Edit: As of now, 9/18/09, the sale price is no longer 71% off.

Christianbook.com has the TNIV True Identity: The Bible for Women, hardcover on sale for $9.99 plus shipping. Since the TNIV is planned to be discontinued (or updated and renamed to NIV) in 2011, they may be letting go of some of them at big discounts. The page linked to has a description, reviews and samples. Be sure the see the samples–it looks like it has blue text, which I don’t like but a lot of people do since they change their text from black to blue in message board posts.

UPDATE 9/4/09: WorldMagBlog added this below the two posts I mention below:

EDITOR’S NOTE: In a post on Tuesday, WorldMagBlog quoted from a post at Christianity Today’s blog that the writer later had to adjust a bit. With CT, we apologize for that misleading detail. The main point of the several stories, however, remains fully accurate. See WORLD’s coverage in next week’s magazine for a fuller report.

However, they did not correct what they originally wrote, as Christianity Today did.

Here is what was originally written in the press release:

In announcing a major revision of the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible, Biblica (formerly the International Bible Society and Send The Light, or IBS-STL) CEO Keith Danby said decisions surrounding the release of the NIV inclusive language edition and the 2002 revision, Today’s New International Version (TNIV), were mistakes.

But in WorldMagBlog’s posts they write, “Translators of the controversial, gender-neutral Today’s New International Version are now saying they made a mistake, reports Christianity Today.” (translators did not say this) and “On Tuesday, Alisa blogged about the TNIV and how its translators now admit the gender-neutral edition was a mistake.”

Neither of these factual errors were corrected which makes me wonder what their motives are.

End of Update

Original Post:

Regular readers know I do my best to keep things positive. There are plenty of other blogs out there to point out the negative or to be polemic in nature.

I also don’t want to get into this whole NIV, TNIV, NIV 2011 thing other than the link roundup.

However I would like to point something out.

For a bit of history, on February 23, 2002 WORLD Magazine’s Susan Olasky wrote a cover story on the TNIV translation which really got things moving in the critical direction.

Then on September 1, 2009 WorldMagBlog wrote a post saying, “Translators of the controversial, gender-neutral Today’s New International Version are now saying they made a mistake, reports Christianity Today.”

But that isn’t what translators said. Christianity Today wrote a retraction saying, “Note: An earlier version of this blog post said that Keith Danby’s remark that “some of the criticism was justified and we need to be brutally honest about the mistakes that were made” was in regard to the Today’s New International Version. He was discussing the earlier New International Version Inclusive Language Edition, released in the U.K. in 1996. I sincerely apologize for the error.” But WorldMagBlog won’t acknowledge the error.

To make matters worse, they said something similar in another post on September 3 (today, as of this writing). “On Tuesday, Alisa blogged about the TNIV and how its translators now admit the gender-neutral edition was a mistake.”

In a comment on the thread I suggested they look into the facts and haven’t seen anything yet.

World Magazine is one of the instigators in starting this division in the church over a Bible translation. Whether you agree with TNIV’s translation philosophy or not, it’s gotten out of hand. Let’s see if they do anything about it and if this little blog makes any difference.

Edit: This is turning into a roundup of links. I will keep adding as I become aware of more. Each of these has a little bit something different in them. I’m trying to only add links that address the NIV 2011.

Correcting the ‘Mistakes’ of TNIV, Translators Will Overhaul NIV at Christianity Today
Correction from earlier version of the article:
‘Note: An earlier version of this blog post said that Keith Danby’s remark that “some of the criticism was justified and we need to be brutally honest about the mistakes that were made” was in regard to the Today’s New International Version. He was discussing the earlier New International Version Inclusive Language Edition, released in the U.K. in 1996. I sincerely apologize for the error.’

HT: WorldMagBlog

Exciting Announcement about the NIV Translation at Koinonia

Translators announce 2011 update of popular NIV Bible at USA Today
“We may even be returning to what we had in the 1984 NIV,” says Moo.

HT: Better Bibles Blog

This Just In: the NIV to be Updated as “NIV 2011″; TNIV to be Discontinued at This Lamp

NIV Revision at Thoughts and Meditations

Ligon Duncan on Zondervan and the TNIV at Between Two Worlds

Albert Mohler Responds to NIV Annoucement at CBMW

CBMW leader “very encouraged” by NIV announcement at CBMW
(let’s see how that turns out)

The Thawing of the 1984 NIV – Louis at Baker Book House has some thoughts

The future of the TNIV at Aberration blog

Interview with Douglas Moo on the 2011 NIV at DashHouse.com

HT: Between Two Worlds

Thoughts & Predictions on the 2011 NIV (and a Requiem for the TNIV) at This Lamp

What will the updated NIV look like? at Gentle Wisdom

Dumnezeu n-a spus asta – despre traducerea genurilor in textul sacru
Documented history – much of it in English

HT: Dr Jim West

More Bible Wars On The Horizon? at Restless and Reforming

(T)NIV[i] 2011

HT: Thought and Meditations (his favorite)

The NIV 2011 – 95% TNIV? – Reflections at Baker Book House

Why Did I Ever Buy Into the TNIV? at New Leaven

Those Complaining Complementarians Won at New Leaven

Evangelical Leaders Welcome NIV Revision Plans with Caution, Hope at The Christian Post

TNIV – the bad boy Bible. Hated by Piper, Sproul and MacArthur enough for them to mention it in their sermons!

