TNIV missing from BW7 lists

[Columcille]

Gontroppo,

Glad to see I'm not the only one who feels this way. I haven't spent a great deal of time with the TNIV, but I have used it for some study and personal reading and I don't have a big problem with their translation approach. It might could be said that they went too far with making certain pronouns gender neutral, but they didn't do anything not done in every modern translation. Even the ESV, which is often loved by vocal opponents of the TNIV, has a number of places where a masculine pronoun is translated in a more gender neutral sense. Most people recognize that the masculine Greek pronoun was often used as ours - as the gender neutral term. It's just the product of our times that the masculine pronoun is no longer as acceptable to carry a gender neutral idea. That issue is a different discussion.

The TNIV does not sacrifice the message of the Bible. Every translation has passages I think could have been done better, and the TNIV is no exception. But I have not found a single place in the TNIV that I felt distorted the truth of Scripture. The uproar about the translation has had me somewhat confused.

Background on me, I've spent 4 semesters studying Koine Greek as an undergraduate, 3 semesters in seminary, and general Greek usage in my own study. My Hebrew is a bit non-existent so any comparisons I've done between the TNIV and the original languages have been in the Greek.

[Bennett B. Wethered]

As I said, the purpose of my post was to dissuade anyone from using or making available the TNIV (or any other non licensed work), for use in BW via the Version Database Compiler.

Obviously, my comments about the translation philosophy/approach used in the TNIV (as also the NRSV & NLT) has prompted references to the quality, appropriateness, or accuracy of that translation.
- - As resources in looking at the issues involved, I recommend http://www.genderneutralbibles.com/ (as well as http://www.keptthefaith.org/ ), from which one can read many links to articles that detail, verse-by-verse (see especially the "Comparative verse list" under "The Text," on the latter site for this), example-by-example, instances where they question the translation choices made by the translators of the TNIV, NRSV, and NLT. I encourage any who are interested to read through the various articles (by scholars with Hebrew and Greek language background) on this topic.

[Columcille]

I confess I didn't do a careful reading but a very quick scan, and those websites look like more of the same old argument made against the TNIV without honest demonstration that the TNIV changes biblical meaning and intent. I really have struggled to try and understand why people have been so aggressive in attacking the TNIV while defending other translations which engage in the exact same approach with many pronouns.

Also, using the term "gender neutral Bible" is itself somewhat dishonest and misleading. The TNIV is not a gender neutral Bible. In the vast majority of references where a gender pronoun is used in the original language, a gender pronoun is used in the translation. In those instances where it is clear that the Biblical meaning applies to both men and women, the TNIV uses a gender neutral translation.

I think we evangelicals too often look for things to fight about, and when there's nothing better going on we invent battles. The TNIV debate strikes me as one of those cases.

[ingosorke]

The TNIV discussion should probably move to the non-BW discussion.

Out of fairness to the translation, the TNIV is only 7% different from the NIV, and most changes have nothing to do with gender. Those changes actually lean towards being more "literal" than dynamic-equivalent (i.e., Rev 14:4). Incidentally, no English translation retains the Greek "mouth to mouth" in 3 Jn 1:14; they all translate "face-to-face". And curiously the KJV translated Mt 5:9 400 years ago with "children" but changed to "sons" in the NKJV.

If for no other reason the TNIV would be nice to have for comparative reasons (with the NIV), to see trends in translation technique etc.

I always considered BW more of a technical tool than a philosophical platform . . .

For the other side of the coin, dig around in www.tniv.info -- and my main English translation is the ESV!

Happy comparing,

Ingo Sorke
work: Southwestern Adventist University
study: Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
breathe: Family

[Columcille]

The TNIV discussion should probably move to the non-BW discussion.
...
I always considered BW more of a technical tool than a philosophical platform . . .

Quite true, I'll say no more on the merits of the TNIV. Easy to say now, but can I keep my mouth shut when others have posted...? ~cue mystery music~

[Bennett B. Wethered]

The TNIV discussion should probably move to the non-BW discussion......

If for no other reason the TNIV would be nice to have for comparative reasons (with the NIV), to see trends in translation technique etc.....

I always considered BW more of a technical tool than a philosophical platform . . .

Happy comparing,
Ingo Sorke

Yes, I'd also love to have the TNIV, for comparative purposes, but especially if it could come with some of the translator's notes that we have in the NET Bible.

Yes, this aspect of any TNIV discussion should now more properly be on the "non BibleWorks discussion" part of the Forum. My only desire in citing those websites was to make them, as resources (and I do see them as substantive), known to others who may not previously been aware of the information, examples, and perspective they present. Having done so, I need say no more on the subject.

[cmyktaylor]

Brothers,

You miss the point. This is a glaring omission. The TNIV markets itself as the Bible for our generation. I believe Bibleworks is one the best Bible study tools of our generation. How can such a sharp tool be missing such a key part?

The answer from the Bibleworks staff is devastating. Zondervan has priced them out of the market. Not only that; they almost did the same with the NIV. Has Zondervan no shame? Should they not freely offer this version to BW as they do on their website?

I say this partly to my own family’s shame. Before he died, I asked my grandfather (KNT) to offer The Living Bible to Bibleworks so we could all use it. I love being able to study the history of the paraphrase by looking at the difference between it and its offspring (NLT 1.0 – NLT 2.0). He passed on my desire to his staff at Tyndale. They rebuffed him. I never did ask if they asked for too high of a royalty or if they just didn’t want it published anymore, but the result is the same.

I understand the need to make a return on your investment, but please, be reasonable.

As to my request for the TNIV from David, it was satirical. My point was that if it is freely offered on their website, then surely we should all have free access to it via Bibleworks.

Indeed, I do have The Living Bible on Bibleworks, but as it is illegal for me to freely give it to another, I can not, nor have I, passed it on to any others. Though, if it is any consolation, I believe it is available for free on a website somewhere.

[rkastens]

I know BW is does not like to make Bible translations available as an add on for sale, but it seems to me that if a publisher is charging a significant price for a new translation, then offering it as an add on is the way to go. That way individual users can determine if it is worth it for them to spend the extra money to have it or not. Later, when the cost becomes more manageable, BW can then simply make it available in their base package. I would love to have the TNIV and I'd be willing to pay a little more for it.

For all the knocks on Zondervan, I seriously doubt other Christian publishers are much different. (Although Zondervan may be the worst, I don't know.) In the end, the Christian publishing business is still a business. Christians received their grace from God for free and we typically expect everything else for free as well.

Ron

[general487]

First post!

I for one am a huge admirer of what you guys are doing here at BibleWorks. I have extensively compared other software, and the "bang for the buck" is the only reason I can even make use of the wonderful product (struggling Master's student).

For me, the decision to wait on the TNIV is a smart one if it means higher costs. It keeps BibleWorks in my price range, and I still have a gazillion other modern translations to compare. Going to the website when I need to is no big deal.

Keep up the good work!

[theborins]

the TNIV is being used in more and more churches. I love BW, but believe, as others have voiced, that it's a glaring omission in what is otherwise such a thorough tool.