "eunuch". This detail seems to me to confirm that this really is the same person with the same title. Also the date on the tablet, the tenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, is two years after Nebuchadnezzar first sacked the temple in Jerusalem and took all the gold from it, 2 Kings 24:13. So the gold mentioned in this tablet could well have been Nebo-Sarsekim's share of the spoil from Jerusalem.

TNIV revisions: CBT annual meeting

2007-07-08T13:33:00.000-07:00

The CBT has just finished its annual meeting to revise the TNIV. This time it was held in Gig Harbor, Washington. I was encouraged by these words which one of the CBT members emailed to me:

During our session, we considered many proposals, including quite a number that ___ ___ had passed on to us from you. You should be encouraged to know that we have adopted a number of your suggestions, while, in other cases, your flagging of a problem led us to consider another re-wording. Of course, many were not adopted -- but that is the case for all of us who make proposals!

I was also informed that it is easier for the CBT if suggestions for revisions for the TNIV are sent to them once per year, instead of at any time which is what I've been doing. They ask that proposals be submitted to them by January 1 to be considered at their annual meeting.

I am mulling over ideas for how we might be able to set up an Internet forum where TNIV revision suggestions could be posted, similar to how the NET Bible invites input. I would welcome your input for such a forum.

discovering the Bible for ourselves

2007-07-04T22:48:00.000-07:00

Glenn at IBS continues to blog about the Books of the Bible, a new format for the TNIV. Some (but probably not most who choose to buy this new format) will criticize IBS for taking out verse and chapter numbers. But Glenn argues that we need to discover the literary units and features of the Bible for ourselves:

What we do instead is explore literary signals. There are lots of things to look for: shifts in literary type, changes in topic, progression in plot, and, very importantly, key repeated phrases at literary seams. Because most of us have not been encouraged to read whole books of the Bible, nor to read them as literature, we are not used to paying attention to these things.

Reading whole books of the Bible to find out what the big picture is! Now that sounds like something my friend Mike Sangrey has been saying for years. And Mike and Glenn are both right. We need to move beyond proof-texting usage of Bible verses. We need to move beyond using just a few verses, or even a single verse, to "support" some claim. We need to seriously study the biblical text. There is a lot to discover in it.

I'm looking forward to getting my copy of the Books of the Bible.

TNIV at eBible.com

2007-07-03T10:51:00.000-07:00

The TNIV, and the NIV, are now available at eBible.com. See also the eBible blog, which has also recently announced blog scripture reference tools for Blogger and for WordPress.

Books of the Bible pre-ordered

2007-07-01T16:12:00.000-07:00

A couple of posts ago I blogged about a new format for the TNIV, which should enable people to read the Bible in more appropriate literary segments.

Pre-publication orders for the new format can now be made. I just pre-ordered a copy with a sage cover (because I want to be wise!).

embedded meaning

2007-06-29T12:02:00.000-07:00

In Luke 11:7 the man whose friend wants to borrow bread from him says in the NIV:

Don't bother me. The door is already locked, and my children are with me in bed. I can't get up and give you anything.

It is revised in the TNIV to:

Don’t bother me. The door is already locked, and my children and I are in bed. I can’t get up and give you anything.

I consider this another example of an improvement of the TNIV over the NIV. The NIV is "literally" accurate, but to many readers today its wording can connote something along the lines of a Michael Jackson pajama party with children. And that was not what was going on in the setting of this story. In those days there was a common bed for poor families.

The NIV and translations like it which translate the Greek here literally communicate wrong connotation. And that is inaccurate translation. The TNIV communicates the essentials of the scene accurately and does not invite an unintended inference of a father's incestuous abuse of his children.

Motives and Bible translation

2007-06-28T14:45:00.000-07:00

A Friend of Christ questions whether it has been right to question the motives of those who have translated the TNIV and ESV.

He concludes:

I think it's time we stop questioning the motives of those who want to bring us the Word, and look at the translations for what they are. Otherwise, we're not just hurting ourselves, but others as well. We who study this sort of thing need to be able to be objective in our recommendations, and not reject certain translations because we question the motives of the fallible people who made them.

I agree.

innovative TNIV format

2007-06-24T16:10:00.001-07:00

Today Michael Hanegan blogged about a new format for publication of the TNIV:

Check out this new exciting project from the International Bible Society!! It’s called “The Books of the Bible” and it features the entire text of the TNIV in a more theologically and chronologically sensitive order without chapter or verse numbers, footnotes, or multiple columns. Basically they want you to just read and pay attention to the Bible.

In the new format, the books of the Old Testament (called the First Testament in the new format) are grouped in a similar way to the traditional three sections of the Hebrew Bible, but the sections are now labeled as "Covenant History" (which includes not only the Hebrew Torah, but also the "former prophets", Joshua-Kings), "The Prophets," and "The Writings." The order of books within a section, however, differ from their order in the Hebrew Bible. The IBS format emphasizes chronology for its arrangement of the books. It does so also for the books of the New Testament.

The Books of the Bible will display the biblical text in a single column format, which I prefer.

Several books of the Bible in the new format are available now as free pdf downloads.

According to IBS, the new format will be available for purchase in August 2007. It can be pre-ordered after July 1 at the IBS phone order (1-800-524-1588) or online.

Click here to read more about the Books of the Bible. I plan to pre-order a copy.

eBible.com adds TNIV

2007-06-21T11:00:00.000-07:00

eBible.com has added TNIV to its Bible search engine. This is good news, as more and more Bible search engines include the TNIV. I think it shows that the truth about the TNIV is gaining ground against the well-intentioned, but misinformed, attacks on the TNIV.

Is anything now impossible for God?

2007-06-18T04:19:00.000-07:00

Chris Brauns argues that there are things which God cannot do. I'm not sure he has got this quite right - see my comment. Part of my argument is from Luke 1:37, which in NIV reads:

For nothing is impossible with God.

But in TNIV this verse has been changed to:

For no word from God will ever fail.

Why the change? Is it justified? The main issue is apparently with the Greek rema, which usually means "word" but sometimes, and especially in Luke's writings (also 1:65, 2:15,19,51; Acts 5:32, 10:37) has a weaker meaning "thing, happening, affair". So the NIV interpretation can certainly be jusitified. But then in Luke 1:38, 2:17,29,50, 5:5, 7:1, 9:45×2, 18:34, 20:26, 24:8,11; Acts 2:14, 5:20, 6:11,13, 10:22,44, 11:14,16, 13:42, 16:38, 26:25, 28:25 rema clearly refers to spoken words. It is most telling that 1:38 in the sense of spoken words immediately follows the ambiguous 1:37, although there must be a rapid shift in sense in 2:15,17,19 and 2:50,51.

