The revision of NIV being studied by WELS ...."NIV may not be used after spring 2011"

[twin.spin]

In the "Together in Christ" latest issue, it has been reported:

The New International Version (NIV) is the Bible translation used by most WELS congregations and schools. Zondervan, the publisher, plans to introduce the revised NIV in the spring of 2011. The current version of the NIV will no longer be available after that date.
WELS has not been given the opportunity to review the revised translation. It is possible that the new version will be an improve­ment over the current NIV. It is also possible, however, that changes to the NIV may make it unwise for WELS to continue to use it in worship, publications, and classrooms.​

A committee of WELS scholars and theologians, representing the Conference of Presidents, Wis­consin Lutheran Seminary, and Northwestern Publishing House, has been formed to evaluate the new translation and to bring

rec­ommendations on its suitability for continued use in the synod. If the new version is judged to be unusable, that same committee will evaluate other translations and recommend which translation will best meet the needs of the synod in the future.​

 

[seajoy]

I had heard about the current NIV no longer going to be in print. I had wondered what the synod was going to decide. I guess it remanis to be seen. I'm wondering if it will be the ESV if the new NIV is unsatisfactory. I have an ESV purse bible that I really like - but it's getting to the point that my bifocals don't quite take care of things anymore.

 

[Jim47]

I'm anxious to see what version we end up going with, although, at my age I will probably stick with my NIV. I'm just too old to leanr another

 

[DaRev]

From what I understand, the updated NIV will be somewhat "gender neutral". It's not the greatest translation to begin with, and if this is the direction the update will go, it will be made even worse.

 

[Zecryphon]

From what I understand, the updated NIV will be somewhat "gender neutral". It's not the greatest translation to begin with, and if this is the direction the update will go, it will be made even worse.

Yeah, that probably won't fly too far in the WELS where we're very specific about our genders and which roles they can take in the church.

 

[twin.spin]

I had heard about the current NIV no longer going to be in print. I had wondered what the synod was going to decide. I guess it remanis to be seen. I'm wondering if it will be the ESV if the new NIV is unsatisfactory. I have an ESV purse bible that I really like - but it's getting to the point that my bifocals don't quite take care of things anymore.

It's will be interesting indeed. Wouldn't be something if it comes down to some philanthropist commisioning NPH to gather Lutheran theologians to produce an accurate Bible ... like KJ did.

It would seem like a very God like timing .... poor economy, a decrease of missionaries, the cancelled discipleship programs, the inevitable reality that another synodical school may have to be closed as a synodical school, the decrease of communicate membership. Not to mention the attack upon the written word for multiple agenda's.

It would seem that out of such circumstances, that what would appear as unprobable by human reasoning, that God has often used men.

 

[twin.spin]

From what I understand, the updated NIV will be somewhat "gender neutral". It's not the greatest translation to begin with, and if this is the direction the update will go, it will be made even worse.

So what options does one have .... what is the "greatest"? We don't speak KJ, not to many speak German to read Luther's Bible.

Is it not time then for "the greatest" to be published?

 

[twin.spin]

I'm anxious to see what version we end up going with, although, at my age I will probably stick with my NIV. I'm just too old to leanr another

I agree,
For many it will become the "Blue hymnal", like how my mother still has her german hymnal before old blue.

But wouldn't surprise me if more people are passionate about a hymnal change than a Bible change.

 

[filosofer]

Well, the original revision of Beck's translation (known as AAT = An American Translation) was called New Evangelical Translation (NET) in 1988. The New Testament was edited by Kuske from WELS and Hoerber from LCMS. It was an excellent update and would have filled the need; I was privileged to serve congregations that were test congregations (using the pericopes as they were translated), and I offered several translation suggestions that were incorporated into NET. Sadly, in 1992 the Bible Society brought in a whole new team, changed the philosophy, then revised the translation, especially the NT, and was published in 1995 as God's Word.

So, if someone could start with the 1988 edition... Unfortunately, I think that it is tied up by the God's Word to the Nations Bible Society. So unlikely that they would release it for revision away from God's Word.

The 4th Revision of Beck's original AAT was done by John Drickamer, and published by Herman Otten in 2000. There are still a few mistakes. I have emailed Herman twice, and have never heard from him or anyone else.

