• 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 long before the Niv gets revised again do you think?

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Are they still thinking to keep revising it regular basis?

Why shouldn't it be revised on a regular basis? Why shouldn't any translation be revised every few years? No version is perfect;they need to be corrected in spots. Martin Luther updated his five times in his life.

Revision is not a problem --it is a good thing.
 

DaChaser1

New Member
Why shouldn't it be revised on a regular basis? Why shouldn't any translation be revised every few years? No version is perfect;they need to be corrected in spots. Martin Luther updated his five times in his life.

Revision is not a problem --it is a good thing.

Do they have a regular schedule for doing it?

Also, unless/until there has been new discoveries in the original languages texts. manuscripts, etc, or unless there is current/better understanding of the times/culture/languages, why even do it?
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Here's what they promised in 1997:

POLICY STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE SOCIETY (IBS) REGARDING THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (NIV) OF THE BIBLE

May 27, 1997

In consideration of the emphatic support by Christian leaders and reader of for the NIV Bible and IBS' mission to "serve the Church in evangelism and discipleship by providing God's Word so that people around the world might come to faith and life in Jesus Christ," the board of directors of the International Bible Society resolves that:

1) IBS has abandoned all plans for gender-related changes in future editions of the New International Version (NIV).

2) The present (1984) NIV text will continue to be published. There are no plans for a further revised edition.

. . .

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/948
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No timetable but I guess that small and often is less controversial than big and seldom.

Rob

The work of translating the Bible is never finished. As good as they are, English translations must be regularly updated so that they will continue to communicate accurately the meaning of God’s Word.

Updates are needed in order to reflect the latest developments in our understanding of the biblical world and its languages and to keep pace with changes in English usage.

Recognizing, then, that the NIV would retain its ability to communicate God’s Word accurately only if it were regularly updated, the original translators established The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT).

The committee is a self-perpetuating group of biblical scholars charged with keeping abreast of advances in biblical scholarship and changes in English and issuing periodic updates to the NIV. CBT is an independent, self-governing body and has sole responsibility for the NIV text.

The committee mirrors the original group of translators in its diverse international and denominational makeup and in its unifying commitment to the Bible as God’s inspired Word.

In obedience to its mandate, the committee has issued periodic updates to the NIV. An initial revision was released in 1984. A more thorough revision process was completed in 2005, resulting in the separately published TNIV.

The updated NIV you now have in your hands builds on both the original NIV and the TNIV and represents the latest effort of the committee to articulate God’s unchanging Word in the way the original authors might have said it had they been speaking in English to the global English-speaking audience today.

The first concern of the translators has continued to be the accuracy of the translation and its faithfulness to the intended meaning of the biblical writers.
This has moved the translators to go beyond a formal word-for-word rendering of the original texts.

Because thought patterns and syntax differ from language to language, accurate communication of the meaning of the biblical authors demands constant regard for varied contextual uses of words and idioms and for frequent modifications in sentence structures.


The New International Version Preface. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
 

DaChaser1

New Member
No timetable but I guess that small and often is less controversial than big and seldom.

Rob

Doesn't this bring in though more "interpretation" of what the original authors meant/intended?

Would paul and Moses see need to have it so inclusive languaged for today?
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Listen to Rippon. A lot of people don't understand that making a modification to a modern Bible is not simply to "change" what it says. It is to make sure that our modern language fits well with the age/generation the Bible is trying to target. If the Bible uses 16th century English; I don't see many people from 40 under reading it.

The publishers of the NIV will have to determine the cost of modifications vs. the risk and modern sales. It does become a business decision; but, we are a free enterprise country; you are either gaining in business or going down. Rarely, do businesses in our type of market sit still and continue to make the same percentage of profit year after year without changes.

Think of the change as an effort to stay up with modern English, not to change what the original manuscripts said.
 

DaChaser1

New Member
Listen to Rippon. A lot of people don't understand that making a modification to a modern Bible is not simply to "change" what it says. It is to make sure that our modern language fits well with the age/generation the Bible is trying to target. If the Bible uses 16th century English; I don't see many people from 40 under reading it.

The publishers of the NIV will have to determine the cost of modifications vs. the risk and modern sales. It does become a business decision; but, we are a free enterprise country; you are either gaining in business or going down. Rarely, do businesses in our type of market sit still and continue to make the same percentage of profit year after year without changes.

Think of the change as an effort to stay up with modern English, not to change what the original manuscripts said.

Understand that, but what happened to the English language since 1984 so much to warrent revision, unless its JUST for the inclusive language renderings brought in, verty thing once oppossed?
 

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
Great God Almighty, what has changed since 1984?!

Is that a serious question? 28 years have passed and you're curious what might have changed?
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I'm not personally stepping in for our Great God but the answer is once again given in the NIV's Preface.

One of the main reasons the task of Bible translation is never finished is the change in our own language, English.
Although a basic core of the language remains relatively stable, many diverse and complex linguistic factors continue to bring about subtle shifts in the meanings and/or connotations of even old, well-established words and phrases.