The slight problem I see with the TNIV interpretation is that adunateo would normally mean "be impossible" rather than "fail". In fact this verb is found elsewhere in the New Testament only in Matthew 17:20, but the related adjective adunatos is more common. The meaning is almost always "impossible", although in Acts 14:8 and Romans 15:1 it means more like "weak, powerless".

So, literally the verse is "With God every word/matter will not be impossible". I would take this to mean something like "Nothing that God says he will do will be impossible for him to carry out". And the TNIV rendering effectively says the same thing.

But, lest anyone think that TNIV is weakening God by denying that he can do all things, that he is almighty, see Matthew 19:26 TNIV:

... with God all things are possible.

Generic "man" being misunderstood

2007-06-15T10:29:00.000-07:00

I have just posted at Better Bibles Blog on how generic "man" in NIV and other translations is being misunderstood. I concluded my post with:

The sooner IBS and Zondervan phase out NIV and replace it by TNIV, the better.

Important Articles to Read

2007-06-11T22:58:00.001-07:00

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.

TNIV XL customer reviews

2007-06-07T12:26:00.000-07:00

The amazon.com customer reviews of the TNIV XL (larger print) edition from Zondervan are interesting. I found them helpful.

large print TNIV

2007-06-06T15:31:00.000-07:00

I am in my mid-50s and my eyes are finding it more and more difficult to read small to medium font sizes. I have a pocket edition of the TNIV. Its print is far too small for comfortable reading. I have a hardback TNIV printed by Zondervan. It's about the size of a pew Bible. I also have a TNIV Study Bible. Both seem to use the same size print, less than 7 points, I believe. That, also, is too small for my eyes. I cannot read the text comfortably in either edition.

So I researched large print TNIV editions. There is a TNIV XL thinline edition which has a 9.6 point font which Zondervan calls "larger print". But their "larger print" is smaller than large print in many other Bibles. Then Rick Mansfield told me about a large print TNIV available from IBS, the copyright holder of the TNIV. I ordered it.

IBS ships by FedEx Ground. The Bible left the IBS warehouse in Colorado Springs, CO, on Monday afternoon, June 4. It was scheduled to arrive tomorrow, but got to me a day early. Finally, I have a TNIV with a print size that is comfortable for my eyes! From my comparisons with printouts at 10, 11, and 12 point sizes, the IBS large print is between 10 and 11 points in size.

Some of you may be like me, visually challenged, or at least visually challenged at this stage of life. My optometrist has told me I have "presbyoptic" eyes. He knew I was a linguist and enjoyed using that word with me. Anyway, for those of you who need larger print, I'll describe the TNIV edition which I received today.

The cover is attractive, a conservative, two-tone brown. The binding looks sturdy. This Bible easily lies open on a flat surface.

The font used is either Arial or a font very close to Arial, the same sans serif font I have seen in all TNIV Bibles, including those published by Zondervans.

The page format is two-column. With the larger print there are not very many words per line of print. In the poetic books average line length seems to be about 5 words. That's too few for me; I find so few words per line to be a distraction for smooth reading. I would prefer a one-column format for smoother reading.

There is no red print in this edition from IBS. Hurray! My eyes find it difficult to focus on red print in Bibles. The red of shimmers before my eyes and my eyes get stressed reading it. (How do publishers get a color to shimmer?!) I really don't need to see the words of Christ in red.

Pagination in the IBS large print edition does not match pagination of any other TNIV edition that I have. But pagination does match among several other TNIV editions, just not the ones I have.

Paper thickness seems fine in the IBS large print Bible. It feels more like a good quality book paper, thicker than thinner paper often used in Bibles. The paper in the IBS Bible has a glossy, smooth finish on it. The paper used in this IBS edition has a harder surface than the paper used in the TNIV hardback Bible I have published by Zondervan. The color of the IBS Bible paper is a creamier white than the white used for the pages of the TNIV Study Bible. The contrast between the black print and the background white is comfortable, not too highly contrastive as found in some books which use whiter paper.

I think my eyes might be able to read the TNIV XL Larger Print thinline Bible which is printed at 1 point less than that of the IBS Bible I received today. But I'm not sure. The proof of the pudding is in the ..., hmm, seeing? And it's not easy to locate a bookstore nearby where the TNIV XL is stocked to be able to see it for myself. Would any of you like to photocopy a page from a TNIV XL Bible and mail it to me?

CBT member on Shema post & comments

2007-06-04T08:13:00.000-07:00

One of the oldest members of the NIV/TNIV Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) has responded to our post on the Shema and comments on the post. Here is his response, speaking as an individual, not for the CBT as a whole:

"Chemo head" has been so severe the past few weeks that I have been incapacitated. Today, hopefully, I can make some sense.

I cannot now respond to every item raised in your blog and the responses, but in general I must observe that the critics , at least the worst of them, show a serious deficiency in their understanding of the Hebrew (its idioms, and how it works), and in their understanding of the social system that developed the Hebrew language and which that language served. As for this latter, ancient Israel was not a community created by a large/small group of individuals through economic and political action. It was rather a community generated organically (family->clan->tribe->people).For that reason the people could be called/named after its patriarchal ancestor, and was so called/named regularly. When such was addressed by its progentor's name, it was both the community itself that was addressed collectively and its members destributively at the same time. And the language reflects that.

Allow me to work through the shema' in detail, with brief annotations. This will show how the language works: how the collective (and generic) [which is implicitly distributive also] can be and is referred to in pronouns and verb forms with either the singular or the plural without any difference in meaning.--the shema' is not a catechism of the individual, as "anon" claims, but is expressly (and grammaticaly) addressed to "Israel" (the people with whom Yahweh made covenant at Sinai), which is the antecedent of the pronouns (both independent and as integrated with the verbal forms) throughout the shema'. That is to say, here the pronouns, mostly singular but sometimes plural, refer to the people of Israel, collectively and/or distributively at the same time. This will be demonstrated by also adding some of the following narrative, where the same language is continued.

4 Hear (m.s.impv), ISRAEL (prop. n., m. s. col), Yahweh our (1st pl: Israel) God, Yahweh is one [see also the possible alternatives]. 5You (m.s.: Israel--all and each, and similarly in what follows) are to love Yahweh your (m.s.) God with all your (m.s.) heart and with all your (m.s.) nephesh and with all your (m.s.) might / strength / power. 6And these words/commands which I command you (m.s.) today are to be on your (m.s.) heart. 7And you (m.s.) are to recite them to your (m.s.) children and you (m.s.) are to speak of them when you (m.s.) are in your (m.s.) houses (pl. according the Mas. pointing) and when you are walking on the way (s. abstract generic ), and when you (m.s.) are lying down and when you (m.s.) are rising up. 8And you (m.s.) are to tie them for a sign on your (m.s.) hand/arms (pl. according to Mas. pointing), and they are to be philactories (pl) between your (m.s.) eyes. 9And you are to write them on the doorposts of your (m.s. ) houses (pl. according to Mas. pointing) and on your (m.s.) gates [pl.--city gates?].

