Author, Simon.
Published, September 8, 2009.
After much conjecture and controversy, the Todays New International Version has been taken off the market. As of 2011, the TNIV will be replaced by an updated New International version. While my interest in bible translations is fairly limited, this is a bit interesting, and could be something to think about for owners of a TNIV.
See this article on Between Two Worlds. Keith Danby, Biblica CEO, said this in a press release:
We want to reach English speakers across the globe with a Bible that is accurate, accessible and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand. This is why we are recommitting ourselves today to the original NIV charter, complete with its charge to monitor and reflect developments in English usage and Biblical scholarship by periodically updating the NIV Bible text.
As time passes and English changes, the NIV we have at present is becoming increasingly dated. If we want a Bible that English speakers around the world can understand, we have to listen to, and respect, the vocabulary they are using today.
HT: Justin Taylor.
Any thoughts on translations? I’m not a fan of “translation snobbery”, which users of the ESV often have a bad case of (See some of the comments at the bottom of the linked article). I use an English Standard Version. My church uses an New Revised Standard Version, which I quite like too. I own an NIV, as well as a New Living Translation, which I really like. Interestingly, the NLT comes in for some criticism, but I find it helps illuminate the text quite colourfully.
When it comes down to it, though, if the King James Version was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me!
The NIV is one of the few fresh translations of the collected manuscripts; it stands as one of the better, using more modern scholarship in its translation. It is also a paraphaistic translation, which is somewhat required to properly translate different idioms which would otherwise make little sense in English.
Conversely the ESV “stands in the classic mainstream of English Bible Translations of the past [500 years]” (Preface to the ESV), and as such draws on more than one “understanding”. This helps to iron out the “excesses” that you might get from a single (and particularly geared) translation; but will lack the punch and effectiveness of something more contemporary, like the NIV.
As I mention excesses here I point out that the TNIV, while continuing in the newer translation, got a little distracted with interpretation, so much so that it “divided the evangelical Christian community” (http://bit.ly/wXdss), something I have longed to be more widely recognised of the TNIV. Its a-gender agenda (the word play was mostly accidental) only added fuel to an already out-of-control fire, and as such I am glad that it is being removed from the market.
The NLT and similar translations offer good insights, however I agree entirely with Moo that it is important to retain “God’s unchanging word”, thus a version which seeks to be very contemporary will perhaps over-translate certain passages, and should not be used as a foundation for teaching. There is a difference between using contemporary language and idioms, and overloading it with contemporary rhetoric and concepts.
I use the ESV, because I enjoy the style of English which is less contemporary and more vivid, I think, than the NIV; though my respect for both is definately growing the more I study NT Greek. The only “translation snobbery” I will not be ashamed of, is making sure you have a good translation and not an interpetation; the inspired word of God, not the altered word of that guy.
Well said in the last paragraph there. Everyone will probably need to read the last sentence a couple of times to get it!
I acknowledge that the NLT is a paraphrase-translation. I wouldn’t use it as my key source if I was expositing the scriptures. I have found, though, that at small group, when the NLT is read out alongside the NIV or ESV, it is very vivd and helpful alternative text. I still really like it, and if it’s used alongside a NIV, ESV or NRSV, I think it can be a really excellent tool for understanding and illuminating difficult passages.