FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-01-2009, 06:08 PM   #1
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 237
Default NIV Revision - Your turn

It might not be news to some, but there is going to be a period of soul searching for the next NIV. Just noticed this at one of my other favorite haunts, The Huffington Post: NIV Revision


The top-selling Bible in North America will undergo its first revision in 25 years, modernizing the language in some sections and promising to reopen a contentious debate about changing gender terms in the sacred text. The New International Version, the Bible of choice for conservative evangelicals, will be revised to reflect changes in English usage and advances in Biblical scholarship, it was announced Tuesday. The revision is scheduled to be completed late next year and published in 2011.



I'd like to hear what people think should be up for consideration? Obviously besides just chucking the whole thing out.

Personally I'd love to see better translation of Hebrew in the OT, add "young girl" and remove "virgin" anyone?


Gregg
gdeering is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 08:36 PM   #2
Sea
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Midwest, USA
Posts: 106
Default

Semi-serious suggestion: start using "ya'll" as a second person plural pronoun.

This would increase the accuracy of the translation.
Sea is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 08:44 PM   #3
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Get rid of the doctrinal mistranslation of Gen 1:1. It should be:

In the beginning of god's creating the heavens and the earth...

(or: In the beginning when god created the heavens and the earth...)

The beginning is god saying "let there be light".

But then YEC buyers might have a heart attack... but then YECs don't read NIV. It's KJV or nothing, isn't it?


spin
spin is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 01:09 AM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Get rid of the doctrinal mistranslation of Gen 1:1. It should be:

In the beginning of god's creating the heavens and the earth...

(or: In the beginning when god created the heavens and the earth...)

The beginning is god saying "let there be light".

But then YEC buyers might have a heart attack... but then YECs don't read NIV. It's KJV or nothing, isn't it?


spin
And with that, spin has completely laid waste to a huge part of Mormon theology.:notworthy:
dog-on is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 03:50 AM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Hi Folks,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea
Semi-serious suggestion: start using "ya'll" as a second person plural pronoun. This would increase the accuracy of the translation.
Then the NIV would begin to catch up with the King James Bible in pronoun accuracy.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven Avery is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 11:15 AM   #6
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,457
Default

According to Reuters, the NIV is overseen by the Committee on Bible
Translation (CBT) which is made up of a group of international biblical scholars. The promise seems to be that English speakers from around the world would be better served by this new translation, not just North Americans. I can't help but feel that plenty of people will resist this change, and I wonder if some folks will want to preserve the old NIV. Could they do this under copyright law?
Newfie is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 12:04 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newfie View Post
I can't help but feel that plenty of people will resist this change, and I wonder if some folks will want to preserve the old NIV. Could they do this under copyright law?
As I understand the law, copyright on the current version will be unaffected by the publication of any revisions.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 12:26 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Land of Make Believe
Posts: 781
Default

For starters, accepting the Documentary Hypothesis.
motorhead is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 07:07 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Space Station 33
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by motorhead View Post
For starters, accepting the Documentary Hypothesis.
That would be sweet - especially if each source was color coded...
xaxxat is offline  
Old 09-02-2009, 09:05 PM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Gregg,

While I generally like the way their translation philosophy had balanced dynamic equivalence (translation tries to clearly convey the thoughts and ideas of the source text) with healthy respect for formal equivalence (translation tries to remain as close to the original text as possible, without adding the translators' ideas and thoughts into the translation), the choice of textual variants and especially footnotes are blatantly slanted towards the US conservative-evangelical POV.

Because I read the books of the bible to understand what they actually say, and not what I would like them to say or to use in worship, I personally like a literal (formal equivalence) translation, but the NASB (the most literal) and especially the KJV(AV) have archaic language that can get in the way of interpretation. The RSV & NRSV are supposed to be formal equivalence translations, but I can find numerous places where the meaning conveyed is clearly dynamic, and does not effectively convey the full meaning of the Greek.

But if you accept their translation style, which in itself is pretty good, the biggest thing I would like to see changed is the footnotes. They should reference a range of opinions about the historical situations and textual variants rather than just the ones approved by Calvinists.

DCH

Quote:
Originally Posted by gdeering View Post
It might not be news to some, but there is going to be a period of soul searching for the next NIV. Just noticed this at one of my other favorite haunts, The Huffington Post: NIV Revision


The top-selling Bible in North America will undergo its first revision in 25 years, modernizing the language in some sections and promising to reopen a contentious debate about changing gender terms in the sacred text. The New International Version, the Bible of choice for conservative evangelicals, will be revised to reflect changes in English usage and advances in Biblical scholarship, it was announced Tuesday. The revision is scheduled to be completed late next year and published in 2011.



I'd like to hear what people think should be up for consideration? Obviously besides just chucking the whole thing out.

Personally I'd love to see better translation of Hebrew in the OT, add "young girl" and remove "virgin" anyone?


Gregg
DCHindley is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:44 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.