10And it shall be when Yahweh your (m.s.) God brings you (m.s.) to the land which he swore to your (m.s.) fathers (pl), to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, to give to you (m.s.), great and pleasant cities (pl.) which you (m.s.) did not build, 11and houses (pl.) filled with all (s. col.) [kinds of] good (s. col.) [things] which you (m.s.) did not fill and (already) dug wells/cisterns (pl.) which you (m.s.) did not dig, vineyards (pl.) and olive groves (pl.) which you (m.s.) did not plant, and you (m.s.) eat and you (m.s.) are satisfied, 12guard (m.s.) yourself (m.s.) lest you (m.s.) forget Yahweh who brought you (m.s.) out of the land of Egypt, from the house (s.) of bondage (pl.). 13Yahweh your (m.s.) God you (m.s.) are to fear and him you (m.s.) are to serve and in his name you (m.s.) are to swear (your oaths). 14You (m.pl.) are not to go after other gods from the gods of the peoples who are all around you (m.pl.), 15for a jealous God is Yahweh your (m.s.) God who is in your (m.s.) midst, lest the anger of Yahweh your (m.s.) God flare up against you (m.s.) and he destroy you (m.s.) from the face of the ground. 16You (m.pl.) are not to tempt Yahweh your (m.pl.) God as you (m.pl.) tempted him as Massah. 17Be sure to keep (m.pl) the commands of Yahweh your (m.pl.) God and his statutes and decrees he commanded you (m.s.).

Note carefully all the annotations. One cannot read Hebrew forms/idioms as if they were English. Clearly, throughout this typical piece of Hebrew text, ISRAEL, the people delivered out of Egypt and covenanted with at Sinai is the community addressed (collectively and distributively), the people who constitute a community generated from their patriarchal ancestors, not created (through economic and/or political action) by a group (large or small) of individuals. That is what translators have to honor. FOR THAT REASON, RENDERING THE SINGULAR PRONOUNS AND VERBS WITH PLURALS IN ENGLISH THROUGHOUT SUCH PASSAGES IS ACCURATE TRANSLATION.

Many other matters could be addressed: the Hebrew use of the conjunctive waw, the Hebrew use of nephesh (as well as our modern uses of "soul" as in "heart and soul" or "body and soul" or "heart, soul, mind and strength," etc.), but I do not have the strength for it now.

The Bible Experience: New Testament is the 2007 Audio Book of the Year

2007-06-02T12:51:00.000-07:00

The Bible Experience, a dramatized recording of the TNIV, has taken top honors at this year's Audie Awards. (The Audies are to audio books what the Grammys are to music.)

Five years ago, Zondervan's NIV Audio Bible won an Audie in the inspirational category, but this year, the Audio Publishers Association named The Bible Experience the best of the best—in any category.

Congratulations, Zondervan and Inspired By. This is exciting news for the TNIV.

complementarian TNIV

2007-06-02T07:56:00.000-07:00

The TNIV has been criticized as being an egalitarian and/or feminist Bible. One wonders how closely those making this accusation have actually read the TNIV. If you are a complementarian and wish to teach about complementarianism from the Bible, you can teach that from the TNIV as you would from any other version of the Bible. (And if you are an egalitarian, be sure to read the final paragraphs of this post.) Following is a post (with minor modifications) that I blogged some time ago on the Better Bibles Blog. I will add a few comments at the end, referencing the complementarian writing of Doug Moo, the current chairman of the CBT. which revised the NIV to become the TNIV.

Complementarians believe that men and women are of equal value, but complement each other with different God-appointed roles in the home and church. (Egalitarians believe that women and men are of equal value and can have the same roles in the home and church.) Are you a complementarian? Did you know that you can teach complementarianism from the TNIV, just as you can from another Bible version such as the ESV? This may surprise some complementarians who have attacked the TNIV, calling it a feminist Bible, a Bible for "feminazis", a Bible "soft" on biblical manhood and womanhood, a Bible that "neuters" masculinity, and boycotting it in Christian bookstores.

Let's examine what the TNIV actually says to see if it can be used to teach complementarianism. We'll compare what the TNIV says to the ESV. Some complementarians claim that the ESV promotes a biblical view of manhood and womanhood while the TNIV does not. Following are some key tenets of complementarianism, with Bible passages typically used to support them:

1. A husband is the head of his wife (Eph. 5:23):

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. (TNIV)

For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. (ESV)

The TNIV and ESV teach headship of the husband identically in Eph. 5:23.

In 1 Cor. 11:3 the TNIV actually translates about headship of a woman more strongly than does the ESV:

But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (TNIV)

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. (ESV)

The TNIV translates the Greek words gunaikos and aner of this verse as "woman" and "man," respectively. This is more literal and a broader (stronger) translation than the ESV which translates these Greek words as "wife" and "husband," respectively. The more restrictive translation of "[the head] of the wife is her husband" is footnoted in the TNIV but not found in the translated text itself.

2. A wife is to submit to her husband as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22):

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. (TNIV)

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. (ESV)

The TNIV and ESV teach the same thing about submission.

3. Woman is the glory of man (1 Cor. 11:7):

A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (TNIV)

For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. (ESV)

The TNIV and ESV not only have identical teaching in this verse, but identical wordings of "but woman is the glory of man."

4. Women are to be silent in church (1 Cor. 14:34-35):

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (TNIV)

the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. (ESV)

Again, the teaching is identical between the TNIV and ESV, and the wordings are nearly so. Neither is stronger than the other in what it states.

5. Women are not to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to teach men (1 Tim. 2:12):

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. (TNIV)

I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. (ESV)

Again, the meaning of the translation wordings from these two versions is identical, as far as I can tell. I don't sense a significant difference in meaning between the two wordings "assume authority" or "exercise authority." Dr. Wayne Grudem, however, does consider there to be a significant difference between these two wordings. He says that

the TNIV adopts a highly suspect and novel translation that gives the egalitarian side everything they have wanted for years in a Bible translation. It reads, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man” (italics added). If churches adopt this translation, the debate over women's roles in the church will be over, because women pastors and elders can just say, “I’m not assuming authority on my own initiative; it was given to me by the other pastors and elders.” Therefore any woman could be a pastor or elder so long as she does not take it upon herself to “assume authority.”

