Today’s NIV Bible Barred from LifeWay Christian Bookstores

Christian Post ^ | Jan. 27, 2005 | Pauline J. Chang

[paudio]

The Rolling Stone Magazine reversed its decision not to air an advertisement for the Today’s New International Version (TNIV) of the Bible earlier this week, but the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)-affiliated Lifeway Christian Resources has not yet changed its decision to keep the edition out of its 122 bookstores because of the version’s gender-neutral translations.

The controversy over the International Bible Society (IBS) and Zondervan Publishing House’s TNIV began in 2002 when initial publishing began. Fundamentals and evangelicals rejected the version’s rendering of male terms like “son” and “father” into the gender neutral “child” and “parent”, respectively.

By the year’s end, two of the nation’s largest evangelical denominations, the SBC and the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), passed resolutions establishing that the TNIV has “gone beyond acceptable translation standards.”

“Although it is possible for Bible scholars to disagree about translation methods or which English words best translate the original languages, the TNIV has gone beyond acceptable translation standards,” a part of the SBC’s 2002 Resolution 4 read. “This translation alters the meaning of hundreds of verses, most significantly by erasing gender-specific details which appear in the original language.”

Resolution 4 expressed “profound disappointment” with the IBS and Zondervan, and further resolved that “Lifeway not make this inaccurate translation available for sale in their bookstores.”

Lifeway’s spokesman Rob Phillips said Lifeway has not had the chance to review the full Bible yet, but does not have plans to stock it.

The TNIV is set to be released next week.

[Always Right]

Since certain names like John and Peter imply a gender, should we change the names to something more neutral like Pat. Even Jesus implies a gender, perhaps a new name is in order....

[Smartaleck]

Our "Parent" who art in heaven"?.........yeah right.

[BellStar]

Matt 5:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

The "Jot" is the Hebrew word "Yodh" which is the 10th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. It is also the smallest letter. It's European or English equivalent is the letter "Y" as in the English term Yahweh or in Hebrew YHVH since there were no vowel's used in the ancient script.

The word "jot" itself is an English transliteration of "iota" which is the 9th letter of the Greek alphabet. "Iota," in turn, is the nearest Greek equivalent for the Hebrew yodh.

The "tittle" is the small decorative spur or point on the upper edge of the yodh. If you can imagine a tiny letter with a slightly visible decorative mark.

Tittle is used by Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. It means the little lines or projections by which the Hebrew letters differ from each other. One example would be the difference between the letter L and I. The difference is only one small mark. We use phrases like "the dotting of the i, and the crossing of the t," and "every iota."

It is interesting that the Jewish scribes who copied the MT (Massoretic Text) of the Hebrew Bible scrolls paid the greatest attention to the minutiae of detail and such marks attached to each consonant throughout the entire text. They even numbered every letter, word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, section, and scroll to insure that the total equalled that of the text being copied before allowing it to enter the holy synagogue.

The meaning of the passage is very clear. Not even the smallest letter or even its decorative spur will ever disappear from the "God Breathed" Word until all is fulfilled. In fact when heaven and earth are replaced by a new heaven and earth, the Word of the Lord will have accomplished its purpose and will be fulfilled in every detail even to the very letter.

Not One "Jot Or Tittle"

Don't Mess With the Text!

[SerpentDove]

When you feel you have to water down the Bible so the Goddess-worshippers don't have a problem with it, you've gone too far.

Ridiculous. And Zondervan? Shameful.

[Tax-chick]

Jesus called God, "Father," and used the pronoun, "He." So should we.

[R. Scott]

Don't Mess With the Text!

So we should all learn Hebrew, Aramaic and ancient Greek? Many fundamentalists consider only the King James Version the only true Word of God – and it is actually a rather poor translation.

[Martin Tell]

Our "Parent" who art in heaven"?.........yeah right.

Recently I saw a PBS documentary about the lesbian Methodist pastor who was defrocked.

In that church, the congregation prayed, "Our Mother/Father, who art in heaven ..."

I kid you not.

The real kicker was that many in the congregation thought the head pastor (the lesbian was the junior pastor) was too much of a biblical literalist.

[Jemian]

You are completely wrong about the King James being a bad translation. In fact, it and the New American Standard version have over a 90% accuracy in a word for word translation from the oldest manuscripts extent. Other translations such as the New International Vesion and Phillips have around a 75 - 80% accuracy.

[beezdotcom]

So we should all learn Hebrew, Aramaic and ancient Greek?

That's not what was implied. Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.

[R. Scott]

You are completely wrong about the King James being a bad translation. In fact, it and the New American Standard version have over a 90% accuracy in a word for word translation from the oldest manuscripts extent.

I consider a 10% error rate as being pretty bad.

[trebb]

Just another attempt to advance us all towards being apostate - change a thing here and there and eventually, any change is acceptable... It must really irk some folks that the man is supposed to be the spiritual head and master of the household ;-)

[R. Scott]

Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.

PC should never enter into the translation of any work.

[nicmarlo]

Thank you Bell Star (especially) and Jemian for your informative posts. I understand your point, Bell Star, and you are quite right. Translation of the Bible should be a painstaking enterprise to accurately and precisely interpret the literal (i.e., pronouns) and cultural meaning (i.e., idioms).

I'm quite surprised that Zondervan has strayed from this. What exactly is it they are attempting to do, besides bastardizing Holy text?

While in college I learned that it's quite possible that William Shakespeare helped with writing the King James version. Studies apparently have been done on that. It was quite interesting.

Myself, I prefer the New American Standard Version....and I like the Amplified Bible for a simple study. It would be best, however, to use the book that has the Greek and Armaic (I think it is) languages placed in columns and get an even better understanding that way....I forget what that type of book is called.

[Walkin Man]

When you feel you have to water down the Bible so the Goddess-worshippers don't have a problem with it, you've gone too far.

Ridiculous. And Zondervan? Shameful.

I totally agree with your thoughts!

[Jemian]

I gave myself a little leeway when writing those statistics. It was about 2 years ago when I saw those figures on the literalness of translations. I am thinking that the KJV is 99% accurate and the NAS 97% accurate. I'm not sure and would have to do some digging to come up with the exact figure.

It is impossible for translators to be completely accurate with a text due to abstract concepts being conveyed. So, any percentage in the +90% is actually quite good. I do think it best for people to study Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, however not required. I also think that we can trust our Sovereign God to give us the knowledge we need to come to faith regardless of the translation.

[nicmarlo]

10% error rate

10% error rate, made in good faith, is much better than 40% error rate by intent. So, your point is, R. Scott?

[BellStar]

Don't Mess With the Text!
Translation: he can never be made to be she any more than a translation that would call a cow a goat!

[Gamecock]

Paging xzins to post 8

[Caesar Soze]

A rather poor translation of questionable manuscripts, at that. And one that has been updated and changed many times over the years. I'd tell KJV-onlyists to put that in their pipe and smoke it, but King James was a well-known enemy of smoking, so I'm sure they don't have pipes.