End of TNIV?

[Psalm 95]

So, it seems that even the translators of the TNIV has some problems with it. A new update of the NIV will result in the ending of the TNIV.

I have read very little in the TNIV myself, so I do not have an opinion on this, other than that I look forward to an updeted NIV.

http://theologica.blogspot.com/2009/09/zondervan-taking-tniv-off-market.html

 

[Johnv]

The NIV is quite a classic translation, and they jumped the gun with the TNIV. The language updates in the TNIV were not necessarily consistent with widespread English usage. On short, they went for a linguistic revolution rather than linguistic evolution. However, there has been significant change in the use of English since the original NIV, so a revision to the existing NIV is warranted. Such minor revisions are necessary from time to time as the English language continues to evolve. I look forward to the 2011 revision of the NIV.

 

[EdSutton]

End of TNIV??

Could be, apparently.

Although I doubt that this will affect the NIV all that much, just as the TNIV didn't make much of an impression on this version, despite the hype.

I have noted before (and usually been ignored) that there are reasons why versions such as the GEN, KJV, NKJV, and NIV have a significant impact on English Bible usage, while other versions do not have anywhere near this impact, even though the linguistics may appear equal to each, at a glance or even at a detailed analysis.

Why is that??

Could it be that just maybe the Holy Spirit sees something in some versions that we don't?

Call this new revision what you will, I personally don't see any permanent effect to NIV, on any widespread basis. However, this revision could prove the effective death-knell for the TNIV, just as the ASV of 1901 proved the effective death-knell for the RV of 1881.

Ed

 

[Rippon]

I read a bunch of blogs on the subject as a result of the news Psalm 95 broke.

As a TNIV fan I am disappointed. But I knew Zondervan wasn't exactly helping with the marketing of the TNIV. Something was up.

The updated 2011 NIV won't be much different than the TNIV in my estimation. The TNIV New Testament had just changed 6% of the NIV text. I can't see the 2011 taking steps backward. The TNIV is an improvement of the NIV.

As this news starts to settle in I will at this point still use the TNIV as my main text with an assist from the NLTse.

I do look forward to the 2011, but feel bad that the TNIV was thrown under the bus needlessly.

TNIV critics (largely ESVO folks)are probably whooping-it-up now.They will think they scored a major victory. But the lies and deliberate misinformation that they spewed about the TNIV will not be forgotten.

 

[Rippon]

Although I doubt that this will affect the NIV all that much, just as the TNIV didn't make much of an impression on this version, despite the hype.

What hype? It takes marketing to make hype. The marketing of the TNIV was less than lackluster. The hype behind the ESV however...

 

[preachinjesus]

lol...I was heading to this forum to post a link up on this issue.

I used the TNIV as my reference text while working through my final semester of Greek exegesis. It is helpful but I found it to be lacking at parts. The whole gender-neutral thing is just another part of the issue.

The version has been universally panned and not widely accepted. In terms of publishing it has been a failure when compared to other new translations debuted in the same period. I think a lot of that has to do with the gender neutral controversy.

I'm glad they have decided to update the translation (hopefully they'll address the participles they so often neglected) and give us something truly dynamic and foundational for this century. I'm hopeful.

That said I do want to comment about the gender neutral controversy: I think it was pretty overblown. Having read the articles on both sides and seeing who was pushing what perspetives I honestly only disagreed with maybe five or six decisions in the New Testament translation. Too often when teaching/preaching I automatically explain the text in a gender neutral fashion when I encounter terms like "adelphio" or an anartharous "anthropos." I feel the gender neutral perspective (on both sides) really pushed this conversation beyond where it needed to go, but it was healthy.

In actuality this really is a good example of the market working itself out.

 

[preachinjesus]

What hype? It takes marketing to make hype. The marketing of the TNIV was less than lackluster. The hype behind the ESV however...

Part of this comes from Zondervan pulling its punches on marketting due to the fervor created by so many gender-neutral opponents. It also didn't help that Lifeway yanked the TNIV. That really did hurt Zondervan with this translation.

IMHO, publishers of the Bible need to on cautious ground. Zondervan pushed a political/theological issue a bit too hard. Now getting guys like Doug Moo and DA Carson (I think) to endorse the version was huge...but the rhetoric from the far right hurt them with the people in the pew (and they're the ones that matter anyhoo.)

As for the ESV...lol...there is a great article in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society comparing translations (I believe the ESV is in there) and how at many points the ESV is actually more functional than the NIV. Pretty good stuff.

It is all about the big mo though...and it helps to give Mark Driscoll a dumptruck full of Bible to hand out :thumbs:

 

[Rippon]

Call this new revision what you will, I personally don't see any permanent effect to NIV, on any widespread basis.

Calling Language Cop. Attention please."I don't see any permanent effect to NIV" is in need of some adjustment.

However, this revision could prove the effective death-knell for the TNIV,

Duh. Well of course. The TNIV will no longer be published. That will certainly be terminal.

 

[Rippon]

there are reasons why versions such as the GEN, KJV, NKJV, and NIV have a significant impact on English Bible usage, while other versions do not have anywhere near this impact,

Why is that??

Could it be that just maybe the Holy Spirit sees something in some versions that we don't?

the ASV of 1901 proved the effective death-knell for the RV of 1881.

So the Holy Spirit didn't approve of the ERV and ASV since they are not in common use?