The TNIV and ESV both make it clear that Jesus was a male, not some androgynous human. Both versions refer to God with masculine pronouns. Both versions retain the biblical language text wording of God the Father, rather than as generic God the Parent.

As far as I know, those who accuse the TNIV of being a feminist translation or being influenced by feminism cannot support that claim from how passages traditionally used to teach complementarianism are worded. The TNIV is an accurate translation and does not deserve the criticism it has received from its opponents. It does not deserve to be boycotted by Christian booksellers who seem to believe its critics rather than being Bereans (Acts 17:11) who study the Bible (or any translation of it) carefully for themselves to find out if what people claim about it are true or not.

UPDATE: Dr. Wayne Grudem, probably the most vocal critic of the TNIV, has written:

The TNIV in particular has changed the translation of many of the key passages regarding women in the church, and I would find it almost impossible to teach a Biblical “complementarian” view of the role of women in the church from the TNIV.

But complementarianism can be taught from the TNIV just as egalitarianism can be. Both viewpoints can be taught from any English Bible version. I do not know what Dr. Grudem is referring to when he says that the "TNIV in particular has changed the translation of many of the key passages regarding women in the church." I would like to see a list of such verses and an explanation for how their translation has been changed from other Bible versions.

I disagree with Dr. Grudem's claim about the TNIV. I suspect that the complementarians on the TNIV translation committee would disagree also, starting with its chairman, Doug Moo, who has written an article defending complementarianism. It appears in the anthology Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood which may be downloaded for free from the complementarian CBMW website. Other authors in the anthology include, among others, Dr. Grudem, his co-author, Dr. Poythress, with whom he has written a book against the TNIV, Thom Schreiner, and D.A. Carson.

Does the TNIV slant the teachings of the Bible toward egalitarianism or feminism, as its critics claim? No, it does not. But a claim of a feminist bias in the TNIV, repeated often enough, is believed by many who do not study something carefully enough themselves. This blog attempts to set the record straight and tell the truth about the TNIV.

Now, if you are an egalitarian, I hope you were able to read all the way through this post without feeling betrayed by the TNIV. Because another truth about the TNIV, or any other Bible version for that matter, is that you can teach egalitarism from the Bible, if that is your belief, just as you can teach complementarianism from the Bible. The Bible is simply the Bible. We come to it, we read it, we attempt to understand it, we interpret it, often trying to be fair but sometimes bringing our own presuppositions to the sacred text, we draw conclusions from what we read in the Bible. And yet, throughout the centuries of Bible study and scholarship humans have drawn different conclusions from the Bible. This is normal. We are humans, trying to understand a text which was not written as a systematic theological textbook. It was not written to definitively solve all the difficult theological questions. We humans want definitive solutions. We crave systematic and categorical answers.

If you give the TNIV a fair hearing (or reading), you should find that it teaches biblical truth as well as any other Bible version, and more accurately and clearly than many.

flaming arrows of death

2007-05-30T07:42:00.000-07:00

Josh Tinley likes the wording "flaming arrows of death" in the TNIV, Prov. 26:18-19:

Like a maniac shooting flaming arrows of death is one who deceives a neighbor and says, “I was only joking!”

Josh prefers that crisp metaphor over the wordings in the NIV:

Like a madman shooting firebrands or deadly arrows is a man who deceives his neighbor and says, “I was only joking!”

and NRSV:

Like a maniac who shoots deadly firebrands and arrows, so is one who deceives a neighbor and says, “I am only joking!”

It's nice to see that the TNIV not only updated some of the language of the NIV to be more current, but also made some revisions like this which are more effective from a literary standpoint.

TNIV Reference Bible: THICK It Is! [UPDATED*]

2007-05-29T12:45:00.000-07:00

Last week, I wrote a post titled, "TNIV Reference Bible: Thick or Thin?" In that post I pointed out that we did not know whether or not the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible would be a standard reference Bible or a thinline reference Bible. Personally, I did not want a thinline for a number of reasons, and I felt like most of you who are interested in this Bible felt the same way. I asked you for your opinions in the comments and you gave them.

And then we waited...

Well I've been given authority to tell you that around mid-day today, the powers-that-be at Zondervan made an official decision. They made the decision to change the paper in this Bible to a heavier weight--specifically one more suitable for writing notes! I'm drawing from two sources here, but one says that the paper is indeed heavier than what was originally planned, which was already heavier than the standard thinlines produced by Zondervan. My other source gave me some specifics: the TNIV Reference Bible will use a 39 GSM TerCoat Plus Paper stock. If you want to get a feel for this paper's thickness, go check out the Archaeological Study Bible (best-selling study Bible in the marketplace in 2006) which basically uses the same stock.

Of course, this is extremely good news! Here are a few of other little tidbits:

Because of the change in paper stock, the list price goes up from $29.99 to $34.99.

The thickness will be approximately 1.25 inches.

The downside is that the change in paper means a delay in delivery. Rather than a September/October release date, realistically, we'll be looking more realistically at December.

I imagine that I speak for a lot of folks when I say the extra $5 is not a problem, nor is the extra wait. I believe most of us would rather wait a couple of extra months and get a quality Bible, all things considered.

Based on the specs we've already seen and the information about the paper weight revealed today, I can fully endorse the TNIV Reference Bible as THE edition for pastors, teachers, and other serious students of the Bible to use--at least until that wide-margin edition comes out one day :-)

I know that I'll look forward to using one of these Bibles myself for teaching and preaching.

*UPDATE: I just got further good news about this Bible from Zondervan. In addition to the thicker paper mentioned above, the TNIV Reference Bible will, in fact, feature a smyth-sewn binding!

Translation Philosophy

2007-05-29T07:55:00.000-07:00

As I continue to read articles and books and listen to debates and read my ESV and read my TNIV, etc., this issue doesn't bother me a whole lot. I like a variety of types of translations: formal equivalent OR functional equivalent OR balanced/mediating as Dr. Kenneth Barker would call the NIV/TNIV. I see great strengths in each.

I wonder how much of our background affects our approach. I'm 36 years old. When the full TNIV was released, I was 34 - right at the tail end of their target audience. I've always lived in the Midwest. While I only have a handful of college credits under my belt, I was academically gifted throughout school.

Thus, I've never had much problem reading a KJV, for example. So as I approach this subject, I have no problem reading an ESV and knowing who the intended audience is, genderly speaking. I know when male pronouns are applying to the whole human race. I don't mind a formal equivalent translation.

However, I can't say I'm having a lot of problems with gender-accurate translations such as the TNIV and the NLT so far either. I listen to both sides and see their points. Some points are better than others.

