| Fritzpw_Admin says, Thank you for joining us tonight everyone. We've heard quite a bit of negative criticism surrounding Zondervan's plan to release a new gender accurate Bible dubbed the Today's New International Version. In our last Chat on this topic we welcomed Rev. Tim Bayly who pointed out numerous inaccurate translations of several Biblical passages. Tonight we'll be Chatting with associate professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary, Dr. Mark Strauss. Dr. Strauss has written a book concerning gender accuracy in Bible translations as well as written an article in support of the TNIV. Be sure to check these out by clicking on the image at the bottom of your screen or goto http://www.tniv.info. Before we begin allow me to introduce our Event Team. Helping me on stage tonight we have our Senior News & Culture Editor, Janet Chismar aka News_Editor, as well as Spikehost, DaisyHost, and Stormyhost. And then of course you have me, myself, and I... Tasters of fine chocolate and fudge. (More info later on where to send fudge. *Smile*) And now please join me in welcoming Dr. Strauss. |
| stormyhost asks, What was the reasoning behind doing yet another Bible translation with so many excellent ones already on the market? |
| Dr.Strauss says, Good question. The NIV translators have felt for a long time that the NIV needed revision, especially with reference to gender language. The mandate of the NIV is to keep it current to contemporary English, so this is really just a part of the normal revision process of the NIV. It is true we have a wealth of translations, which is a wonderful thing for English speakers. |
| madchatter asks, How do you respond to critics who "charge translators with doing more paraphrasing than actual translating, changing the meaning of some texts, and charting a course for more drastic revisions in the future." |
| Dr.Strauss says, Some translations certainly take liberties with the text, missing the original meaning. But this is not what the TNIV does, either in theory or in practice. The goal of the TNIV is to accurately render the meaning of the origin text in contemporary English. |
| ibtrying2 asks, It appears that those in opposition to the TNIV point most often to what they perceive as a broken promise from 1997 when IBS and Zondervan agreed not to publish a new version of the NIV. Can you tell us why that promise was originally made? |
| Dr.Strauss says, Another good question. The original agreement was made under great duress and pressure. The IBS and the CBT felt that they had no choice but to sign those agreements because of public pressure, but I am quite sure they never really agreed with the decision. In fact, however, the TNIV did not break the original agreement. The TNIV is a new translation, not a revision of the NIV. The original agreement was that the NIV would not be revised any further, and that the 1984 revision would never be changed. Just as versions like the NRSV and the new ESV are new versions, not merely revisions of the RSV, so the TNIV is a new version, not simply a revision of the NIV. |
| chanan asks, There's some contradiction in what you state. In answer to the question regarding the need, you said this was part of the normal revision process for the NIV, but now you say that this is a new translation, not merely a revision of the NIV. Is it a revision or a new translation? |
| Dr.Strauss says, Another good question. If things had gone normally, the NIV would have been revised to include gender changes. Unfortunately, because of the misinformation and public outcry, the NIV translators and the IBS agreed never again to change the NIV. The result is that the IBS had to introduce a new version, and leave the NIV in tact. The 1984 NIV will now never be changed again (which incidentally, is contrary to its original mandate). |
| garnetofgod asks, What exactly is changed in this version of the Bible? |
| Dr.Strauss says, The only thing that is changed with reference to gender language is that inclusive terms are introduced when the original readers intended an inclusive reference. For example, when Paul said in Rom. 3:28, that "a man is justified by faith," he used the Greek word anthropos, which in this case means "person" (all scholars agree on this). The TNIV simply chooses an accurate and precise English term which means what the Greek term means. |
| on_standby asks, how do you keep the meaning of the original text if you change the gender of God? That is a MAJOR part in the Christian faith! |
| Dr.Strauss says, The TNIV, like the NRSV, the NLT, the NCV, the CEV, and a host of other translations, does not change any masculine references to God. All masculine pronouns and masculine images related to God are retained. The only changes in the TNIV are related to human beings and then only when the references in the Greek and Hebrew are clearly inclusive. |
| guest574 asks, what about masculine images that aren't related to God? Did you change them from the original? |
| Dr.Strauss says, No. All metaphors and images that were intended to be masculine are retained. The changes only relate to references that were intended to include men and women. |
|
Chatmaster shouts, Get all the latest info on Zondervan's new Bible, Today's New International Version. Just goto http://www.tniv.info"
Most Recent User Comments
Be the first to comment on this article!
|
