Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

Under the Preface my NIV says 1978 and (Revised 1983) so maybe that is the 1984 version, and the copyrights are numerous so if I am correct for this one it reads 1973, 1978, 1984. Mine is a Life Application Bible, NIV. Zondervan.


141 posted on 03/16/2014 12:48:14 PM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies ]


To: Kackikat

“The explanation offered for the “updates” is also misleading in that it does not mention the real political and financial considerations that have caused the NIV committee to make three revisions within the past fifteen years. The considerations that set in motion this series of revisions are, however, indicated in a document that set forth a new “Policy on Gender-Inclusive Language” adopted by the committee in 1992. The document contains these paragraphs:

C. Authors of Biblical books, even while writing Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit, unconsciously reflected in many ways, the particular cultures in which they wrote. Hence in the manner in which they articulate the Word of God, they sometimes offend modern sensibilities. At such times, translators can and may use non-offending renderings so as not to hinder the message of the Spirit.

D. The patriarchalism (like other social patterns) of the ancient cultures in which the Biblical books were composed is pervasively reflected in forms of expression that appear, in the modern context, to deny the common human dignity of all hearers and readers. For these forms, alternative modes of expression can and may be used, though care must be taken not to distort the intent of the original text.”

http://www.bible-researcher.com/niv.2011.html

“For this revision to the NIV, particular attention has been paid to external feedback in the area of gender language. As stated in the September 1, 2009, announcement regarding the planned update, every single change introduced into the committee’s last major revision (the TNIV) relating to inclusive language for humanity was reconsidered. Some were preserved, some were abolished in favor of the 1984 rendering and many were reworded in a third, still different way.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/niv/Translators-Notes.pdf

I no longer use the NIV.

“However the Southern Baptist Convention rejected the 2011 update because of gender-related issues. Southern Baptist publisher LifeWay declined the SBC censor to remove the NIV from their stores. The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod also cautioned against its use.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIV


142 posted on 03/16/2014 1:01:57 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I sooooo miss America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson