In my post about surveying Bible translations with respect to a three-legged stool of interpretation foci, John Hobbins made the following comment:
If NIV/TNIV gets it act together, translates the so-called Apocrypha, and produces a study Bible that is attentive to the history of interpretation, it might become a worthy competitor of NRSV.
There have been many posts on the frustrations of many with regards to how IBS and Zondervan have (or have not) marketed the TNIV. The continuing presence of the older NIV on bookstore shelves is seen as a deterrent to widespread adoption, regardless of how the gender language issue plays itself out. But what if IBS were to take a much different strategy with the TNIV?
We know that the NIV has significant market penetration in the conservative evangelical community. What if IBS were to translate the Apocrypha as John suggests and position the TNIV to the mainline Christian community, including the Catholic and Orthodox traditions? They would need to match the NRSV in translating not just the Septuagint books, but also the additional books specific to the Orthodox tradition. I might suggest also translating the Book of Enoch?
The NIV would remain available for the evangelicals, while the gender-accurate language of the TNIV would presumably be more acceptable to the mainline Churches. You could then have all major Christian traditions using a common text that had, at most, 4-5% variance overall and without significant theological dispute. That would also allow IBS to update the NIV text for non-gender textual reasons in order to better compete with the ESV.
Rick Mansfield has cited several instances of recent academic literature using the TNIV, including A Reader’s Greek New Testament and The Writings of St. Paul. The NRSV is the de facto academic standard, perhaps an expanded non-evangelical edition of the TNIV would bolster its cause in scholarly circles as well?
Perhaps, if he’s privy to the decision makers, Rick can shed some light on what IBS and Zondervan are planning for the TNIV’s future – but it certainly would be interesting to have another “common Bible” candidate on the market.
7 Comments
i don’t know if CBT would go for it, they’re rather conservative organization…
I’m really rather skeptical that the CBT will ever produce a translation of any of the deuterocanonical books, let alone a translation of the 1 Enoch or the like!
The International Bible Society is a decidedly Protestant organization, and its goal is to translate and distribute the Bible for evangelism and discipleship. Of course, the Protestant Bible has 66 books–no more, no less! With that in mind, it seems difficult to imagine that they would commit money and resources to translate anything other than the books of the Protestant canon. (In fact, I seem to recall seeing comments precisely along those lines from IBS when the question of translating the “Apocrypha” for the NIV was brought up, but I can’t remember where. Maybe in a paper by John Stek or Ken Barker?)
Actually, there are at least a couple of members of the TNIV CBT (maybe more) interested in translating the deuterocanonicals.I believe it would be a smart move for wider acceptance of the TNIV, but as Mike mentioned, they are a very conservative group. However, stranger things have happened. There’s a Catholic version of the NLT, and those translators are conservative as well. If it happens, I imagine it would be ten years now before it is complete.
I also hear rumors of an ESV apocrypha, and evidently, there is confirmed interest in a NET version as well.
However, I don’t believe you’ll ever see something like 1 Enoch translated since no one views it as Scripture.
I’d carry a Bible with these extra books. I don’t consider them Scripture, but they are of enormous historical value directly related more to the New Testament than the Old Testament in my opinion. They are the backdrop for the context of the NT.
My current greater worry is that a lot of energy and marketing is going to go into a 30 year celebration of the NIV next year. In my opinion, they ought to mark 30 years by retiring it, but that’s not going to happen. If anything, it will get extra attention, and I find this to be a grave mistake.
My current greater worry is that a lot of energy and marketing is going to go into a 30 year celebration of the NIV next year. In my opinion, they ought to mark 30 years by retiring it, but that’s not going to happen. If anything, it will get extra attention, and I find this to be a grave mistake.
That’s a great point, Rick. I hadn’t realized that was coming up… did they make a big deal about the 25th anniversary? I have to say that up to this year, I really haven’t paid much attention to the NIV and/or Zondervan’s marketing.
Interesting to hear on a possible TNIV with the apocrypha. Although the ESV is my main translation I use a few others as well. I am not a big fan of the newer translations but do feel they are a needed tool in the study of God’s word. I am looking to purchase an NRSV with apocrypha as well as a TNIV, because of R. Mansfield’s reviews of it. I am also looking to purchase a NLT as well as the HCSB. ALthough the ESV was first released in 2001 it is not a new translation, more of an updated old translation.
I don’t remember if a big deal was made out of the NIV’s 25th anniversary, but I can tell you that there WILL be a big deal made out of the 30th anniversary. Not forward-thinking in my opinion.
There have been many posts on the frustrations of many with regards to how IBS and Zondervan have (or have not) marketed the TNIV.
In the December issue of Christianity Today, Zondervan placed a one page ad of the TNIV Reference Bible. I was happy to see that they were doing more marketing for the TNIV…finally, but there were no ads for the NIV so that surprised me a bit. Who knows, sales for the TNIV may pick up around Christmas time.