Any one else think the Niv 2011 went to far in gender Inclusive language in revision?

[Rippon]

This easier to read or "readability" is a bunch of bunk.

You want to be a cheerleader for awkward,cumbersome,archaic and non-standard English versions to be the ideal?

 

[saturneptune]

You want to be a cheerleader for awkward,cumbersome,archaic and non-standard English versions to be the ideal?

I am sure that was not the message he is trying to convey to you. Then again, you never get the message or concept correctly. There is nothing wrong with someone who reads the KJV. It works. You are just as guilty as the KJOV people by trying to cram your ideas down others throats. Why dont you mind your own business.

 

[Rippon]

This easier to read or "readability" is a bunch of bunk.

Do you think that the current NIV is an easy read? If so,on that basis,is it worthy of being dismissed out of hand?

Have you ever read the NLT? It's less difficult to read than the NIV.

Have you ever read the NIrV? It uses very simple language.

All three serve their purposes. The audience of the NIV is the most wide-spread. But the NLT is catching up. The NIrV is very useful for young children and ESL people. All three bring the Good News to people. These translations should not be despised because their reading level is not as high as some of the more form-oriented versions.

 

[go2church]

Uh, yes it does

 

[Revmitchell]

If any of them are difficult to read I suggest you go back to kindergarten and start all over again learning how to read. This readability thing has been blown way out of proportion. It is completely ridiculous.

 

[mactx]

This readability thing has been blown way out of proportion. It is completely ridiculous.

Agreed.
This issue is not the scripture is too difficult (in KJV or whatever) but that people do not take the time needed to learn to read comprehensively.
Add to that the tendency to take 1 verse or a snippet of 1 verse and make it the rule for a thing and you get chaos among God's church.

 

[Oldtimer]

If any of them are difficult to read I suggest you go back to kindergarten and start all over again learning how to read. This readability thing has been blown way out of proportion. It is completely ridiculous.

AMEN to that, Brother.

Especially in this age when few bother to pick up any version of the Bible to actually read and study God's word. Way back in my ancient history college days, I learned a valuable lesson about learning to read.

Class: English literature.
Subject: Chaucer

During classes in Old & Middle English literature, the professor would call on students stand and read aloud passages from assigned studies. Example, chosen at random.

The Knight's Tale
But for to tellen yow of his array,
His hors were goode, but he was nat gay.
Of fustian he wered a gypon
Al bismotered with his habergeon,
For he was late ycome from his viage,
And wente for to doon his pilgrymage.
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/canttales/knight/

To make a passing grade in his class the following scripture applied.

2 Tim 2: KJB
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Just as it applies to reading and understanding the Bible -- again, any version. STUDY is the keyword! Additionally, people will STUDY what interests them the most. Woodworking, for example, is filled with words that are not in common usage. Cooking is filled with words with subtle meanings. The list can go on. These two should be enough to make the point.

This readability thing has been blown way out of proportion.

Closing note. As mentioned before, my father could not read or write. Yet, he had a good understanding of God's word. He was called home in 1981. I doubt he ever heard scriptures from any version other than the KJB. IMO, "readability" is an EXCUSE often used to cover much from being lazy to trying to make a profit. (Some valid exceptions noted.)

 

[saturneptune]

This individual is destructive in all subjects he posts. In this particular case, it seems to me we should be thankful we have the Word of the Lord period, instead of making unedifying remarks about various versions. There are just some people on this earth if God made ten million dollars appear on their door step, would demand ten billion, then complain about the taxes taken out.

 

[Rippon]

If any of them are difficult to read I suggest you go back to kindergarten and start all over again learning how to read. This readability thing has been blown way out of proportion. It is completely ridiculous.

RM: You didn't address anything that I had posted. Specifically,what is it you have against what I said in my last post? Go line by line if you have to.

 

[Rippon]

Closing note. As mentioned before, my father could not read or write. Yet, he had a good understanding of God's word. He was called home in 1981. I doubt he ever heard scriptures from any version other than the KJB. IMO, "readability" is an EXCUSE often used to cover much from being lazy to trying to make a profit. (Some valid exceptions noted.)

And the valid exceptions invalid your laziness and profit-driven accusations.

 

[Revmitchell]

RM: You didn't address anything that I had posted. Specifically,what is it you have against what I said in my last post? Go line by line if you have to.