How much of our background and our personality affects our ability to form an objective conclusion on this issue? I'm not saying an objection conclusion isn't attainable. Indeed, I think mine's objective. But why do I come out differently than theological heros of mine such as Grudem or Sproul, et al? They're objective too, aren't they? I can think of two possibilities:

Either they or I have better data to form a more informed conclusion.
Either they or I are allowing subjective things or outside pressures to slant our conclusion.

When it comes to non-formal equivalent translations, people (notice the gender-accurate word people) appear to like them or not like them. People (there I go again) are not indifferent on this issue. Wayne Grudem is one of the more respected and outspoken people against the TNIV. But Wayne Grudem is not too hip on non-formal equivalence.

In commenting on Grudem's book The TNIV and the Gender-Neutral Controversy, one person stated in a book review at Amazon.com

Grudem fears that the TNIV will grow in popularity and that his beloved NIV may fade in popularity.

I don't think this person is too familiar with Grudem. Beloved is too strong a word for Grudem in regard to the NIV as far as I can tell. After listing many problems he has with functionally equivalent translated verses, Grudem writes in a co-authored book Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation . . .

When I look at examples like these I know I cannot teach theology or ethics classes using a dynamic equivalence translation . . .Although the NIV is not a thoroughly dynamic equivalence translation, there is so much dynamic equivalence influence in the NIV that I cannot teach theology or ethics from it either. I tried it for one semester several years ago, shortly after the NIV first came out, and I gave it up after a few weeks . . . Nor can I preach from a dynamic equivalence translation . . . Nor can I teach from an adult Bible class at my church using a dynamic equivalence translation without checking the original at every verse . . . Nor can I lead our home fellowship group using a dynamic equivalence translation . . . Nor would I ever want to memorize passages from a dynamic equivalence translation.

Though I bought the book, you can read it yourself for free here so that you can see I did not leave out anything that changes Grudem's meaning as I skipped over portions.

Grudem reads functional equivalent translations as commentaries only (see the link above to the book). His Systematic Theology has memory verses. In the chapters, he uses the RSV for the memory verses (a predecessor to the ESV . . . though his book has been revised since I bought it and my guess is it uses the ESV now), and the NASB & NIV at the end of the book for the memory verses.

His personality and background, it would seem, give him a disposition against functional equivalence. So of course he will not agree with the TNIV. We should hear his arguments. But if his translation philosophy doesn't even give a hearty thumbs up to the NIV, can we expect any better with the gender accurate TNIV?

It seems to me the bottom line might be people who prefer formal equivalent versions are not for the TNIV while people who don't mind non-formal equivalent versions don't have serious problems with the TNIV.

So what causes a person to prefer formal over non-formal and vice versa? Does our age, our extent of education, our geographical location, and our function in life (or ministerial calling) affect our conclusion on this?

I don't think one of those things by itself makes the decision. But a combination might slant us more in one direction than the other. Does growing up in the Midwest give a slight different bent for me than someone growing up in the New England area? What about your function in life? Does one person whose function is being a theology professor at a seminary have a different effect on them than the person reaching out to minister to a postmodern society or to junior and senior high students? Does it make a difference if you were born in 1951, 1971 (me), or 1991?

What causes a person to prefer formal equivalence only? Or am I making a category mistake by asking what what causes the cause? Or is this thought of translational philosophy and its relation to one's conclusion of the TNIV not accurate? Are there people that are pro-functional equivalence that are still anti-TNIV?

Skeptic becomes sold on TNIV

2007-05-28T14:45:00.000-07:00

Kristy has been Frustrated by Bibles. She's been searching for a version she could trust and feel comfortable with. She blogs:

One of my problems lately has been an over-awareness of translation. I could feel the interpretation of the translators working under the surface of the text, and it made me skeptical. How could I be sure that the translator hadn't been fidgeting with the meaning of the text? I knew this was a problem, and I wanted to make sure that I could trust as much as possible whatever version I bought.
On a whim, I decided to investigate the TNIV. I heard horrible things about it, but I wanted to make sure it was as bad as I heard. To my surprise, of all the translations that I had read, it was the one that made me feel the least skeptical. I really have no idea why that was. I started reading Luke, and I looked up and found myself at chapter four, sucked into the story. I was surprised, but I was sold, so I skipped off to Borders to claim a copy.

Read the rest of her post to find what happened.

Pentecost Sunday reading

2007-05-27T15:32:00.001-07:00

1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem Godfearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?” (Acts 2:1-12, TNIV)

Doctrine and the TNIV: monotheism

2007-05-26T07:50:00.001-07:00

This is the first in a series of posts I plan to write to evaluate whether or not the TNIV accurately translates passages in the Bible which teach doctrines considered important by many faith communities.

The belief that there is only one God is central to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Monotheism is emphasized in the Shema of the Hebrew Bible. The Shema has been memorized and recited by Jews for millennia. Jesus summarizes the Shema in the two greatest commandments that he speaks of, as recorded in the New Testament (Mark 12:29-31).

The full liturgical recitation of the Shema includes three passages:

the Shema proper: (Deut. 6:4-9)
Vehayah (Deut. 11:13-21)
Vaiyomer (Numbers 15:37-41)

In this post we will only evaluate the TNIV in its translation of the core prayer of the Shema, Deut. 6:4-9:

4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6. These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. 7. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.

Here is the NIV wording from which the TNIV was revised:

4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6.These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.

The TNIV and NIV wordings are nearly identical. Did you spot the revision? TNIV verse 6 ends with "on your hearts" while NIV ends with "upon your hearts". I sense no meaning difference between "on" and "upon" in this context. If you considered the NIV rendering of the Shema accurate, the TNIV wording is as well.

Both versions footnote verse 4 whose Hebrew can be accurately translated in more than one way. The TNV footnote reads:

Or The LORD our God is one LORD; or The LORD is our God, the LORD is one; or The LORD is our God, the LORD alone

The NIV footnote is identical to that of the TNIV.

The TNIV translation of the Shema compares favorably with that of the Jewish scholars who translated the Tanakh, the most recent (1985) revision of the Hebrew Bible produced by the Jewish Publication Society:

4. Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone. 5. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. 6. Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day. 7. Impress them upon your children. Recite them when you stay at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you get up. 8. Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead; 9. inscribe them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.

Verse 4 differs slightly, reflecting the various ways its Hebrew can be translated. Like the NIV and TNIV, the Tanakh footnotes this verse to give an alternate translation:

Others "The LORD our God, the LORD is one."

The wording in this footnote is identical to the translation in the text of the TNIV.