 

[TomVols]

As for the ESV...lol...there is a great article in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society comparing translations (I believe the ESV is in there) and how at many points the ESV is actually more functional than the NIV. Pretty good stuff.

Actually, I remember that article being just the opposite. Seemed that the ETS article did not approve much of the ESV.

 

[Chessic]

Do you happen to have a link for that article? ty

 

[go2church]

Not only will the TNIV cease being published when the NIV 2011 comes out, but so will the NIV 1984 according to a q and a time with Doug Moo the leader of the translation team and Moo Girkins president/ ceo of Zondervan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTA4tbCrFjc

The missteps of the TNIV marketing team have been learned, the major mistake being the continued publishing of the old NIV. I suspect the new version will be very much like the current TNIV. I will gladly continue to use my TNIV awaiting the revision of 2011. It is a great translation. This little nugget, it will be called simply the NIV, no letters, numbers just the NIV - yet another lesson learned.

 

[go2church]

Got a better information source

http://homepage.mac.com/rmansfield/thislamp/

 

[TCGreek]

In a word: Politics.

 

[TC]

In a word: Politics.

Actually, I think it is two words. The second word is dollar. I am guessing that if the TNIV was selling a lot better, they would not be doing this.

 

[EdSutton]

Actually, I think it is two words. The second word is dollar. I am guessing that if the TNIV was selling a lot better, they would not be doing this.

Good point, to toss in my own

worth!

Ed

 

[Rippon]

Good point, to toss in my own

worth!

Ed

If it wasn't for the sinful actions of prominent, professing, Christians, the TNIV would be a be popular translation currently.

I had sent in suggestions (as many others also) to the TNIV translating team almost two years ago. I hope they use those suggestions on the 2011 NIV. I have a feeling it's going to look a lot more like the TNIV than the NIV. They certainly don't need to appease Grudem and Dobson.

 

[annsni]

If it wasn't for the sinful actions of prominent, professing, Christians, the TNIV would be a be popular translation currently.

I had sent in suggestions (as many others also) to the TNIV translating team almost two years ago. I hope they use those suggestions on the 2011 NIV. I have a feeling it's going to look a lot more like the TNIV than the NIV. They certainly don't need to appease Grudem and Dobson.

From my understanding, while small translation issues, the "prominent professing Christians" were concerned over changes from the original language that, while making it easier understand the generalness of gender in some places, it did not follow the text. You can't fault them for that.

 

[preachinjesus]

You just can't dismiss the reasonable critique and justified questions concerning the translation method and result by saying it was "sinful."

There are legitimate questions about the broad strokes which the translation committee of the TNIV took in their task. The scholastic community on all sides of this debate (lest we think this is just a two-sided debate) have brought profound thought, hermeneutics, and theology in a civil arena to ask legitimate questions.

I don't care much for the TNIV as a teaching text. There are lots of reasons for that. I appreciate it and am using the International Bible Society's The Books of the Bible as a devotional text right now, and that's in TNIV. Am I to be accused of sin for recommending other translations to members of my flock? I surely hope not.

We've got a TON of new translations from a variety of methods and groups. I wonder how well this new revision of the NIV will do. How many of us will really switch over? I can't say I would.

 

[Rippon]

You just can't dismiss the reasonable critique and justified questions concerning the translation method and result by saying it was "sinful."

There has not been much reasonable debate about the TNIV. First it was primarily the pro-ESV crowd (verging on ESVO) that wa sbehind the reprehensible things said about the TNIV. Dobson allowed no TNIV spokesperson on his program -- only Grudem from the anti-TNIV side.

Grudem is not the Bible scholar he has the reputation for. Hardly any of the anti-TNIV petions with hundreds of signatures had people with New Testament competence. Just about every New Testament scholar had no problem with the TNIV New Testament.

The continued boycotts based on the hyped-up lies of the pro-ESV crowd has been very sinful.

World magazine became a trashy tabloid with all sorts of lies and deliberate misinformation about the TNIV.

Wicked aspersions were cast on the translation team.

Though I live in South Korea I have been back to America a number of times in the past decade or more. I have personally encountered deceitfulness about the translation from a lot of people -- including booksellers.

Admittedly a bunch of people were ignorant also because they believed Dobson,Grudem & Co. and blindly followed them.

The hyprocrisy of many endorsing the NLTse while condemning the TNIV is mindboggling. The very same things they roundly condemned the TNIv for are present in the NLTse -- but nobody has boycotted that fine version.

There are legitimate questions about the broad strokes which the translation committee of the TNIV took in their task.

What broad strokes?

The scholastic community on all sides of this debate (lest we think this is just a two-sided debate) have brought profound thought, hermeneutics, and theology in a civil arena to ask legitimate questions.

I didn't find much wholesomeness in the anti-TNIV websires. It looked a lot like the KJVO mentality."In a civil arena'?! Come off it!

Am I to be accused of sin for recommending other translations to members of my flock? I surely hope not.

Why are you asking that question? I have never even hinted at such a nonsensical thing.

I wonder how well this new revision of the NIV will do.

A lot will depend on the maturity level of a number of Christian big names.

How many of us will really switch over? I can't say I would.

I took a wild guess that you wouldn't. There's nothing like making a decision without the facts in front of one's self.

Many dumped on the TNIV without actually owning one in the first place. They styled themselves as the experts over those of us who cherish the translation. The arrogance of the anti-TNIV mob.