I didn't have any intention in addressing your post. I do not care. The whole claim for language readability is useless.

 

[saturneptune]

I didn't have any intention in addressing your post. I do not care. The who claim for language readability is useless.

Yes, it misses the whole point. Well, his claim to language readability and the substance of his posts have something in common: useless

 

[Rippon]

I didn't have any intention in addressing your post. I do not care. The [sic]who [sic]claim for language readability is useless.

Hmm...LOL!

 

[Oldtimer]

And the valid exceptions invalid your laziness and profit-driven accusations.

????

I'm sorry, I may not have had enough coffee this morning. Your reply doesn't make sense.

Neither does it address the key point made in the portion that you chose not to quote.

Prove that there are NOT people who are too lazy to read their Bible, regardless of version. Advance rebuttal: Ever notice near pristine Bibles that are faithfully carried to church each Sunday for years? Vivid contrast to those that are falling apart from signs of considerable usage.

Prove that profit is NOT one of the motives for introducing "new and improved" to generate further sales. Especially with for-profit major publishing houses. The very ones who can afford the overhead needed to send new editions to the presses every few years.

That said, neither of those items, in your reply, address the core of the rebuttal points presented in response to the line of thought resulting from the following statement:

You said: "You want to be a cheerleader for awkward,cumbersome,archaic and non-standard English versions to be the ideal?"

 

[Oldtimer]

You want to be a cheerleader for awkward,cumbersome,archaic and non-standard English versions to be the ideal?

Last reply, brought focus again on this statement. Especially the highlighted words.

I thought this whole issue of the ever increasing flow of new Bible versions is due to the premise that English isn't "standard". That, instead, it is ever changing and evolving as time passes. Thus, new editions/versions/translations are needed to keep up current speech patterns and definitions.

Older versions become "awkward, cumbersome, and archaic due to the fluid nature of the English language. Thus a "standard English" Bible version cannot be be published for longevity. Much like computer hardware and software. Much like buying a new car. They are obsolete or nearly so at the time of purchase because a better "standard" will be on the market in a few months.

 

[Yeshua1]

Keeping women out of leadership is actually capitulating to culture, nit the other way around. Culture of the day treated women as property, Jesus said women are free. Paul did too, but temporarily said learn (which was so radical for the day) quietly for now, not forever.

the mandate to have male headship/leadership in the church for the roles of pastor/elder NOT culture drivem for that applies for all cultures and times!

 

[Yeshua1]

Then Paul is contradicting himself. In Timothy he says be quiet but in Romans commends Phoebe and Junia, an apostle and a deacon.

actually, Phoebe was a deaconess, and that position was NOT seen as being one of spiritual authority/leadership in the church, as that was reserved for role of pastor/elder/overseer, and those were to be godly men!

junia is NOT translation except in the Niv as being a female Apsotle, all other MV see Junia as being either a man, or else a female who was with the Apsotles, but NOT an Apostle herself1

This is good point to show feminism creeping into the Niv 2011!

 

[Revmitchell]

actually, Phoebe was a deaconess, and that position was NOT seen as being one of spiritual authority/leadership in the church, as that was reserved for role of pastor/elder/overseer, and those were to be godly men!

junia is NOT translation except in the Niv as being a female Apsotle, all other MV see Junia as being either a man, or else a female who was with the Apsotles, but NOT an Apostle herself1

This is good point to show feminism creeping into the Niv 2011!

Deacons are not a spiritual authority or leader in the church either, according to scripture.

 

[Yeshua1]

Do you think that the current NIV is an easy read? If so,on that basis,is it worthy of being dismissed out of hand?

Have you ever read the NLT? It's less difficult to read than the NIV.

Have you ever read the NIrV? It uses very simple language.

All three serve their purposes. The audience of the NIV is the most wide-spread. But the NLT is catching up. The NIrV is very useful for young children and ESL people. All three bring the Good News to people. These translations should not be despised because their reading level is not as high as some of the more form-oriented versions.

the HCSB/Esv read about same as the niv, and both would be superior to use for serious studies, while both the nasb/Nkjv are not impossible to read and use foe serious studies!

problem basically is the church has had a spiritual 'dumbing down" as oreagrding biblical liiteracy!

 

[Yeshua1]

Deacons are not a spiritual authority or leader in the church either, according to scripture.

true, and was trying to sow our friend that the bible does NOT support female leadership, and that is NOT culturally based, but universal!