Comments on: The literary Bible: Feeding the flames of hell

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:49:01 +0000

Yes, we'll both blog about it. I've posted on NewEpistles. Looking forward to your rankings and comments. Anyways, got to run for a doctors appointment.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:28:28 +0000

Sounds good – I’m working on a post as well, but there’s no reason we can’t both tackle it. Looking forward to your thoughts!

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:20:13 +0000

Exactly ElShaddai. I agree. It’s all relative or contextual. The only way to assess a translation’s “authority” is to look at it objectively to see how often a translation is quoted by teachers, pastors and Christian publications of any sort (books, news magazines, ministry publications, academic journals, websites, etc.) This is why I pick the NIV, eventhough the TNIV is a better translation. I think this is an issue worth blogging about so I’ll blog about this issue. I would like to ask for people’s opinion and rankings of translation authority including yours.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:58:51 +0000

The interesting thing about “authoritative” is that it can be contextual… For example, we can say that the NRSV is accepted as “authoritative” in academic settings, even while conservative evangelicals reject it for various theological or cultural reasons.

I agree with your comment about Zondervan and the NIV – they would be crazy to dump the NIV from a market perspective, even if the TNIV offers more modern scholarship and improvements to the accuracy. It’s a shame that they got boxed in with the gender issue and couldn’t simply update the NIV itself, though then they’d be dealing with “upgrade” issues for a massive install base.

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:27:40 +0000

Yes, the NIV is definitely still one of the most authoritative translations today . I think that’s why HC/Zondervan is still sticking with the NIV and not moving on to the TNIV…yet. The popularity of a translation makes it more authoritative. In my opinion, the next most authoritative translation is the NKJV but the NLT is gaining a lot of ground too.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:21:50 +0000

As a relatively new member of a church that uses the NIV as their pew/pulpit Bible, I’m becoming more familiar with the idea of the NIV as “authoritative”. My former church had standardized on the NLT…

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:08:16 +0000

Yes, I do like the use of “authoritative” when I’m not talking about the formal-dynamic equivalency issues. This is a totally different issue when it comes to translations. These days, the NIV, NKJV and NLT seem to be gaining the most authority in evangelical churches. But it’s funny how we tend to ignore the NKJV on our circle of bibliobloggers, and we also tend to think that the NIV is way out-of-date. Nevertheless, they are still authoritative.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:54:53 +0000

I think there was some consternation on the NEB team that the translation was "out of date" even as the full Bible was being released in 1970 (NT, 1961). Certainly the appearance of the RSV a decade or two earlier in the 1950s (NT, 1946) gave that translation significant traction.

Thank you for using "authoritative" instead of "accurate". It's an interesting distinction and one that I've been thinking of exploring rather than needlessly continuing the translation philosophy wars.

By: Kevin Sam

Kevin Sam — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:44:15 +0000

Back in 1989, it seems like the mainline churches chose to back the NRSV with more enthusiasm than the REB because you hardly ever hear the REB being quoted these days. It shows how authoritative the RSV was back then in comparison to the NEB. Perhaps this also shows that formal translations tend to end up being more authoritative than dynamic translations.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 05:19:48 +0000

I think the REB got caught in the crossfire, so to speak, between the NIV and the NRSV. The complete NIV, especially, was on the market for over 10 years before the REB and NRSV were published in 1989.

I think the NEB likely out sold the REB too.

Oh, to be sure. According to the histories that I've read, the publication of the NEB was a major event, with worldwide support. Interestingly, the publishers were unsure whether the edition with the Apocrypha would sell as much as the edition without. So they did a series of small print runs in order not to have excess inventory.