New version of the NIV
Ouch!!! People were warning me this day would come. The optimist in me didn't want to believe them. As much as I hate the message, I am thankful to the messenger (memverse member Josiah) for ruining my day and I want to pass the word on to others in the memverse family. I am not happy, but am still praising God that He, His eternal truth, His love and power, His Promises and Claims, His Word does not and will not change!!!
Not only do I dislike most, if not all the changes in the new NIV, it sure is a pain as a lover of the "outdated" NIV to have a new edition with the exact same name (Why didn't they just stay with the "wonderful" TNIV for the few out there who want the NIV to keep up with the changing times?) messing things up. Regardless of the mess man has made of translations and various other aspects of christian culture, may we be all the more passionate and steadfast in getting to know Him and His Word and in spreading a passion for and commitment to His Word to people we know and as God opens doors, around the world!!!
Andy, any thoughts on how this will affect memverse?
57 responses to New version of the NIV
Ok, after reading the new NIV on Biblegateway I realize it is really a new translation and substantially different in the wording. I will probably list two NIV translations going forward:
NIV (1984) and NIV (2010)
I'm assuming that the NIV version we've all been merrily using is the NIV (1984) and not NIV (1973).
I must say, the appeal of the NIV translation for me has always been the possibility of its phrasing entering the vernacular in the same way the KJV once did. With it's global appeal it seemed as though that might happen but this new translation certainly muddies the waters again.
this is laziness on my part, but I would appreciate it if people wish to share specific examples that they find most agregious to help me decide the best response going forward. I read NIV when I was first saved & we've all invested alot in studying & memorizing with that version . . . *sigh* If I knew then what I know now, I might have gone NKJ .... At any rate, thanks for the heads up!
I must admit that I am none too pleased with the developtment either. Even if readability is supposedly the appeal of the NIV, I really do not think a new version is needed yet. The 1984 NIV is perfectly readable and easy to understand. If you stumble upon a word you don't know, there's an amazing tool called the dictionary that you can look it up in, and you've just learned a new vocabulary word as an added benefit. It's not challenging words that cause difficulty in memorizing the Bible, it's the abundance of "just-slighly-different" translations that are always floating around.
I wonder if Bible Bee and Bible Quiz events will start using the new translation right away, or if they'll give the option to use the old version for a while.
Can anyone describe a few examples of how the NIV is changed??? Personally, I use the ESV and am 102% happy with it, but I was just wondering if the changes made are 'dumbing' the Bible down for the general, biblically/spiritually illiterate populace or what. . . I agree with Talia.
Here's a good document on the changes that were made:
http://www.biblegateway.com/niv/Translators-Notes.pdf
This is the "New Coke Fiasco" of 1985 all over again -LOL. I want to keep my "NIV - Classic". :)
I noticed "brothers" changed to "brothers and sisters" (such as in Phil 4:8)
I will check out the doc, Andy, thank you!
This is a rather big change:
1984 NIV: ‟‛I hate divorce,’ says the Lord God of Israel, ‛and I hate a man’s covering himself with
violence as well as with his garment,’ says the Lord Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and
do not break faith.â€
Updated NIV: ‟‛The man who hates and divorces his wife,’ says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‛does
violence to the one he should protect,’ says the Lord Almighty. So be on your guard, and do not be
unfaithful.â€
Pretty big theological change here...and its not just a rewording...
Luckily, I memorize from The King James Version. But I can nonetheless see how frustrating this would be. I definitely agree with Phil that man has made a mess of various Bible translations. It was my understanding that the NIV was at least partially a word for word translation from the original texts, but it seems that the 2010 version is tending more toward a paraphrase. As Josiah pointed out, some changes are more than just a change in wording, but extend to the very theology of the Scripture itself. Adding "and sisters" when the original text doesn't even include those words comes across to me as nothing more than an attempt to make the Word of God less offensive to an ungodly world.
I have been wondering for a while which version I should memorize in. Until now, I've been using NIV, but I have heard a lot of people switching to ESV... I don't know. I have memorized a lot in NIV. We'll see. Thanks for the update, Josiah. I'm not as upset as Phil. :)
Dakota, let me point something out. My ESV Bible, printed in 2007, has this footnote from the word "brothers in every New Testament book that contains it.
E.g. Acts 1:14: ". . . together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his *brothers*." ---Footnote: 'Or "brothers and sisters." The plural Greek word adelphoi (translated "brothers") refers to siblings in a family. In New Testament usage, depending on the context, adelphoi may refer either to men or to both men and women who are siblings (brother and sisters) in God's family, the church.'
That should shed some light on that particular change.
The example noted by Josiah is terrible! That is too bad the new NIV has chosen to go that way. As to the brother and sister issue, I don't see that as an issue where the Bible is obviously referring to both men and women. I remember my Dad always saying at a passage addressed to the "brethren" that the "sistern's" were also included in that as well :-)
I have started memorizing from the NLT in recent days. For those who haven't read it yet I would recommend giving it a try at least for reading from if not using it for your memory work -- it's a great translation too.