TNIV – not your father’s Bible

TNIV – we like chicks

TNIV – the best Bible you’ve never heard of

TNIV – Christianity’s best kept secret

TNIV – we catch the flack so the NLT doesn’t have to

The NIV is yesterday’s Bible; use the TNIV

TNIV marketing: work smarter, not harder

Any others?

• Baker Book House informs us that “Scot McKnight and fellow blogger RJS have started a series of posts at JesusCreed.org on the book with Walton interacting from time to time.” This book has made quite a splash and having a series with the author participating is a bonus.
  Genesis One 1 (first in a series)
• I asked about the state of evangelicalism in a previous post on this blog. Phil Johnson wrote an interesting post where he writes from a perspective that’s similar to mine. He says, “Evangelicalism regularly comes under attack from all sides, and let’s face it: a lot of the criticism leveled against evangelicals is well deserved. Although I hold firmly to historic evangelical doctrine, I thoroughly despise what the contemporary evangelical movement has become.” This perspective helps me understand why I would have to say that I am an Evangelical by definition but I don’t really like being identified as an Evangelical because of what the movement has become.
  Whither Evangelicalism?
• Creation Points to God’s Greatness and Beauty – Photographs collected on Randy Alcorn’s blog
• Relevance of the TNIV:

HT: Aberration blog

Since the intention of some of my posts isn’t always clear, I will preface this by saying that I’m agreeing with my blogging friends TC and Stan. I’m providing short quotes from each blog post in case you don’t want to read all of them but I’ve provided links to each one if you are interested.

First came this:
Barack Obama and the TNIV by John Piper

The larger issue here is: Are the “programmatic changes” of the TNIV (and some other recent versions) worth the difficulties that the translators find themselves in when trying to bring singular Greek or Hebrew words over into English as plurals, or masculine words over into English without masculine connotations? The price is high and linguistically unnecessary.

Then TC at New Leaven mentioned it:
Barack Obama and the TNIV by John Piper…

To be honest, when I first saw the title, I thought Piper was going to use President Obama to bash the TNIV on gender-issues. Well, I was right, but not what I expected.

Soon after, Stan came up with some insight:
John Piper, the ESV, and hypocrisy

Aside from sounding extraordinarily petty and lame, perhaps John Piper should read some of the writings on his own blog before he starts drawing conclusions about current English usage.

…

It seems to me there are enough examples above [see his post] to show that John Piper is somewhat confused regarding the use of pronouns in modern English.

And the reason I thought I would do a little roundup of these posts is because I came across this today and it made me think of it:
National Grammar Day 2009: Ten Common Grammar Myths, Debunked
HT: Challies.com

They can be singular in certain situations. To quote an idol of mine, Geoff Pullum: ‘Avoid singular they if you want to; nobody is making you use it. But don’t ever think that it is new (it goes back to early English centuries ago), or that it is illogical (there is no logical conflict between being syntactically singular and semantically plural), or that it is ungrammatical (it is used by the finest writers who ever used English, writers who uncontroversially knew what they were doing).’

So there you have it.

Update – here is a new post by Stan:
“Singular” they, the ESV, and lost credibility

This paper has been mentioned many times. These somewhat longer (compared to most blog posts) types of papers are often difficult to read while sitting at the computer. So it’s easy to read about the gender related things near the beginning, and if it isn’t a critical matter to you, move on to something else.

One interesting part of this paper is the listing of many verses where there are changes between the NIV and the TNIV aside from the gender issue. These can be found on pages 4-14. Being very familiar with the NIV, almost every change I’ve noticed in the TNIV on my own even before I looked at this paper, aside from the gender inclusive language is positive as far as I can tell.

TODAY’S NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION:
THE UNTOLD STORY OF A GOOD TRANSLATION (PDF file)
by Craig L. Blomberg
Distinguished Professor of New Testament, Denver Seminary

Some quotes:

Approximately 7% of the text is changed from the last American revision of the NIV, published in 1984. A little less than 30% of these changes involve inclusive language for humanity…

In a busy world, it is often easiest just to trust a respected friend and scholar, do a little bit of first-hand examination, and come to a conclusion. On the other hand, I have read every word of the TNIV, rereading my old NIV at the same time, noting and evaluating every change in light of the UBS Greek New Testament, so that the generalizations that I make may be as accurate as possible.