The NASB has often been promoted as the most accurate English Bible translation. Note how close its wording is to that of the TNIV:

4. Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! 5. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. 6. These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. 7. You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up. 8. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. 9. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.

The only major difference I can see between the NASB wording and that of the TNIV is that in verse 7 the NASB has "sons" being taught rather than "children." The Hebrew root here is ben which in the plural can refer to either male children or both male and female children, depending on the context. The context of this verse does not tell tell us whether all children or only sons were to be taught. So either "sons" or "children" can be considered accurate translation. The majority of English Bible versions I have checked translate those being taught in Deut. 6:7 as "children", including Coverdale, Bishop's, Geneva, KJV, ERV, ASV, RSV, Smith-Goodspeed, Beck, REB, NAB, NJB, JPS, NJPS, NIV, TNIV, NKJV, NRSV, WEB, ESV, New Life Version, TEV (GNT), CEV, NLT, GW, NCV, NET, Christian Community Bible, The Message, HCSB, ISV. Versions I have found which have "sons" are Wycliffe (1395), NASB, NWT, Alter, Darby, Young's Literal, Farrar.

In the past few years the ESV has been promoted by some as a more accurate translation than the TNIV, especially with regard to gendered language in the biblical texts. Some of the most vocal critics of the TNIV served on the ESV translation committee. Here is how the ESV translates the Shema:

4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. 6. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. 7. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. 8. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. 9. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.

The ESV wording is essentially identical to that of the TNIV. There are minor word differences but none that reflects any meaning difference. Note that the ESV, which is promoted by its advocates as more accurate than the TNIV with regard to gendered language, translates those who are taught in verse 7 as "children," the same gender-inclusive word as in the TNIV and most other English versions, not gender-exclusive "sons."

I conclude that the TNIV is an accurate translation of one of the most important passages of the Bible, the Shema, which emphasizes monotheism, total devotion to God, and the need to teach the commandments of God to our children.

Shabat shalom.

Preacher chooses the TNIV

2007-05-25T08:32:00.000-07:00

Jay Davis has settled on using the TNIV as the Bible he preaches from. Click here to read his blog post about his decision.

A Bible-shaped Hole

2007-05-24T20:25:00.000-07:00

Gary Zimmerli, of A Friend of Christ blog, has A Bible-shaped Hole. Read his post to find out what he's been missing.

TNIV Reference Bible: Thick or Thin?

2007-05-22T11:06:00.000-07:00

A lot of us are excited about the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible. Some want to use this Bible to teach or preach from. Others simply want a quality TNIV in an edition with readable print and a cover that doesn't call attention to itself. We've been told that the Bible will measure 6.25" x 9.25"

But how thick is it?

This is something that Zondervan hasn't told us. Is the TNIV Reference Bible going to be a Bible with standard thickness with Bible paper at least at a weight we can scribble an occasional annotation, or is it going to be a thinline with paper too thin for any reasonable amount of handwritten notes?

Consider some numbers for a moment. A lot of us who wanted a decent looking TNIV for public use have bought the TNIV Thinline Bible XL which according to the Zondervan website is 1248 pages and 1.2" thick.

So what if the TNIV Reference Bible is only 1" thick? At 1408 pages, that would mean that the printers would have to use thinner paper in the Reference Bible than what's already used in the Thinline XL.

In my own experience with the XL, the anecdotal information I've heard from others, and from the reviews I've read on Amazon.com, everyone seems to complain that the paper in the Thinline Bible XL is too thin.

So what would you think if I told you the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible is a thinline and there's a possibility that paper even thinner than that in the Thinline XL would have to be used?

I should state up front that NO ONE has told me this is the actual case. So far Zondervan has not released information regarding the thickness of the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible, and I cannot find any definite information yet.

Earlier today, I was in a bookstore and I looked at a leather-bound TNIV College Devotional Bible (not for me--I was just looking). Now it is listed as being over 1600 pages, and it is 1.7" thick. It's definitely not a thinline, the paper is not too thin, and I imagine it would be fine to write on. At the same time, this Bible is neither too thick nor too bulky. In fact, as far as leather Bibles go, I thought its thickness was just right.

So at 1408 pages, why can't the upcoming TNIV Reference Bible also be a non-thinline somewhere between 1.5" to 1.7" thick? I'd like to know your opinion. I'd like to open up this post as a bit of an informal poll. We aren't going to have anything in the sidebar, simply your discussion in the comments. Try to answer the question along these options as best as you can:

• I do not want the TNIV Reference Bible to be a thinline. Why?

• I'd really like the TNIV Reference Bible to be a thinline. Why?

• Although I plan on buying this Bible, I really don't care whether it's a thinline or not. Why?

Please be polite and constructive in your comments. This Bible, as far as I know, has not yet gone to press, so maybe there's still room for some influence. I would also like to limit discussion in the comments to the topic at hand, so if you have no interest in this Bible, please refrain from posting.

But for those of you who want a copy of the TNIV Reference Bible, what do you think?

An Androgynous Jesus?

2007-05-21T13:23:00.000-07:00

Another powerful argument made against the TNIV is that it presents an androgynous Jesus!

an•drog•y•nous \an-ˈdrä-jə-nəs\ adjective

[Latin androgynus hermaphrodite, from Greek androgynos, from andr- + gynē woman — more at queen]

(1651)

1 : having the characteristics or nature of both male and female

2 a : neither specifically feminine nor masculine 〈the androgynous pronoun them〉

b : suitable to or for either sex 〈androgynous clothing〉

3 : having traditional male and female roles obscured or reversed 〈an androgynous marriage〉

— an•drog•y•ny \-nē\ noun

Merriam-Webster, Inc. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. 10th ed. Springfield, Mass., U.S.A.: Merriam-Webster, 1996, c1993.

This is a serious charge that should cause any Evangelical to have a double take towards the TNIV. However, just because one of your favorite Evangelical teachers may make this claim, don't take it for granted. Be a Berean. Don't let that teacher be your protestant pope!

Joe, give an example. Sure, again I will use Dr. Wayne Grudem. Why do I keep picking on him? Because he is one of the most respected names that has set himself up as an opponent to the TNIV. He is the type of person that I would be more likely to walk away saying Well, if Dr. Grudem says so, it must be so and never end up doing the research for myself. Dr. Grudem writes . . .

VERSE: Hebrews 2:17

NIV Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.

TNIV Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.

CHANGE IN MEANING: Did Jesus have to become like his sisters "in every way" in order to become a "high priest in service to God"? All the OT priests were men, and surely the high priest was only a man. This text does not quite proclaim an androgynous Jesus (who was both male and female), but it surely leaves open a wide door for misunderstanding, and almost invites misunderstanding. Meditate on that phrase “in every way” and see if you can trust the TNIV.

