Did the SBC ever retract their condemnation of the NIV 2011?

[Leevo]

I thought I read something a few months back that stated that they did. I have not been able to find anything besides the original resolution from 2011 condemning the version. Any help?

Also, what are your thoughts on the NIV 2011?

 

[faroukfarouk]

I thought I read something a few months back that stated that they did. I have not been able to find anything besides the original resolution from 2011 condemning the version. Any help?

Also, what are your thoughts on the NIV 2011?

20 years ago the publishers IBS tried to issue a gender neutral NIV. But it aroused such opposition that they put out a statement about how it wasn't providential, or something.

But of course they had invested a lot of money in the project. So after they though the fuss had died down they tried again.

Those of us familiar with Latin America will be aware of the influence of huge corporations there. Churches in North America are not immune, either.

 

[dysert]

I haven't heard that they retracted it. And I've never really used the NIV anyway, so no, I don't use the 2011 edition.

 

[AACJ]

I thought I read something a few months back that stated that they did. I have not been able to find anything besides the original resolution from 2011 condemning the version. Any help?

Also, what are your thoughts on the NIV 2011?

Is it much different from the other NIV Bible preversions?

 

[Leevo]

Is it much different from the other NIV Bible preversions?

Preversions?

 

[dysert]

My understanding is that the 2011 edition uses gender neutral language, which would be consistent with its dynamic equivalence translation philosophy.

 

[Leevo]

My understanding is that the 2011 edition uses gender neutral language, which would be consistent with its dynamic equivalence translation philosophy.

It does. I have concerns about using it if an entire denomination has denounced it. I used to not think it was a very big deal but my perspective has changed since then.

 

[dysert]

It does. I have concerns about using it if an entire denomination has denounced it. I used to not think it was a very big deal but my perspective has changed since then.

And a fairly conservative denomination at that.

 

[Leevo]

And a fairly conservative denomination at that.

Indeed. Considering that I am more or less a Southern Baptist, and agree with them on almost every theological point, I take caution when approaching this subject, given that they denounced the version. I wish I had thought about that before I ordered a NIV LASB overnight and can't cancel it. Here's hoping that ChristianBook will let me via phone.

 

[OzSpen]

I thought I read something a few months back that stated that they did. I have not been able to find anything besides the original resolution from 2011 condemning the version. Any help?

Also, what are your thoughts on the NIV 2011?

'The NIV and the Southern Baptists' was published in 2011. This article by Scott McKnight hopes that the SBC will reverse its decision. I have not seen anything that confirms this - yet!

However, I live a long way away - in Australia. I enjoy the dynamic equivalence of the New Living Translation as well. For new Christians, I find the NLT to be very easy for them to understand. As one who reads and teaches NT Greek, I am pleased to recommend the NIV 2011 and the NLT as reliable, dynamic equivalence translations. I know from teaching NT Greek that a literal translation is impossible to achieve without inserting words to explain sentences.

Why don't you read Daniel Wallace's article, 'Fifteen Myths About Bible Translation'?

Oz

 

[Leevo]

'The NIV and the Southern Baptists' was published in 2011. This article by Scott McKnight hopes that the SBC will reverse its decision. I have not seen anything that confirms this - yet!

However, I live a long way away - in Australia. I enjoy the dynamic equivalence of the New Living Translation as well. For new Christians, I find the NLT to be very easy for them to understand. As one who reads and teaches NT Greek, I am pleased to recommend the NIV 2011 and the NLT as reliable, dynamic equivalence translations. I know from teaching NT Greek that a literal translation is impossible to achieve without inserting words to explain sentences.

Why don't you read Daniel Wallace's article, 'Fifteen Myths About Bible Translation'?

Oz

Thanks! I read through it and saw the point specifically regarding the NIV. Still not sure how I feel about it yet.

 

[SeekerOfChrist94]

Indeed. Considering that I am more or less a Southern Baptist, and agree with them on almost every theological point, I take caution when approaching this subject, given that they denounced the version. I wish I had thought about that before I ordered a NIV LASB overnight and can't cancel it. Here's hoping that ChristianBook will let me via phone.

You can return it as long as it's in its original wrappings, for example don't unwrap the plastic from off of the Bible.

 

[Leevo]

You can return it as long as it's in its original wrappings, for example don't unwrap the plastic from off of the Bible.

I called them and it had not processed yet so luckily I was able to cancel until I can consider it more.

 

[AACJ]

Gender neutral Bible? Is that a literal descriptor?

 

[SeekerOfChrist94]

Gender neutral Bible? Is that a literal descriptor?

The NIV 2011 uses 'they' or 'them' in place of 'he' or 'him'. Basically trying to be politically correct. I find it very confusing when translations do this, which is why I don't like the ESV too much since it uses this type of wording.

 

[SeekerOfChrist94]

I called them and it had not processed yet so luckily I was able to cancel until I can consider it more.

Yeah their processing times can take a bit, even if you do order overnight, it can still take a few days to process.

 

[Leevo]

The NIV 2011 uses 'they' or 'them' in place of 'he' or 'him'. Basically trying to be politically correct. I find it very confusing when translations do this, which is why I don't like the ESV too much since it uses this type of wording.

I am not sure if it is being politically correct, or if it is more trying to be accurate. In Greek, the masculine forms "him, he, brothers" etc. is always used. In English, it would more accurately carry over to mean something like "them" in our language.

 

[AACJ]

The NIV 2011 uses 'they' or 'them' in place of 'he' or 'him'. Basically trying to be politically correct. I find it very confusing when translations do this, which is why I don't like the ESV too much since it uses this type of wording.

These modern Bible perversions continue to get worse and worse. When witches, warlocks, queers and homosexuals praise a Bible version (perversion), its time to admit.....its not authoritative. Satan has stealthily and deceptively slithered through the back door of the Church, with a bible perversion under each arm, whispering into the minds and hearts of Christians...."Yeah, hath God said...?"

 

[AACJ]

I am not sure if it is being politically correct, or if it is more trying to be accurate. In Greek, the masculine forms "him, he, brothers" etc. is always used. In English, it would more accurately carry over to mean something like "them" in our language.

I am sure the queers in the world will love this gender-neutral version, and I am sure that the makers of this abomination are hoping to profit handsomely from it in expectation that "Christian" queers everywhere will buy it by the truck load. Commercial enterprise, I say.

Thank God the KJV committee was not bound by copyright law and commercial incentive.

Inspired or God-directed modern bible versions? The makers of these abominations must bow the knee to copyright law, not to the Holy Spirit.

 

[Leevo]

I am sure the queers in the world will love this gender-neutral version, and I am sure that the makers of this abomination are hoping to profit handsomely from it in expectation that "Christian" queers everywhere will buy it by the truck load. Commercial enterprise, I say.

Thank God the KJV committee was not bound by copyright law and commercial incentive.

Inspired or God-directed modern bible versions? The makers of these abominations must bow the knee to copyright law, not to the Holy Spirit.

No, the KJV committee were only bound by the king to translate the way he wanted it translated.