I was deeply disappointed to learn (via Eugene Cho’s blog) that Zondervan will no longer continue to publish the TNIV translation of the Bible. I have been using the TNIV in my personal Bible reading and in preaching & teaching in our church community – I am sad both to see the TNIV discontinued and the way in which Zondervan is handling it.
Zondervan CEO Keith Danby says:
The first mistake was the NIVi. The second was freezing the NIV. The third was the process of handling the TNIV.
You can read more about the details the reasons Zondervan has given for discontinuing the TNIV at the Christianity Today blog.
. . . . .
Faithful Communication
As someone who communicates from the Bible on a weekly basis, I have found the TNIV to be a faithful, accurate and scholarly update to the best-selling NIV translation many of us grew up with.
Some critics have narrowly focused on the TNIV’s use of appropriate gender-inclusive language as “proof” of some politically correct agenda. However, as Craig Blomberg writes in The Untold Story of a Good Translation:
A little less than 30% of these changes involve inclusive language for humanity-using “brothers and sisters” for “brothers” when a mixed audience is clearly meant by the biblical terms, or “human beings” for “men” or shifting to a third-person plural or a second-person pronoun to avoid a generic “he,” and so on. To date, virtually no notice has been paid to the majority of the changes, which are unrelated to gender-inclusive language, while much more heat than light has been generated in controversy over the gender-inclusive language.
. . . . .
It’s All Interpretation
Despite the claims of some who say, “They don’t interpret the Bible, they just read it,” the very act of reading a Bible (even in the original Hebrew or Greek) is an act of interpretation. All translations have bias & “agenda” built into the equation because the work is being done by real people, with different perspectives, insights and goals.
I can appreciate a person’s preferences for different versions, but it does not benefit anyone to uphold one translation or another as the “only true” translation. In my own biblical studies, I benefit greatly from having a wide spectrum of translations on hand.
. . . . .
Translate This!
If your experience is like mine, you were taught that the “literal” translation of the Bible is always the best one. However, anyone who has ever learned another language realizes that word-for-word translation can often render the original phrase meaningless in another language. Gordon Fee & Mark Strauss give an example in How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth:
Take, for example, the Spanish sentence, Como se llama? A literal (word-for-word) translation would be “How yourself call?” Yet any first-year Spanish student knows that is a poor translation. The sentence means (in good idiomatic English), “What’s your name?” The form must be changed to express the meaning.
There are two ends of the spectrum of biblical translation. On the one end is formal equivalence, or a more “word for word” approach. At the other end is functional equivalence, or a “thought for thought” approach. It is important to note that this spectrum does not necessarily connote “conservative vs. liberal” but, rather, a range of approaches to translation. Again, in my opinion, we benefit from consulting with versions from both ends of the spectrum.
For the visually-inclined, here are two graphs depicting this formal/functional equivalence spectrum, one from Zondervan and one from the Urbana site.
. . . . .
Back To Gender For A Moment
Some people are totally hung up on the TNIV’s use of gender inclusive language. They rail against its “politically correct agenda,” draft resolutions against it and seek to ban its sale in different Christian bookstores (and, perhaps, might be celebrating victory today with its demise). Apart from serious questions of how we, as followers of Jesus, wield power and deal with disagreements, I take issue with this anti-gender inclusive approach.
If the original biblical Hebrew or Greek implies both men and women (which it often does), shouldn’t we translate it as such? The archaic use of “all men” to imply all people might speak to some, but is increasingly out of touch for more & more people. If we say, “all men” today, most of the time we mean, “all those of the male gender.”
Because my commitment to love God & people and to live faithfully according to Scripture has helped me to see the equal dignity, worth, value and calling of both women & men, I appreciate what Eugene wrote in his post:
The TNIV is not about gender inclusivity but sadly, it was pegged and even advertised as such. The TNIV is about the Holy Scriptures foremost. And while others will strongly disagree, I find it difficult for translations NOT to take into account for appropriate gender neutrality and inclusivity.
. . . . .
Oh Yeah, That’s Why We Read It
Unfortunately, what often gets lost in the translation debates is the reason we read Scripture in the first place. As Jesus puts it, the whole point is:
‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.
No matter how fervently we want to defend a particular translation, let’s not lose sight of what really matters and the life to which God calls us.
