Posted on 09/01/2009 12:31:33 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
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.
"We want to reach English speakers across the globe with a Bible that is accurate, accessible and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand," said Keith Danby, global president and CEO of Biblica, a Colorado Springs, Colo.-based Christian ministry that holds the NIV copyright.
But past attempts to remake the NIV for contemporary audiences in different editions have been plagued by controversies about gender language that have pitted theological conservatives against each other.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Let’s hope the update doesn’t change “Adam & Eve” to “Adam & Steve.”
Then God said to Noah “Yo! Round up two of every critter in yo hood cuz I’m gonna make it rain!”
The Bible of choice for conservative Christians is the KJV. No one should hold a copyright on God’s work.
And then God said “AmeriKKKa’s chickens are coming home, to ROOST!”
Mohammed holds a copyright on his version of the Bible too.
Wrong, NIV is a big seller, but not the choice of conservative Bible believers. It distorts God's word and changes the doctrine. Also known as Satan's translation.
They’ve already blown this once with the NIVr (I beleive is the name.) Basicly a pc version of the Bible.
"Thou shalt not steal, unless thou art up for re-election"
"Thou shall have no other gods above the State"
ping.
Can you provide an example of why this is so?
I’ve contrasted some passages of the NIV with the KJ or even the NKJ, and although the old style English is difficult, the meaning seems quite a bit different in some cases. Since KJ preceded the NIV, I interpret that to mean the KJ is more accurate. Besides, I still like the KJ just because it uses “Sodomite”. That’s clear and unambiguous to me.
You shouldn’t use the NIV because it is corrupt.
The Bible of choice for conservative Christians is the KJV. No one should hold a copyright on God’s work.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The KJV was also copyrighted at the time it was translated (it has since run out obviously.) The point being that the KJV springs from the same “copyrighted poisioned well” that the NIV springs from.
I do agree in principal though that it is preferable for a Bible translation to be in the public domain.
The problem with the KJV is that it was translated into the language of its day, but the English language has passed it by.
You can bet on that one. Probably add “and the snake that offered Adam and Steve an organic apple was a Republican, right wing gun nut from Halliburton”.
Please provide an example. Blanket statements like that hold no water.
There are many KJV vs NIV comparisons online, just look at them and see the scriptures that are completely left out along with many changes to doctrine. I printed a 22 page article fron the internet a couple of weeks ago, and that only covered the New Testiment.
Is this the version that didn't like God being refereed to as a man ( because it offended the NOW hags ) and they "corrected" it?
Since KJ preceded the NIV, I interpret that to mean the KJ is more accurate.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That does not follow logically. I’m not sure if there is an official name for the logical fallacy you just engaged in, but it is one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.