One of the shifts that creates particular challenges to writers and translators alike is the manner in which gender is presented.
The original NIV (1978) was published in a time when “a man” would naturally be understood, in many contexts, to be referring to a person, whether male of female.
But most English speakers today tend to hear a distinctly male connotation in this word.
In recognition of this change in English, this edition of the NIV, along with almost all other recent English translations, substitutes other expressions when the original text intends to refer generically to men and women equally.
Thus, for instance, the NIV (1984) rendering of 1 Corinthians 8:3, “But the man who loves God is known by God” becomes in this edition “But whoever loves God is known by God.”
On the other hand, “man” and “mankind,” as ways of denoting the human race, are still widely used.
This edition of the NIV therefore continues to use these words, along with other expressions, in this way.


A related shift in English creates a greater challenge for modern translations: the move away from using the third-person masculine singular pronouns—“he/him/his”—to refer to men and women equally.
This usage does persist at a low level in some forms of English, and this revision therefore occasionally uses these pronouns in a generic sense.
But the tendency, recognized in day-to-day usage and confirmed by extensive research, is away from the generic use of “he,” “him,” and “his.”
In recognition of this shift in language and in an effort to translate into the “common” English that people are actually using, this revision of the NIV generally uses other constructions when the biblical text is plainly addressed to men and women equally.
The reader will frequently encounter a “they,” “their,” or “them” to express a generic singular idea.
Thus, for instance, Mark 8:36 reads: “What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?”
This generic use of the “indefinite” or “singular” “they/them/their” has a venerable place in English idiom and has quickly become established as standard English, spoken and written, all over the world.
Where an individual emphasis is deemed to be present, “anyone” or “everyone” or some other equivalent is generally used as the antecedent of such pronouns.


The New International Version Preface. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Rob
 

Van

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How much credence should be given to the view of planned obsolesce, that every few years a revised version comes out so as to create a market for more sales. If I was a cold hearted accountant, I might like making changes to tickle the intolerant ears, simply to sell more $86.00 study bibles in leather bindings with gold edges. :)
 

DaChaser1

New Member
I'm not personally stepping in for our Great God but the answer is once again given in the NIV's Preface.



Rob

Again, was this change really a necessity to allow one to better under the Bible, or else accomodating "feminist voices" in liberal Christianity demanding us to force Bible off "male bias?"
 

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
Language changes, or don't you agree? In the last 30 years change has come at a break neck speed, translations begin to sound outdated sooner, so they update them. I don't really see this a big deal, but I guess you do.
 

Oldtimer

New Member
How much credence should be given to the view of planned obsolesce, that every few years a revised version comes out so as to create a market for more sales. If I was a cold hearted accountant, I might like making changes to tickle the intolerant ears, simply to sell more $86.00 study bibles in leather bindings with gold edges. :)

Sadly, that's the case today in almost everything, from Bibles to healthcare. "Cold hearted" accountants run the numbers, track sales trends, and confer with marketing executives on how to gain or recapture market share.

Computers and spreadsheets have made "what-if's" fast and easy to do. I know, I was a part of that in my former life. If we do abc how will it impact our annual sales figures? Instead of taking days to figure it out, results are now immediate.

Using the NIV as the example, go into a Christian bookstore. You don't see a shelf full of NIV with black or blue covers. Instead you see shelves of them, designed to appeal to every market niche that has the potential to generate a profit for the seller. Bibles have become fashion statements. Bibles have become a commodity treated in the same way dish detergent is being sold.

How often do we see a "new and improved" version of a dish detergent hit the market? Everytime the sales lag on a brand name detergent, there's a new gimmick being promoted to boost sales. Bigger bottle, more concentrated, "green" version, new fragrance.... the list can go on.

Society has been conditioned to always look for the new and improved. Throw out the "outdated" whether it's last years style of shoes or a Bible produced 5 years ago. Our church has an annual yard sale. The bulk of the donations are clothing items. Often in new condition with the sales tags still on them. Buy it, maybe wear it a few times, then give it away because it's out of style -- it's outdated -- it's obsolete.

How long has it been since there was a major discovery of ancient manuscripts, such as the cache of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Yet, the "new and improved" Bible versions IMPLY they are coming at a fairly rapid rate. If the English language -- as a whole -- were changing as fast as publishers imply, I wouldn't be able to talk to someone 50 years younger than myself.

Sure there are new words added to the English language at a fairly rapid pace. Google, twitter, Ipad, disc brakes, wide-screen, microwave, and Tupperware weren't in use 75 years ago. But, I don't find any of them or an archic equivalent mentioned in the Bible. Updated language is a marketing smoke screen to justify issuing a new Bible version every 5-10 years. Every 100 years, maybe, but not every time sales begin to slump as the market has been saturated with version y. Version z is going to roll off the presses so outdated y can be tossed in the trashcan.

This is the biggest problem that I have with mass merchandising Bibles. God's word is being treated as if it were Dawn dish detergent. Sales & marketing departments, plus accountants are the driving forces behind the steady stream of "new and improved" Bibles. Say what you will, but in my humble opinion all other considerations for new edition/version/translation take second place at the major publishing houses.
 

DaChaser1

New Member
Language changes, or don't you agree? In the last 30 years change has come at a break neck speed, translations begin to sound outdated sooner, so they update them. I don't really see this a big deal, but I guess you do.

Think that ONLY reason that the Niv has been revised since 1984 was to to being "pressured" to keep it current with adding inclusive renderings, but still do not see why the real need to do that!

neither the NKJV/NASB has bothered to do that!
 
Top