Hey Daniel. Long time. Hope things are well with you, Jeya, and the kids!
This is a great post. Well-argued, researched, and written in a convincing tone. Is it okay if I use this as a resource? (Also, what’s your opinion of the NRSV?)
Kee Won – Good to hear from you! Hope you & your family are doing well also! Thanks for the kind words. Yes, please feel free to use this post.
* * *
Good question about the NRSV… For me, it’s been a helpful academic resource. I haven’t found it to be as readable as the NIV/TNIV, but it feels less clunky to me than the ESV. How about you, what do you think?
It’s weird. I’ve always been very attracted to the NRSV. I actually think it’s because the version I had was single-columned, which made it read more like a novel rather than a two-columned bible ;p. I also think it’s because the NRSV was the version I was reading when I went through my rough patch at PTS. It got me through some hard times, so I think I have a weird emotional attachment to it. Besides that, I do like the artistry of the sentences in the NRSV. Some of the sentences are very well-crafted, which I’ve found helps draw out a more emotions from me. (It also helps that it’s mostly accurate, and tries to get across the intent of the author.)
Man, I feel like I’ve lived under a rock for the past few years. I remember a long time ago when the TNIV was in the news, then I heard nothing about it for a long time (and I barely saw it in any stores). Now I’m hearing it’s being nixed. Do online stores have any left?
Yea, I have the same feelings about the ESV. Here’s what I commented on Andrew’s posting of your blog – “We started using the ESV in our church; however, despite it being advertised as an extremely readable literal translation, I’ve found it reads rather like sanded wood, and, at times, can be extremely hard to read or follow. (It gets especially problematic when they refuse to break up the paragraph-long sentences in Paul’s letters [i.e. 2 Tim 1:8-12]). I’ve found it’s hard on most lay-people, and fails to get across the intended meaning of key phrases because of their dedication to word-for-word translation, rather than intent. Many conservative Christians (a camp in which I fall) have gone the ESV route. What have you found most helpful about the ESV? (I actually am curious, because I’d like to know different perspectives as to why it’s been embraced by so many. I was initially enthusiastic about it, but not so much now, especially after reading through it on a daily basis.) But personally, I have found it’s a helpful exegetical tool.”
The thing annoys me most about all this is that the dogmatic Christian Right has done it again. Bleh.
Please say HI to Jeya for me!
(Sorry for not formatting.)
Kee Won — Haha! No worries – somehow this particular WP template doesn’t recognize line spaces in the comments section. Strange, I say! I appreciate you sharing your experience with the Bible. There’s something about living deeply in Scripture. While I have not abandoned my commitment to exegete like a Presbyterian, I definitely agree that the artistry of Scripture should not be ignored.
We’re having a discussion of this exact topic on God Didn’t Say That.
–Joel
Joel – Thanks for dropping by and commenting. I appreciate your scholarly insight into these important questions.
[…] since it is a “faithful and scholarly translation” but there you have it. There are others for whom the TNIV has been an important resource for their own lives and ministry and they ar…. Daniel writes: As someone who communicates from the Bible on a weekly basis, I have found the […]
Hi Dan,
Perhaps not as bleak as it initially seems. Doug Moo seems to say, some of the developments in TNIV will carry over to NIV 2011. Looking forward to that version.
I do remember more heat than light in TNIV critiques. Having said that, I did think TNIV could’ve been better, e.g., certain renderings could obscure potential messianic connotations. Maybe NIV 2011 will do better there.
ESV is better for study than NIV in my view. NIV makes some decisions for the reader that a student would rather make himself (though NIV decisions are always very defensible ones). E.g., sarx as flesh or sinful nature, as well as faith of Christ as faith in Christ, etc.
– Sam
Sam – Nice to hear from you. I always appreciate your insight. It’s good to be clear about what trade-offs we’re making in different translations. Thanks for the followup information about the NIV 2011. I’m eager to see how this turns out.
[…] TNIV Jump to Comments I was just going to get around to finally buying a copy of the Today’s New International Version of the Bible and now I hear that Zondervan is going to discontinue it, after a vitriolic campaign against it by the usual suspects of the American evangelical right. It’s times like these that I despair about evangelicals. Great post about it here. […]