R.I.P.
What is touted on the Zondervan website as “Today’s newest and brightest translation” is going the way of the dodo. It is being discontinued in favor of a revision of the NIV. I am a little disappointed because it really was a pretty good translation. Like any translation it had its flaws (like changing singular masculines into plural third persons – James 5:13 for instance). I am mostly upset because the one I have is falling apart and has a ton of notes written in the margins and I don’t care to replace it with something that isn’t going to exist in a couple of years.
Rex already mentioned his use of the TNIV…any of the rest of you effected by this decision. What do you make of it, good idea, bad idea or generally don’t care?
0 Responses
I wonder hos much this decision is due to some of the evangelical quaters not using the TNIV because it translates *anthropos* (man, human) in the more generic sense (which might solve an egalitarian problem but creates other problems as Matt pointed out).
Any ways, I thought the TNIV was a revision of the NIV. What would they accomplish by doing away with the TNIV and creating a revised NIV? What a joke.
Grace and peace,
Rex
I’ve been trying to get the TNIV off the ground, but it’s hard to convince a group of people to change translations. I like that the TNIV takes on some of the translation problems of the NIV, but it still leaves some egregious errors in play (1 Cor 14:35 sigato is translated as “be silent” when earlier in the chapter it is “be quiet” and “stop talking” – terrible).
NRSV?
James,
I really prefer the NRSV, as I think it has done a great job of rendering a word for word translation that is easily readible like the NIV/TNIV (where as the NASB and ESV do not seem to allow for a flowing read). However, there seem to be very few “people in the pew” who read from the NRSV. Maybe this will change.
Grace and peace,
Rex
I’m happy with the NIV personally. There are a few Scriptures I wish they’d have translated differently, but overall I can’t complain too much.