Bad memory recall!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
'How Gender Neutral Bible Translations Endanger Christian Marriage
- Thread starter Martin Marprelate
- Start date
Some additional reading for you!
http://waynegrudem.com/wp-content/u...uation-of-Gender-Language-in-the-2011-NIV.pdf
This does, with their concerns!
http://waynegrudem.com/wp-content/u...uation-of-Gender-Language-in-the-2011-NIV.pdf
Again, it has nothing to do with the Southern Baptist Convention. Can't you get it together?
It's a good one. It was published in 2003. I got it in Jan. of 2006.
His paper details just why the SBC rejected it as a viable translation!
Last edited:
Whose 'paer'?
fixed my post, what did you think of his concerns?
It has nothing to do with the Southern Baptist Convention.
This was the contribution of nine people. I didn't see Grudem's name.
It is extremely picayune. There are no core doctrines mentioned. At first the TNIV is accused of 3,686 'inaccuracies.' Then, one page later the figure jumped to 3,699. That's sloppy. It was said that the 2011 was 25% better with respect to inclusive language. So going with the lower number concerning the TNIV that means the 2011 NIV has 2,764.5 'inaccuracies.'
I have pointed out a great many incidences of awkward grammar in the ESV, but I haven't called them inaccuracies. Inaccuracies are in the eye of the beholder. There could be fair disagreement with the way a verse is rendered, but I have never heard of any Bible version being critiqued with the tag-line of inaccuracies.
There is a lot of male insecurity in this paper. They are afraid of losing "male-specific meaning." And that over trifles.
I counted 17 examples. Of that number three of the NIV examples agree with the CSB rendering.
They said that seven words are of particular concern to them :
father
son
brother
man
he
him
his
I have made a thread or three on the these and other key words that are of concern to male language protectors.You can see how the CSB compares with the NIV in a more comprehensive manner.
You mean "blessed is the person." The CEB and ISV rendered that portion of Psalm 1:1 with "Blessed is the person."
The NIV, NET, YLT, REB and CSB have "Blessed is the person."
You poor, deprived child. I have done threads on it in the old days before I reinvented myself as Rippon2.
It was originally called The New Berkeley Version New Testament. But with the passing of time the entire canon was translated and published in 1969 as The Modern Language Bible. It's a sentimental favorite of mine. Before I ever laid eyes on an NIV, the MLB was my dearest possession. A Korean pastor presented me with an NIV in 1998. I spent many months transferring my MLB notes to my NIV. Since the passage of time I have a mutitude of English language Bibles and I have different notes in most of them.
The MLB was considered to be a Conservative, or rather, very Conservative Bible translation. The notes are usually edifying, and sometimes unusual.
Thanks for your concern, but I expect I shall pull through.
I don't want to upset you, but the fact is, I don't read everything you post.I have done threads on it in the old days before I reinvented myself as Rippon2.
If there is one thing the world is not short of, it is English language Bible versions.
Any real and valid reason to translate it that way?
Guess we have not yet converted to Niv Preferred camp yet!
Praise God for that!
Too many of them!
Yes, because everyone, not just adult males are blessed.
"Blessed is the one [anyone, male or female, young, old or middle-aged] who does not walk in step with the wicked or stand in the way that sinners take or sit in the company of mockers."
We know though that man stands for both men and women!