Let's drop the TNIV! Right? Hang on. Not so fast. First of all, let's apply the rule never read a Bible verse, and look at a whole paragraph.

Hebrews 2:14-18 (Today's New International Version)

Today's New International Version (TNIV)
© Copyright 2001, 2005 by International Bible Society

14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. 16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. 17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

A good test to see if there truly is a gender problem is to perform the paraphrase test. Every time we see the word man, or brothers or whatever gender word is in question, substitute the word male(s) and see if the text makes sense or if it appears the word means something more inclusive. You can do this with any verse in question.

The key in the Hebrews 2 passage is in verse 14 . . . Jesus is sharing our humanity. Notice also in verse 14 the word children. That's not a TNIV gender "neutral" choice either. Even the ESV has children in verse 14.

This passage is referring to the essential doctrine of the incarnation. Jesus was made 100% human. Dr. Grudem is reading way too much into this. The point of the writer of Hebrews wasn't that Jesus was made fully male, it was that Jesus was made fully human. The passage is a contrast to angels. Even Grudem himself acknowledges this outside of the context of speaking on the TNIV . . .

Jesus had to become a man, not an angel, because God was concerned with saving men, not with saving angels. But to do this he “had to” be made like us in every way, so that he might become “the propitiation” for us, the sacrifice that is an acceptable substitute for us. Though this idea will be discussed more fully in chapter 27, on the atonement, it is important here to realize that unless Christ was fully man, he could not have died to pay the penalty for man’s sins. He could not have been a substitute sacrifice for us.

Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology : An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994), 540.

Point being that while Grudem uses the word man, he's using it in contrast to angels. The emphasis in Grudem's paragraph above being that Jesus was fully human, not that he was fully male. It's clear when Grudem states God was concerned with saving men, not angels. Does Grudem mean only males? Of course not. Grudem believes Jesus was a substitute for both men and women. But once the discussion is turned towards the TNIV, Grudem takes man to mean male, not humanity.

For fun, perform the paraphrase test on Grudem's paragraph. Substitute male for man, and males for men, every time and see if you think that is what Grudem really wants to communicate. I'm serious. Stop and do that test right now on the above quote.

Secondly, does every always mean every? Of course it does, Joe! Not really. When the waitress (or waiter) asks is everything okay? do they (notice my use of the singular they) literally mean everything? No, of course not. They mean everything in regard to the restaurant: the meal, the restrooms, the environment, etc. They aren't inquiring how your job is going and how the kids are doing at school, etc.

Same thing here. Even if we limit it to just males, Jesus isn't like each of us males in every way if we take that in the most wooden literal way we can take it. I'm 5'8", about 200 lbs give-or-take, an ISTJ, married, father of biological children, not Jewish, not a carpenter . . . Jesus is not like me in every way. But he became fully human, just like me.

I'm sure even Grudem knows every doesn't always mean every in the most wooden literal way possible every time it's used.

I love your work, Dr. Grudem. Please reconsider your position on the TNIV.

Changing he/him/his/himself TO they/them/their/themselves

2007-05-20T02:52:00.000-07:00

One problem members of The Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood have with the TNIV is that the TNIV several times translates singular pronouns such as he/him/his/himself into plural forms such as they/them/their/themselves in order to avoid masculine gender. They state that the TNIV inaccurately translates that way some 217 times in the New Testament where the verb in Greek is singular and there is a masculine third person pronoun. The same substitutions are made an additional 159 times according to their study when the antecedent in English is singular.

I will not dispute their stats. I don't doubt the Greek is singular and that the TNIV is translated in the plural those times. If I understand the basic complaint with it, other than changing a masculine singular into a neuter plural, is that readers might miss personal application in some passages by mistakenly taking such passages to be applicable to a group setting. Take for example Wayne Grudem's comment on Revelation 3:20 . . .

VERSE: Revelation 3:20

NIV: I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

TNIV (2005): I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with them, and they with me.

CHANGE IN MEANING: The idea of Christ coming into an individual person's life is lost; Christ no longer eats with “him” but with “them.” Readers may well understand “them” to refer to the plural group “those whom I love” in the previous verse, so the TNIV now pictures Christ coming into a church and eating among a group of people. The clear teaching on individual fellowship with Christ is blurred.

I like Wayne Grudem. But I think he's overstating his case. I looked up these plural pronouns in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th ed. MW allows for this translation of the TNIV . . .

usage They, their, them, themselves: English lacks a common-gender third person singular pronoun that can be used to refer to indefinite pronouns (as everyone, anyone, someone). Writers and speakers have supplied this lack by using the plural pronouns 〈and every one to rest themselves betake —Shakespeare〉〈I would have everybody marry if they can do it properly —Jane Austen〉〈it is too hideous for anyone in their senses to buy —W. H. Auden〉. The plural pronouns have also been put to use as pronouns of indefinite number to refer to singular nouns that stand for many persons 〈’tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o’erhear the speech —Shakespeare〉〈a person can’t help their birth —W. M. Thackeray〉〈no man goes to battle to be killed. — But they do get killed —G. B. Shaw〉. The use of they, their, them, and themselves as pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number is well established in speech and writing, even in literary and formal contexts. This gives you the option of using the plural pronouns where you think they sound best, and of using the singular pronouns (as he, she, he or she, and their inflected forms) where you think they sound best.

Merriam-Webster, Inc. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. 10th ed. Springfield, Mass., U.S.A.: Merriam-Webster, 1996, c1993.

This is the way people in the 21st century speak. I was born in 1971. As far back as I can remember, people have been using these plural pronouns in reference to individuals. It's the course that English has gone. If an antecedent is singular, the plural pronoun is acceptable in the consequent or predicate or what have you.

Besides it being acceptable English in the 21st century and thus an exceptable translation, the Bible has cases even in formal translating where a plural referent is meant to be applied on an individual basis. Take the Beatitudes (from the ESV - the preferred translation of the CBMW) - emphases mine . . .

³“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

⁴“Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

⁵“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

⁶“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.

⁷“Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

⁸“Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

⁹“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

¹⁰“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

The Holy Bible : English Standard Version. (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), Mt 5:3.

Should we conclude that none of these are applicable on an individual basis but only in a group setting because of the use of they and theirs? I don't think so and you probably don't either (and I doubt Dr. Grudem does either).

Now while I think the TNIV did fine in Revelation 3:20, I'm not saying every time is perfect. Revelation 3:20 was fine to me because the antecedent was singular which interprets them and they as singular also in the context based on MW. In Matthew 10:24, I think the TNIV could have represented the singular more clearly. Here is the NIV . . .

