Most underrated Bible translation?

There was some negativity toward the NIV when it came out , but it can't be compared to the assaults against the TNIV . Now the RSV was certainly hated by many , ( still is , by some older Fundamentalists ) even burned in public on occasion . The KJV was spurned by many in its day . The Pilgrim fathers did not want to have anything to do with it . Their Geneva Bibles were held on to tenaciously . Tradition is a hard habit . The traditions we need to keep are of the kind Paul said to pass on .

 

The pilgrim fathers separated from the KJV because of who sponsored it! In this regard, our fundamentalist brothers are way off base promoting the KJV (cooperating with the Anglicans) but denigrating the NIV. In that sense, the NIV is underrated by many fundamentalists even though it was translated by those who hold to the fundamentals! Really odd, isn't it?

 

Actually I've read many Greek scholars who point to it's horrible dynamic equivalence. I have a very trusted friend who pre-ordered it hoping it would be a good version. But was really disappointed. Lets remember they denied working on this updating of the NIV until just a few weeks before it's release. In other words they lied about it. The fact remains the NIV is a much much better translation than the TNIV and it doesn't deserve to be on the top ten list.

 

The TNIV was basically released to try and "cash" in on the paraphrase market. So they attached the 'NIV' name to it to try and give it some validity. The TNIV is a decent translation but it is by no means underrated. HCS is on the top ten list (and should be) because it leans towards the more literal end of the sphere.

 

Most New Testament scholars are in favor of the TNIV . It is not really in the dynamic equivalency realm as such . The TNIV is more formally equivalent than one might think . At times it is more functional just as the HCS and ESV are . It depends on the text that is being rendered . Actually the ESV and TNIV are not far apart in translational philosophy . I know that goes against the public claims of the ESV , but it is true . I read and compare my translations quite a lot .

 

BTW , to call the TNIV a paraprase is simply wrong . Do you own a TNIV , DeclareHim ?

 

No! I have borrowed it from others and I have read it online some. I didn't say it was a paraphrase but they used a lot of dynamic equivalence in places and when one picks it up it reads much like a paraphrase. My initial point was it's aimed for that sales group.

 

I agree with you and the others the NIV is a fine translation why do we need to update it? The language has not changed that drastically. It was simply for monetary reasons. Also I cannot uphold a the translation because they lied about it. How can I use a copy of God's Word which the people responsible for it denied they were working on it.

 

Sorry didn't mean to hijack this thread.