Featured Is it time to "update" the NIV?

I would say de-update it and go back to 1984.

 

No, though the current edition has to tighten up some things --reverting back to the 1984 edition would be a retro-step.

 

Take a look at two threads I started yesterday on that very topic.

 

Would be making it better though!

 

The 1984 edition was the best of the more dynamic translation types, but the 2011 degraded that!

 

While your pastor preachers from the 2020NIV, which translation do you use?

 

LOL. If the owners of the copyright fixed the NIV to the word of God . . . .

 

Sinful balderdash above.

 

The NIV has never been in that category. You know that.

 

I disagree, NIV has always been considered dynamic equivalent.

 

By the uninformed.

 

I guess several different undergrad courses I took are uninformed then?

 

Both readings are not true, John 13:2, "was in progress," versus "was ended." One reading is the word of God the other is a falsehood. Prove "was ended" is the falsehood. It is the oldest and more difficult reading as well as 99.5% of the manuscript support it.

 

The NIV described itself that way.

 

No, in fact it does not. Read the preface. There is no mention of it being a dynamic, or functionally equivalent translation. It is a mediating translation, the same middle ground that the NET, CSB and the NABRE occupy.

 

There is no humor in saying that the NIV is not the Word of God. You are being sinful to say such a thing.

 

Exactly

 

LEB and GW have taking place
CEB has sharing the evening meal
Mounce has During the evening meal
The NABRE, NASB, ESV, NRSV and WEB all have during supper
The NIV and NET have the evening meal was in progress