The 2011 NIV

Those who translated it did NOT adhere to inerrancy of the scriptures, not in the sense of those on the Commitees for either NASV/NIV versions, andit is the truth that it went extreme in the areas of "gender bias" in Bible, more so than NIV 2011, and that it is the preferred version for those holding tocritical moden liberal scholarship...

My pastor completed his PHD in NT theology, wrote on the trinity, and found out that the NRSV was the version of choice in NT studies for today!

 

There's actually really nothing "liberal" about the translation. That opinion is held over from the backlash against the RSV.

 

Conservative Bible scholar D.A.Carson,whom I esteem very highly, said in a review long ago that the NRSV is "a jolly good translation."

 

I wonder why freeatlast will not state which bible version he uses?

 

Good post.

 

Is that all ya got? One guy who tears down the NIV to promote his own Bible translation and another that casts negative motivations on any translator whose translation philosophy differs from the translators of his favorite versions - as if he personally knows each and every one of them.

1. Liberals do not believe in the inerrancy and authority of the Bible
2. Liberals do no believe in the deity of Jesus - at least the ones I know don't.

Let's see how the NIV translators handle these in their own words - the preface of the NIV.

We can clearly see that the NIV translators were not liberal nor is the NIV made for liberals. So far, you have swung and missed three times. In baseball terms - You're Out :smilewinkgrin:

 

Would totally agree with Dr Carson, my only comment on the NRSV was that the translator behind it held to a "less than" view on ineranncy/infallibility as contrasted with those on both NSV/NIV, and that it is really into "gender bias" being"eliminated' in the Bible. more so than either TNIV/NIV 2011!