 

[DaRev]

So what options does one have .... what is the "greatest"? We don't speak KJ, not to many speak German to read Luther's Bible.

Is it not time then for "the greatest" to be published?

The ESV is one of the better translations on the market right now. IMO it is superior to the NIV.

The ESV translation team included six scholars from the LCMS:
Rev. Dr. Daniel Gard
Rev. Dr. Walter Maier III
Rev. Dr. Paul Raabe
Rev. Dr. James Voelz
Rev. Dr. Dean Wenthe
Rev. Dr. Arthur Just Jr.

CPH published The Lutheran Study Bible using the ESV translation. Among the scholars involved with the study portion were several from the WELS/ELS:
Mark Braun
Roland Cap Ehlke (Associate Editor)
Adolph Harstad (ELS)
Mark Lenz
Victor Prange (Associate Editor)
Michael Smith (ELS)

Perhaps considering the ESV would be appropriate.

 

[Jim47]

I have a question aimed at the Pastors here. How do you keep track of the differences in all the translations you have learned? In other words, when you look up a bible verse for exact wording what version do you have in mind?

I of course like many here was raised with the old KJV but when our church changed to the NIV I followed a few years later. My mother-in-law God rest here soul gave me my first NIV. I read it a good many times before I happened upon a sales customer of mine that gave me a nice leather bound NIV that some body had and never read ( no doubt a gift) and discarded. A real shame they din't keep it and read it but I am very thankful for the gift.

By the way, I only ever read the whole KJV once but still recall some passages from it even though my memory is fading

 

[twin.spin]

Well, the original revision of Beck's translation (known as AAT = An American Translation) was called New Evangelical Translation (NET) in 1988. The New Testament was edited by Kuske from WELS and Hoerber from LCMS. It was an excellent update and would have filled the need; I was privileged to serve congregations that were test congregations (using the pericopes as they were translated), and I offered several translation suggestions that were incorporated into NET. Sadly, in 1992 the Bible Society brought in a whole new team, changed the philosophy, then revised the translation, especially the NT, and was published in 1995 as God's Word.

So, if someone could start with the 1988 edition... Unfortunately, I think that it is tied up by the God's Word to the Nations Bible Society. So unlikely that they would release it for revision away from God's Word.

The 4th Revision of Beck's original AAT was done by John Drickamer, and published by Herman Otten in 2000. There are still a few mistakes. I have emailed Herman twice, and have never heard from him or anyone else.

I knew Ron Ehlke and (others) from NPH when NET was offered there. I have the NET 1990 version bible and really come to find the appenidexs a great source for insight of scriptures.Ron had expreesed how promising it was and how disappointing the Bible Society ended it.

This is what bugs me...there are people who reject the Bible because of "mens tampering" arguement. I hear it from Mormons, Universal Restorationalists about the "bad translations". The UR'ers use YLT because of the non use of the word "eternal" and the Mormons ... well, I'll just say to bloster the validiity of BoM. And it seems that things like this add to their arguments.

 

[DaRev]

I have a question aimed at the Pastors here. How do you keep track of the differences in all the translations you have learned? In other words, when you look up a bible verse for exact wording what version do you have in mind?

For exact wording? For the OT, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 4th edition (Hebrew Bible). For the NT, Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition (Greek New Testament).

If one wants word for word English translations, for the NT it would be the NASB and for the OT, KJV. These seem to have the better word-for-word translation, even though a direct word-for-word translation from Hebrew and Greek into English is difficult at best.

 

[RadMan]

AAT is a faithful translation, not a paraphrase, of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. The late Dr. Beck did the major work on AAT, and other theologians continue the work of polishing and publishing.

On the other hand the language of the ESV is very archaic and hard to understand like the King James It just does not have the natural flow of contemporary English. In many places it sounds quite stilted even to a reader used to the KJV. Perhaps some of this is due to the fact that the ESV is not a fresh translation but a touch-up of the RSV, done in part to meet the need for a quickly available alternative to the TNIV.