I was looking over the translation notes on the "new NIV" and I came up with this justification for the passage noted earlier:
Malachi 2:16
1984: ‟‛I hate divorce,’ says the Lord God of Israel, ‛and I hate a man’s covering himself with
violence as well as with his garment,’ says the Lord Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and
do not break faith.â€
Updated NIV: ‟‛The man who hates and divorces his wife,’ says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‛does
violence to the one he should protect,’ says the Lord Almighty. So be on your guard, and do not be
unfaithful.â€
A footnote gives as an alternative, ‟‛I hate divorce,’ says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‛because the
man who divorces his wife covers his garment with violence,’ . . .â€
In the Hebrew, God’s declaration in the first half of this verse is very elliptical and hard to translate. An
interlinear reading might yield, ‟Hating,†‟divorcing,†‟and covers,†‟violence,†‟upon protection of himâ€!
But how do you put all those concepts together? The first word is a masculine participle, followed by
an infinitive construct, suggesting ‟the man who hates and divorces.†‟His protection†could refer to
clothing, but a more contextually meaningful translation would refer to the one he was supposed to
protect, namely, his wife. Most scholars now think that the first half of the verse means something like
‟the man who hates and divorces†(the ESV follows this interpretation). The more minor changes in
the final part of the verse simply use more current English.
I'm not sure what to think of this justification. It sounds reasonable, but it might be wise to look into it more.
I stand corrected. Thank you, River, for pointing that out to me! I'd never heard that before. Whatever the case, I'm so thankful for the knowledge that the Word of God never changes - even if our interpretation of it does.
I think we need to remember we have a lot to learn, and should be like the Bereans, who
examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (NIV 1984)
searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (KJV)
examin[ed] the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. (NASB)
examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (NIV 2010)
searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. (NKJV)
Comparing Scripture with Scripture is part of the key, as opposed to always falling back on JUST what we've been taught. Everything man has taught us needs to be held up against God's entire Word -- the reason we need to be reading the whole thing, cover to cover, as often as possible, and even out of different translations. And, most important of all, asking God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord to show us by His Holy Spirit the truth, and that as we read we would be open to HIS guidance and direction. He says in James, all we have to do is ask and believe and He WILL give us wisdom.
May God bless you all as you continue to memorize; and especially Andy as you figure out how to deal with this and any other upcoming version variations, and Phil and those involved with the Bible Bee as you seek for the best solution. But I pray first and foremost that God would be glorified and we would not forget He has the ultimate control over ALL things.
Laurel :)
I have added support for the new NIV translation. You will see:
New International Version (1984) - NIV
New International Version (2010) - NNV
I'm determined to maintain my three letter translation code so the 2010 NIV will be referred to as 'NNV' for now. The 1984 version will remain as NIV.
Thank you, Talia for the further research into the New NIV translation and thank you also, Laurel for the great reminder! Andy, we appreciate all you do to keep this website up and running!
River, having made it about half way through the translation notes (the page that was linked to by Andy in an earlier reply), it sounds very interesting. I definitely want to read it through at least once. I never was much of a fan of the NIV to begin with, but I still have read it through a few times, and especially enjoy the chronological daily version, as it gives a whole new perspective on things.
I also want to encourage those who want to dig deeper into translation and the historical context in which the Bible was written, to check out the NetBible and John Gill's Commentaries. The NetBible actually explains why they choose the wording they do (as opposed to other translations); and Gill's commentaries are full of information about what the Jews believed about different things. Very interesting.
Both of these are free resources available on the internet.
Have a great day all! :)
I like the king james versions best. Since I do not memorize in NIV, I don't think that a new NIV is a good idea. I have not done that much with it, but so far I am convinced that the NIV (C)2010 is somthing I'll be a fan of.
I see that you have NIV (C)2010 as a memory verse option ;-). About how many of you out there are using the NIV (C)2010? Like said earlier, I don't use the NIV (C)2010 or the 1984/1973 NIVs either, although I have a NIV Bible for cross referancing (1984/1973) and a big reason to why I am keeping it (because, if I don't use NIV, period, why would I have a NIV Bible anyway?) is because they are replacing this type of NIV, so that the 1984/1973 Bibles would probably not be made anymore. So if any of you who do not use NIV, yet have a NIV 1984/1973 , I suggest that you keep your 1984/1973 NIV Bible for this reason. But that's just my opinion, and who knows (but God) if anyone cares for this? I hope that this is not just hot air that just takes up space on the blog.