The purpose of my paper, then, is threefold. First, I wish to point out some enormous improvements that the TNIV has made over the previous editions of the NIV in areas unrelated to gender-inclusive language. Second, I wish to respond to some of the most persistent and misguided charges against the TNIV with respect to gender-inclusive language. Finally, I wish to highlight the fact that the most prominent forms of gender-inclusive language changes in the TNIV that “violate” the CSG are forms of translation found within the New Testament itself, so that those who support the CSG, however unwittingly, are therefore impugning the very patterns God adopted in inspiring his Scriptures.

I’m not posting this because the TNIV is my favorite translation or because I’m a champion of gender inclusiveness to this degree, the latter only because I haven’t spent enough time on it. I just think this is very informative, especially for those who are considering using the TNIV regularly or who want to be well informed. Certainly it’s important to consider other sources as well.

Related articles:
THE DEBATE OVER GENDER-INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE (PDF file) by D. A. Carson
A Brief Summary of Concerns About the TNIV by Wayne Grudem
(although the main thrust of my post is the non-gender related changes from the NIV to the TNIV)

Various people have been letting us know about the new NLT Blog (New Living Translation). Editor and contributor Keith Williams has posted on other blogs when translation issues come up and also has a blog called the NLT Study Bible Blog.

Other blogs that I know of are the ESV Bible Blog and TNIV Truth, an independent blog.

Updated:
NLT Study Bible Blog
NET Bible Revolution

Any others?

Psalm 131:1 ESV
O LORD, my heart is not lifted up;
my eyes are not raised too high;
I do not occupy myself with things
too great and too marvelous for me.

I don’t know what “my heart is not lifted up” or “my eyes are not raised too high” means.

Psalm 131:1 TNIV
My heart is not proud,
Lord, my eyes are not haughty;
I do not concern myself with great matters
or things too wonderful for me.

TNIV clarifies this by indicating that it’s about pride and haughtiness. But are we not supposed to think of great matters or strive to concern ourselves with wonderful things that may for now be too wonderful for us to understand?

Psalm 131:1 NASB
O LORD, my heart is not proud,
nor my eyes haughty;
Nor do I involve myself in great matters,
Or in things too difficult for me.

Even NASB is more clear on a couple of these things.

Psalm 131:1 HCSB
Lord, my heart is not proud;
my eyes are not haughty.
I do not get involved with things
too great or too difficult for me.

I’m kind of surprised that HCSB uses the archaic word haughty. How about arrogant or egotistical?

Psalm 131:1 MSG
GOD, I’m not trying to rule the roost,
I don’t want to be king of the mountain.
I haven’t meddled where I have no business
or fantasized grandiose plans.

This is a nice interpretation of what the meaning may be.

John Gill on v. 1b:
neither do I exercise myself in great matters; or, “walk” (m) in them; these were not the subject of his employment and conversation; he did many great things, in killing the lion and the bear that came into his father’s flock; in slaying Goliath with a sling and stone only; in leading out the armies of Israel, and slaying his ten thousands; and he exercised himself in the great things of the law, which he was careful to observe, and studied the great things of the Gospel, which he had the highest esteem of, and desired to understand; but he did not seek human greatness, or the great things of this world, for himself; he had no ambitious views, or was desirous of the kingdom he was anointed to, before the proper time; see 1 Samuel 18:18;

or in things too high for me: or “too wonderful” (n); see Job 42:3. He contemplated the wonderful make and frame of his body, the texture, symmetry, and use of each of its parts; he observed the wonderful providences of God towards him ever since he had a being; and particularly he took notice of the wonderful love of God to him, and remembered and talked of, and declared, the wonderful works of grace and redemption; but not things above his capacity, out of his reach, and which are secret, or not clearly revealed: and such things we should be content to be ignorant of, or not to have adequate ideas of, or be capable of accounting for;

Related Scripture:

Romans 12:3 HCSB For by the grace given to me, I tell everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he should think. Instead, think sensibly, as God has distributed a measure of faith to each one.

1 Corinthians 3:18-20 HCSB
No one should deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks he is wise in this age, he must become foolish so that he can become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, since it is written: He catches the wise in their craftiness — 20 and again, The Lord knows the reasonings of the wise, that they are futile.

Philippians 1:9-10 HCSB
And I pray this: that your love will keep on growing in knowledge and every kind of discernment, 10 so that you can determine what really matters and can be pure and blameless in the day of Christ,

(Emphasis added)

Philippians 2:21 HCSB
all seek their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ.