Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Gender-neutral NIV | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 32485 | ||
Did you know? "Today's New International Version" - gender-neutral version America's best-selling modern Bible is being issued in a gender-neutral version BIRMINGHAM, January 28 -- The International Bible Society says it will update America's best-selling modern language Bible to make fewer gender distinctions. Biblical conservatives including the Nashville-based Southern Baptist Convention have criticized the idea. References to God and Jesus won't be changed. An example given was changing Matthew chapter 5, verse 9 to "children of God" instead of "sons of God." The New Testament of the latest version goes on sale in April with the full Bible including Old Testament books expected by 2005. The society said Monday its original "New International Version," first published in 1978, will remain on the market. That translation has sold more than 150 million copies worldwide. The new Bible will be called "Today's New International Version." Publisher Zondervan of Grand Rapid, Michigan, holds North American rights to both versions. (http://www1.msnbc.com/local/wvtm/nbcat8911wc.asp) |
||||||
2 | Gender-neutral NIV | Bible general Archive 1 | Makarios | 32498 | ||
Greetings again, Kalos, My question is, will the TNIV be any different from the New International Version, Inclusive Language Edition (NIVI, 1995)? The NIVI was released in Britian but it was taken off the shelves in the U.S. due to the widespread reaction of outrage from evangelicals. Two excellent books that I would like to recommend that deal with the Inclusive Language Debate are: 1) "Distorting Scripture: The challenge of Bible Translation and Gender Accuracy" by Mark L. Strauss 2) "The Inclusive-Language Debate" by D.A. Carson Both books are available through InterVarsity Press. I own both of them, and they are sitting here on my desk, next to my King James Version Only Debate books.. To define what a gender-inclusive version is, it is a translation that seeks to avoid masculine terminology when the original author was referring to members of both sexes. The New Revised Standard Version is widely accepted and adheres to this translation philosophy. However, I feel most comfortable reading from translations that specifically do not take such measures into account. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
3 | Gender-neutral NIV | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 32500 | ||
Makarios, is the New Revised Standard Version really all that popular and widely accepted, particularly among the more conservative evangelicals? I have no hard facts to go on regarding the NRSV, but it is my thinking that some of the more liberal persuasions do use it, but most of the conservatives do not. Do you or does anyone happen to have sales figures on this and other well-known translations? Which seem to be gaining ground and which losing? And finally, can anyone produce a single cogent reason why we need yet another gender-neutral translation, of all things? --Hank | ||||||
4 | Gender-neutral NIV | Bible general Archive 1 | Makarios | 32568 | ||
Greetings, Hank! If one would like to gain a better perspective on the influence of the NRSV, then simply go to http://www.ncccusa.org/newbtu/aboutnrs.html and you can see just who is using it and where. Amongst Evangelicals, the NRSV remains far distant in percentage of use from, say the KJV, the NIV and the NKJV. I would not say that the NRSV can be considered as a "failure" since many in the Catholic circles and in other distinctive congregations have embraced this version as their own. However, I do not believe that one can accurately gauge whether or not a translation is "winning" or "losing" unless they base their gauge upon time and endurance. In both categories, the KJV remains the most venerable of them all, while the NIV has become the up and coming leader in sales of all of the Bibles in the English language. However, the NASB and the NKJV do have a good following, and they have rightfully gained their solid reputations. I've looked for a chart to gauge longevity and sales, but I haven't found such a chart as of yet. When I do, I will post it here. However, I would be willing to go on record saying that the Bibles translations that are 'gaining' the most ground are the NIV, the NKJV, and the NASB with the recent release of the Zondervan NASB Study Bible. The KJV has always been a steady force as far as sales go, and it believe that it will continue to be so for a very long time yet. The NRSV is supported by its own Concordance, own Bible Dictionary (by HarperCollins), and it has a few Study Bibles to its name, including the Oxford Annotated Study Bible and the HarperCollins Study Bible. So the NRSV is by no means "dead" or "failed." Since there has been "evidence" that the NRSV hasn't been a total failure, then why do we need another wishy washy gender-neutral translation? I asked myself that same question. And the reason that I have come to is that Bible translators see this great market of Protestant Evangelicals who mainly use the NIV, the KJV, the NKJV or the NASB, which are all pretty precise and accurate AND do not use gender-inclusive language! So I believe that they see this as an opportunity to make a profit. However, when the translators say that they are making the Bible "more precise" by making it more 'gender neutral', then I disagree with them. I do not believe that if a Bible translation committee goes and translates an English Bible (NIV), and go at it again and produce another volume based on a special "bent" (TNIV or NIVI), then the second work is no greater than the first, which should stand alone, since it was written without any special or enhanced "precision." I trust the Lockman Foundation, and I will stick with my NASB and ESV. In fact, I may get rid of all of my NIVs just out of my shock and displeasure. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||