Debating the New NIV
Introduction
According to the Christian Booksellers Association, the NIV is the best-selling Bible in English-ahead of the King James Version, the New King James Version, the New Living translation, the English Standard Version, the New American Standard, and several others.[1]
But now Zondervan, the publisher of the NIV, has issued a new edition, the 2011 NIV. This edition will replace the current NIV (the 1984 edition). What is this new edition like?
The last two attempts at revising the NIV were met with a great deal of controversy due to their use of a gender-neutral philosophy of translation.[2] The gender-neutral approach of the TNIV (Today's New International Version) in 2002 and 2005 became such a lightning-rod that the version never caught on with American evangelicals and has now been discontinued.
The TNIV provoked a lively discussion among evangelical scholars and Bible readers about translation philosophy in general and about gender-neutral approaches in particular. In fact, the debate actually preceded the appearance of the TNIV because of rumors in the evangelical world that the NIV was going "gender-neutral." That debate began in 1997 and extended through the mid-2000s. Many of the contested issues in that discussion remain unresolved.[3]
It is no surprise, therefore, that many evangelicals have been anticipating the release of the 2011 NIV. Readers want to see how this latest revision has resolved (or not resolved) points of contention about gender language that are left over from these previous discussions.
Does the 2011 NIV deserve the same prominence among evangelicals that the 1984 NIV has enjoyed for so many years? Or will 2011 NIV fall into disuse and go the way of the TNIV?
Readers should realize, first, that the 2011 NIV is not a revision based on the old NIV of 1984, but is a revision based on the now-defunct TNIV of 2005. So there is an obvious question that needs answering. Have the weaknesses of the TNIV been sufficiently overcome in the 2011 NIV?
The following analysis explains both the commendable changes in the new NIV and the areas where we still have cause for concern.
Statistical Summary: 75% of Inaccurate Gender Language
Translations from the TNIV Are Retained in the 2011 NIV
Table 2 - Summary of Old Testament Revisions
from TNIV to 2011 NIV
|
Category |
Same as TNIV |
Revised from TNIV |
%Same |
%Revised |
|
A. Changes Made from Singular to Plural (and a Few Related Changes) to Avoid the Use of "He/Him/His" |
1617 |
429 |
79% |
21% |
|
B. Changes Made to Avoid the Word "Father" |
293 |
23 |
93% |
7% |
|
C. Changes to Avoid the Word "Brother" |
10 |
17 |
37% |
63% |
|
D. Changes to Avoid the Word "Man" |
256 |
117 |
69% |
31% |
|
E. Changes to Avoid the Word "Son" |
14 |
11 |
56% |
44% |
|
F. Changes Made to Avoid the Word "Women" |
4 |
0 |
100% |
0% |
|
Total |
2194 |
597 |
79% |
21% |
Table 3 - Summary of New Testament Revisions
from TNIV to 2011 NIV
|
Category |
Same as TNIV |
Revised from TNIV |
%Same |
%Revised |
|
A. Changes from Singular to Plural to Avoid the Use of "He/Him/His" |
385 |
223 |
63% |
37% |
|
B. Changes to Avoid the Word "Father" and Related Words |
35 |
4 |
90% |
10% |
|
C. Changes to Avoid the Word "Brother" (Or to Add the Word "Sister") |
53 |
33 |
62% |
38% |
|
D. Changes to Avoid the Word "Man" |
22 |
52 |
30% |
70% |
|
E. Changes to Avoid the Word "Son" |
19 |
6 |
76% |
24% |
|
F. Changes to Avoid the Phrase "The Jews"[12] |
24 |
0 |
100% |
0% |
|
G. Changes that Lose the Nuance of Holiness in "Saints" |
27 |
14 |
66% |
34% |
|
H. Other Changes |
7 |
4 |
64% |
36% |
|
Total |
572 |
336 |
63% |
37% |
3. The 2011 NIV incorrectly changes "father" to "parent" or something else
1984 NIV Proverbs 15:5 A fool spurns his father's discipline, but whoever heeds correction shows prudence.
2011 NIV Proverbs 15:5 A fool spurns a parent's discipline, but whoever heeds correction shows prudence. (same as TNIV)
But the Hebrew text has 'ab, which means "father," not "parent." Fifteen other verses in the 2011 NIV make a similar change. Why seek to eliminate "father" when that is the precise meaning of the Hebrew text?
For full review go to http://www.cbmw.org and search for 2011 NIV
Post a Comment
Comments for this post have been disabled.