Numbers 24:17
AAT:“I see Him Who is not here now.”
ESV: “I see, but not now.”
Matthew 13:39
AAT: “The end of the world.”
ESV: The close of the age.”
Luke 2:23
AAT: “Every first born boy.”
ESV: “Every male who first opens the
womb.”
Luke 5:4
AAT: “Take the boat out where the
water is deep.”
ESV: “Put out into the deep.”
Luke 16:6
AAT: “Eight hundred gallons of oil.”
ESV: “A hundred measures of oil.”
Luke 16:7
AAT: “A thousand bushels of wheat.”
ESV: “A hundred measures of wheat.”
Luke 19:44
AAT: “The time your help came to you”
ESV: “The time of your visitation.”
Acts 2:44
AAT: “Shared everything with one
another.”
ESV: “Had all things in common.”
Acts 5:4
AAT: “How could you think of doing such a thing?”
ESV: Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart?”
Acts 10:4
AAT: “Your prayers and your gifts to the poor have come up before God
as an offering.”
ESV: “Your prayers and your offerings have ascended as as memorial
before God.”
Gal. 1:15
AAT: “Appointed me.” ESV: “Set me apart.”
Gal. 4:24
AAT: “This has figurative meaning.”
ESV: “This may be interpreted allegorically.”
Gal. 4:25
AAT: “She is like Jerusalem today, because she and her children are
slaves.”
ESV: “She corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with
her children.”
Eph. 6:4
AAT: “Don't make your children angry.”
ESV: “Provoke not your children to anger.”
Phil 3:7
AAT: “Any advantage I had.”
ESV: “Any gain I had.”
Phil. 3:14
AAT: “The heavenly prize to which God has called us.”
ESV: “The prize of the upward call of God.”
Phil. 4:10
AAT: “It made me very happy in the Lord that now again you showed a
fresh interest in me.”
ESV: “I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that how at length you have revived
your concern for me.”

 

[Studeclunker]

No loss. I detest NIV.

Rad, is the similarity of ESV to the NKJV coincidental or actually some kind of continuation of the re-translation.. or... what, do you know?

 

[seajoy]

Oh Stude - I really like my NIV bible. In fact, I have 3 of them. I like the one with the archeological stuff in it. But I have a small, leatherbound one that I use all the time. It's comfortable, and I love reading out of it. It's like a friend. And I get to read about my true Friend in it. Anyway - it will be difficult to get used to a new version. Of course, I went from the KJV to NIV as a kid and got used to that.

 

[filosofer]

Of course, I went from the KJV to NIV as a kid and got used to that.

Wow! You are a kid, aren't you??!!






I was in high school when the first edition of Beck's Bible (New Testament only) was published (1963).

 

[DaRev]

I at one time thought that the Beck's Bible would make a good youth bible version. It would need a few changes, though, like the use of the word "snake" in Genesis 3. We know from the context that the animal referenced there was not a snake. It became a snake. The traditional word "serpent" would be a much better word choice.

 

[seajoy]

Wow! You are a kid, aren't you??!!






I was in high school when the first edition of Beck's Bible (New Testament only) was published (1963).

I was born in '62. My kids think that is pretty old.

 

[Studeclunker]

Oh Stude - I really like my NIV bible. In fact, I have 3 of them. I like the one with the archeological stuff in it. But I have a small, leatherbound one that I use all the time. It's comfortable, and I love reading out of it. It's like a friend. And I get to read about my true Friend in it. Anyway - it will be difficult to get used to a new version. Of course, I went from the KJV to NIV as a kid and got used to that.

If you went direct from King James to NIV, I can well understand your preferrence. I remember when they started really pushing the NIV and, though I was quite young, still didn't like it. The lyric quality of the language in the KJV was missing. When they came out with the New King James, I loved it. The language barrier was removed without losing the poetic qualities of the writing.

I have a New Testament in four translations (c.1965) that I use as a study aid. One of the translations is the Phillips para-phrase which I really like. Phillips did a good job of making the New Testament much more... well, user friendly. It has its issues. Hence I really like it juxtaposed against the three others that it is.

This study bible is now available with the (I think it's called) New Jerusalem Bible (translation) along with KJV, NIV and I forget what the other is. Being that it includes the Old Testament as well, the new one is quite bulky. Still, it makes an excellent study aid and I wouldn't mind having one. Clairity is always an invaluable tutor.