I use NIV 1984
I do not like the new translation so I hope Bible Bee does not change to the new edition
Marie, I am with you on this one. The Bible Bee has a big decision. I will definately put in my two cents worth encouraging them not to go with this latest, Lord willing, "fly by night" propaganda to the new agenda attempt. We did not go for the first attempt with the British NIV or the latest and greatest repackaging with the "TODAY'S NIV" (TNIV) which didn't last long. Now they are trying to force us to accept the same agenda with the TTTNIV (Ten Thousand Ten NIV).
Yeah, if the Bible Bee wants to support the new NIV, I hope that they plan on letting people pick to use either the new NIV or the old NIV.
That's great. If you don't mind me asking, how did you find out? Is it on their website? An email? Thanks!! EDIT: Thanks for the update, Marie. :)
the live chat feature on the website. I chatted" with Diane at BB and she said so but I do not think in is recorded anywhere in particular
Although the Bee used 1984 NIV in 2011, I don't think THEY have the option to do so in 2012. I think it's Zondervan we need to be contacting to see if they will rethink this awful decision.
http://www.zondervan.com/Cultures/en-US/Company/ContactUs
or write to them at:
Zondervan
5300 Patterson Avenue SE
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530
JaneLovesJesus - I agree that the Bible Bee will likely have to use the NIV 2011 next year, though I don't know for sure. Personally, I'm thinking about switching to the English Standard Version (ESV). If you are interested, Kevin DeYoung has written a great article on why his church switched to the ESV here: http://static.crossway.org/excerpt/why-our-church-switched-to-the-esv/why-our-church-switched-to-the-esv.pdf. As he points out, though, no translation is perfect, and yet we should try to choose a translation that helps us understand the original text as much as possible...
I use KJV so this doesn't matter to me but... my cousin Faith, who is doing the Bible Bee and uses ESV, told me that she heard that the Bible Bee will not be using NIV at all after this year. Has anyone else heard this?
Matthew - Yes, that's what their FAQ page says. My family made the switch to ESV this year since we liked it as a more accurate word-for-word translation and knew that if we didn't switch this year we would have to next year.
OK. I wish your family God's provision as you begin studying in a whole new translation! That would be extremely hard for me.
I too decided to switch translations because of this change. Since the NIV won't be included after this year, I decided to switch early and prepare a year ahead. I switched to NKJV because it's what our pastor uses, and it's my dad's favorite translation. It was between NKJV and ESV, but I chose NKJV, because it seems to me that it flows better. The ESV seems more rigid to me.
So far, it hasn't been too bad. The wording is a little hard to get used to, since I'm accustomed to the easy-flowing NIV, but I'm doing alright. I'm on track with my verse memorization, so it's not really much of a handicap.
I just noticed that the 1984 NIV is no longer available at Bible Gateway. Does anyone know a site where I can easily get it?
Alex, it was nice to use while it had it. Now that site too only has the new NIV. Do you or anyone else happen to know another site where we can get the 1984 NIV. Next time we will try to be more diligent in quickly copying our favorite chapters into Word.
Alex, I am breaking the don't post off topic rule here. However, I can't make the www.memverse.com/assets/SETIA.pdf link work. Am I doing something wrong? It would still be very helpful for me to be able to link to this article.
Does anyone know where 1984 NIV is located online at?
Biblos.com had it for a while after Bible Gateway got rid of the Bible but now Biblos has removed the Bible as well and switched to the 2011 NIV.
How does this affect importing new verses on sites like memverse and scripturetyper?
Marie and Mr. Walker - The 1984 NIV is still available at http://www.biblestudytools.com/ (thanks to Memverse Get Satisfaction member "N K" for mentioning this).
Mr. Walker - Sorry about the Setia PDF; it's back up now.
I have the books of 2 Corinthians and Philippians in the 1984 NIV on my blog.
www.radiantsunshine4him.blogspot.com
I hope this is helpful to some of you.
these are the books I am currently working on memorizing and I wanted to have quick access to them once BG took them off the site.
Alex, I still can't get the pdf file on the internet. What am I doing wrong? What should I click? However, I did see you have the new video up. Thanks.
@Christiana, I dont necessarily like one more than another. I have grown up using the 1984 NIV and have a lot of Scripture memorized in that translation. I read from many different translations, but I usually memorize in NIV (though not exclusively)
@Marie, Thanks Marie. How old are you? Are you in the Bright Lights Group? I am in the Bright Lights group.
@ Christiana, I am a Bright Lights leader. Yes, I am part of the BL group on memverse. I am 20 years old. Are you a part of a local BL group? Who is your local BL leader?
@Marie, I am a part of a BL group. My sister and Erin Allen are the leaders and both are on memverse. Erin Allen is part of the members BL group as well. I am 11.
I haven't yet figured out how to handle this. For now, though, let's try to keep the NIV translation as the original edition. If necessary we'll add an NIV (2010) ... or something like that. I will take a look at how extensive the changes are.