[pissant]

Good, with the evangelicals going limp on global warming and now this, maybe we'll get a few more converted to Catholicism.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I still have and read my King James version!

[LiteKeeper]

Or maybe those who are evangelicals, and hold to an inerrant Bible will rise up to teach our straying brethren the Truth.

[ICE-FLYER]

Wont buy it

[Talisker]

Now, now, next thing you know, someone’s gonna start nailing Bible versions to church doors.

[HiTech RedNeck]

It’s more likely there is a vibrant Southern Baptist presence in American locales where the Romish are looey.

Also you know nothing about the bible biz. The NIV simply marginalizes itself by forcing these politically correct revision. NASB and NKJV are both quite popular among modern readers who want great accuracy.

[Soothesayer9]

No thanks. Christianity is good enough for me.

[Paleo Conservative]

What a miniscule market! The people interested in political correctness aren’t interested in reading Bibles anyway.

[OneVike]

The New International Version, the Bible of choice for conservative evangelicals

First off, I do not know any conservative evangelicals who consider the NIV as good translation.

Like myself, most conservatives use the New American Standard Bible, or the New King James Version. But the NIV has been put on the back shelf with other questionable translations as will be thieir newest heretical version of the Scriptures.

[ansel12]

Good, with the evangelicals going limp on global warming and now this, maybe we'll get a few more converted to Catholicism.

Catholics voted 54% for Obama, Evangelicals voted about 75 to 80% against him. I don't think that we need more Catholic voters.

[Old Professer]

F=MA

F=force
M=mass
A=audacity

[Guyin4Os]

The Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution saying the edition “has gone beyond acceptable translation standards.”

ahh... a voice of reason.

I have never liked the NIV... at all. Back in the 80s, my Hebrew professor in seminary called it the "Nearly Inspired Version" because the translation is inaccurate in so many places. In its attempt to supply "dynamic equivalents" in its translation, it succumbs to the theological biases of the "translators." I put "translators" in quotes because they are not true translators since they imposed their own views upon the text.

I'm not a KJV-only nut, but the KJV in its 400 year-old style of English is STILL a better translation than the NIV, and most other translations as well. For those who are not able to translate the original languages for themselves, the KJV is still the translation of choice for those who are serious about studying God's holy, inspired word.

[givemELL]

Sons is indicative of sex, family structure, traditional marriage and Judeo-Christian tradition and faith. The use of ‘children’, out of context from history, culture and tradition, delegitimizes all of the former from the new Biblical context desired.

There have been many revisions of the Bible, and, this, apparently, is the new socialist version, and the first one to omit ‘Sons’, and probably even subject to more frequent revision, if this one is accepted. With a socialist view, God, Yahweh, could become ‘IT’ in the not too far future, if not eliminated altogether by socially directed revisionists. A better result would ensue if the fever of focus for revision was redirected on Jihad related texts.

[ColdWater]

“and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand”

u r 2 b saved.

[fso301]

The top-selling Bible in North America will undergo its first revision in 25 years

Flame away but the internet wasn't available to scholars for the current NIV version. Obviously, references to humans using gender specific terms like "man" amd "sons" should be changed where appropriate to "humans".

For those relying on the King James, I'm sorry but it has many errors.

[Zack Attack]

I can’t speak for all the changes in this text, but in many instances “children” really is more correct than “sons” according to the Hebrew text. In mixed or unknown gender groups, the masculine gender is always used.

[JimBianchi11]

The Word of God is diminished by the acts of man.

[DaveTesla]

A gender neutral bible.

God created Man and Woman.
The devil has been peeved ever since.

Gene Robinson must be pleased.

[kvanbrunt2]

i fell in love with young's literal translation after reading the first chapter of genesis. se how beautifulthe words are. this is where if first saw the seperation, collection and actual creation. i think it is a beatiful translation. can't spell check. 1 In the beginning of God’s preparing the heavens and the earth— 2the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters. 3 And God saith, ‘Let light be;’ and light is. 4And God seeth the light that it is good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5and God calleth to the light ‘Day,’ and to the darkness He hath called ‘Night;’ and there is an evening, and there is a morning—day one. 6 And God saith, ‘Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.’ 7And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which are under the expanse, and the waters which are above the expanse: and it is so. 8And God calleth to the expanse ‘Heavens;’ and there is an evening, and there is a morning—day second. 9 And God saith, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be collected unto one place, and let the dry land be seen:’ and it is so. 10And God calleth to the dry land ‘Earth,’ and to the collection of the waters He hath called ‘Seas;’ and God seeth that it is good. 11And God saith, ‘Let the earth yield tender grass, herb sowing seed, fruit-tree (whose seed is in itself) making fruit after its kind, on the earth:’ and it is so. 12And the earth bringeth forth tender grass, herb sowing seed after its kind, and tree making fruit (whose seed is in itself) after its kind; and God seeth that it is good; 13and there is an evening, and there is a morning—day third. Young, Robert: Young's Literal Translation. Oak Harbor : Logos Research Systems, 1997, S. Ge 1:1

[Tennessee Nana]

Yes, except to put the word children where God has said “sons” is to water down the meaning of the verses...

to be a child of god is one thinbg

Buit to be a son means you have a high place in God’s house..

authority, an inheritance of everything He has etc...

It is not important to be gender percific...

It is important to be accurate...

We know and understand that woman have just as much right to be sons of God as men have...

Jesus died to give us all salvation and a place in God...

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the SONS of God, even to them that believe on his name: John 1:12

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the SONS of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew Him not. 1 John 3:1

Beloved, now are we the SONS of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see him as he is. 1 John 3:2

In those verses the word “sons” in the Greek is teknon, meaning a child (as produced) child, son, daughter..

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the SONS of God. Romans 8:14

And because you are SONS, God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father Galations 4:6

In those two verses the word “sons” in the Greek is huios, meaning a “son” its used very widely (even for animals) used very wsidely of immediate, remote or figurative kinship, a son, a foal, a child..

To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of SONS. Galations 4:5

Here the word for “sons” in the Greek is huiothesia, meaning the placing of a son ie adoption, (figratively Christian sonship in respect to God)adoption (of children, of sons)

[Altura Ct.]

Liberalism is a disease.