²⁴“A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.

The Holy Bible : New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, c1984), Mt 10:24.

And here is the TNIV trying to remove the masculine term his . . .

24 "Students are not above their teacher, nor servants above their master."

The subject and predicate are both plural in the TNIV. I don't know why they didn't do something like this. . .

A student is not above their teacher, nor a servant above their master.

This would have done away with a masculine gendered pronoun in a teaching that obviously applies to women also, yet it would have retained some of the singleness of the Greek by basically doing the same thing that was done in Revelation 3:20, i.e. having a singular antecedent. The NRSV and the NLT handled it more the way I just suggested by removing the pronoun and replacing it with a definite article . . .

24 “A student is not greater than the teacher. A servant is not greater than the master.

NLT

24 “A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master;

NRSV

The Message (which doesn't even pretend to be a translation - it's an extreme paraphrase) made one feminine and one masculine . . .

24 “A student doesn’t get a better desk than her teacher. A laborer doesn’t make more money than his boss.

I would recommend that option the least. Because surely students can be male and laborers can be female, correct? And sometimes laborers do make more than the boss. Eugene Peterson could have done better on this. But let's not sidetrack . . .

However, even with the TNIV as is, I don't see any grievous crime. Whether students and servants are represented singularly or in the plural, no theology is changed by the TNIV's rendering of Matthew 10:24. I don't see any change in meaning whether we have one laborer or multiple laborers or one student or multiple students. Perhaps in other passages, theology is changed. I have yet to run across that and I would be glad to look at any that you may think change theology by doing so. I don't think Grudem's comments on Revelation 3:20 are convincing.

Bottom line . . .

Be informed.
Look at the issue -- from both sides.
Both sides have multiple people who are Bible believing conservatives and complementarians (people who hold to traditional roles of men & women).
Don't make a reactionary/hasty conclusion.
Don't accuse either side of bad motives.

Sometimes, such as in Revelation 3:20, I think the TNIV translation is fine and will not be misunderstood. Sometimes it isn't as good as it could be, such as in Matthew 10:24. In no case have I yet seen something that gives me reason to make a lot of noise of concern as if this Bible is leading us down some road of feminism or anything anti-Evangelical.

Maybe that will change. If so, I need to hear better arguments from those who have problems with the TNIV. Meanwhile, I will keep carrying around the TNIV along with my ESV (and my NIV, NASB, KJV & NKJV) as I listen to pastors and read through the Bible and compare how the TNIV reads and what impact all these points make or do not make.

Greetings from Joe

2007-05-18T16:55:00.000-07:00

I am the new co-blogger at TNIV Truth. Thank you to Wayne and the guys for inviting me to the party. A little about myself . . .

I am not a linguist like Wayne. I am not a Greek scholar. In fact, I am a high school graduate. My English skills are decent, though I'm sure an English professor could point out numerous problems in my writings. My comprehension skills are decent (I think).

I know how to use Greek tools pretty well. The average Christian possesses usually a Strong's Concordance and perhaps a Vine's Expository dictionary of one kind or another. I own several introductions to Greek and intermediate texts in book, audio, and video formats and have gone through them to varying degrees. I own several Greek texts including multiple versions of the Textus Receptus, the Nestle-Aland 27th, the United Bible Society's 4th, Westcott & Hort, and one version of the Majority text.

I have Kittel's ten volume Theological Dictionary of the New Testament and Kittel's one volume abridged edition, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament by Harris, Archer, & Waltke, and a few other miscellaneous items.

I use all of these tools often. I probably know enough to be dangerous, but not authoritative.

With that ground work laid, on the one hand, don't take what I say for granted. Be a Bearen and check it out. Please verify what I say and check to see if it corresponds with reality. On the other hand, don't cast off what I say and think to yourself this guy is simply an unschooled, ordinary man. While I am that, that's not a good enough reason to dismiss any comments I make.

I work in secular employment for the electric utility for the West suburbs of Chicago all the way to the Iowa border. I help get the lights on when they go off. I've been married since 1992. I have three kids: one daughter (1995) and two sons (1999 & 2002). I'm a Chicago Cubs fan, so I know what it is to suffer. I was born the first time in 1971, the second time in 1986.

In regard to the translation issue: I used to be a Textus Receptus Only adherent, meaning I would use only the KJV or NKJV. That was until the mid 90's. I basically argued like a KJV Only advocate but I thought the NKJV was good too because its New Testament is based off the Textus Receptus. So, as you can see, I've come a long way from where I was. Some think for worse, I think for the better.

Looking forward to sharing at this blog. Grace & peace to you.

Welcome, Joe!

2007-05-18T08:39:00.000-07:00

We welcome Joe Myzia as another blogger for TNIV Truth. Joe has been blogging about the TNIV on his own blog, Blaugmenting Your Christian Worldview as well as commenting on posts here at the TNIV Truth blog. He has agreed to blog about the TNIV here, as well.

TNIV Bookshelf

2007-05-17T07:55:00.000-07:00

As a complete translation, the TNIV is only a couple of years old. That's still infancy stage in the life of a major translation of the Bible. Nevertheless, we're already starting to see a number of new books being published that use the TNIV as a default/primary translation. Some of these are scholarly and some are popular. And at least one so far extends a bit outside the boundaries of the "Evangelical" world.

Wayne has highlighted some of these books in the sidebar of this blog, and we're calling it the TNIV Bookshelf.

So far, the following books are in our list:

An Introduction to the New Testament by D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo

The Writings of St. Paul, 2nd ed. by Wayne A. Meeks & John T. Fitzgerald

How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stewart

Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church by D. A. Carson [this book was released before the publication of the entire TNIV, so only NT references use the TNIV as its base]

Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality by Rob Bell

Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell

Just Walk Across the Room by BIll Hybels

The Deity Formerly Known as God by Jarrett Stevens

Peppermint-Filled Piñatas by Eric Michael Bryant

We're confident this list will grow and hopefully the TNIV will eventually supplant the NIV as the nearly default translation for most writers and publishers. In the meantime, if you spot a book using the TNIV as a primary translation, please let us know so that we can include it in our list.

The new TNIV.com is live...

2007-05-16T20:26:00.000-07:00

The new (and much improved) TNIV.com went live today...

The new site is a great improvement over the old one. It's well designed and easy to navigate. Here are some examples of what you'll find:

Passage comparisons (under "About TNIV")
An up-to-date list of endorsements (under "Who's Reading It")
Product details (under, surprisingly, "Product Details")
An online, searchable edition of the TNIV (under "Experience It")

As with almost all new sites, there may be a few bugs still to be worked out. But on the whole, the site looks and works great. Check it out.