NIV 1984 differences

Page 1 of 1 (18 items)
This post has 17 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Posted: Mon, Feb 15 2016 10:35 AM

Has anyone did a comparison of the https://www.logos.com/product/29979/the-holy-bible-new-international-version-anglicised and the NIV84 that was previously offered?

Since it will almost be impossible to get the NIV84 in Logos (or anywhere else), I'm curious of how different the two may be (if different at all).

Thanks

Posts 476
elnwood | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 11:42 AM

I just did a comparison of the first ten chapters of Genesis.

There were 15 differences that I saw.

realized => realised that
forever => for ever (2x)
toward => towards (4x)
backward => backwards
afterward => afterwards
favor => favour (2x)
labor => labour
centers => centres
added "for" in the verse "rain fell on the earth FOR forty days and forty nights"
that => from which

As you can see, a lot of them are spelling differences that make no difference in reading out loud.

Posts 879
P A | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 11:52 AM

elnwood:

I just did a comparison of the first ten chapters of Genesis.

There were 15 differences that I saw.

realized => realised that
forever => for ever (2x)
toward => towards (4x)
backward => backwards
afterward => afterwards
favor => favour (2x)
labor => labour
centers => centres
added "for" in the verse "rain fell on the earth FOR forty days and forty nights"
that => from which

As you can see, a lot of them are spelling differences that make no difference in reading out loud.

Elnwoord are you comparing an American version with a British version?

P AGeeked

Posts 9966
Forum MVP
NB.Mick | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 12:02 PM

P A:
Elnwoord are you comparing an American version with a British version?

which is exactly what the OP asked about, insn't it?

Running Logos 8 latest beta version on Win 10

Posts 611
Dave Thawley | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 12:08 PM

elnwood:
I just did a comparison of the first ten chapters of Genesis.
elnwood:
I just did a comparison of the first ten chapters of Genesis.

Thanks for sharing your work :-)

Posts 2824
Michael Childs | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 12:09 PM

Sounds like a great solution for those who do not have NIV 1984.

"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley

Posts 879
P A | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 12:43 PM

Not necessarily I have British NIV 84 & 2011 & AMERICAN NIV 84 & 2011 in Logos.

The question is not clear.

But you could be rightStick out tongue

Edit : After reviewing the evidence (clicking on the link). I can confirm you are correctStick out tongue

P A

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 3:20 PM

Dan Francis:

Thanks Dan;

That is a good link for future reference. I was more concerned with the differences between the NIV84 and the Anglicised version. The NIV 1984 is no longer being sold anywhere and has been taken off of the market, so Logos definitely will not have it, however, there is an anglicised version (which I have in Logos) that is said to be a 1984 version. What we are left with today, is that 2011 version and the anglicised, but no NIV84 (which some were fortunate to get before it's discontinuance).

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 3:40 PM

elnwood:

I just did a comparison of the first ten chapters of Genesis.

There were 15 differences that I saw.

realized => realised that
forever => for ever (2x)
toward => towards (4x)
backward => backwards
afterward => afterwards
favor => favour (2x)
labor => labour
centers => centres
added "for" in the verse "rain fell on the earth FOR forty days and forty nights"
that => from which

As you can see, a lot of them are spelling differences that make no difference in reading out loud.

Thanks Elnwood;

Yes, I see. Seems like the differences are mainly grammatical.

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 3:43 PM

NB.Mick:

P A:
Elnwoord are you comparing an American version with a British version?

which is exactly what the OP asked about, insn't it?

Yes. The British version (which is said to be 1984) is available (I have it), but the American version is no longer available (which we already know).

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 3:56 PM

Michael Childs:

Sounds like a great solution for those who do not have NIV 1984.

That is what I'm looking at. The NIV 1984 is referenced so much, not just in Logos, but in paper/leather also. As I understand and realize, many congregations use the NIV 1984 as the translation of choices just as the KJV is.It is such a shame that a translation that people may have be brought up on is no longer being printed. Look at the KJV. Even though there is a NKJV, the primary KJV is still being printed. This is a little beyond the purpose of my question, but we are left searching. So, although my translation of choice is the KJV, I am very interested in the NIV84, which was the secondary choice of translation when I was coming up.

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 4:05 PM

P A:

Not necessarily I have British NIV 84 & 2011 & AMERICAN NIV 84 & 2011 in Logos.

The question is not clear.

But you could be rightStick out tongue

Edit : After reviewing the evidence (clicking on the link). I can confirm you are correctStick out tongue

P A

Wow, P A. Now my question has been intensified. Smile

In your opinion, out of each of the versions that you have, which one is the closest match to the American NIV84? And, are the differences between the two significant in any way?

Posts 623
JAL | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 5:14 PM

Erwin,

The variances in the two versions of the 1984 NIV have mostly to do with different conventions of spelling and grammar. There may also be some substitution of idioms. They are the same translation and I think most American readers would derive the same interpretation of the underlying texts from either one.

The 2011 NIV is a transition that offers different interpretation of many passages based upon more than a quarter century of continuing scholarship and cultural shifts. As with the 1984 NIV an Anglicised version is available for the 2011 translation.

For general information about the history of the NIV see the following linked article:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/niv.html

The websites at the following links provides a detailed record of the differences between the 1984 and 2011 NIV translations:

http://www.slowley.com/niv2011_comparison/index.html

http://www.biblewebapp.com/niv2011-changes/

For links to scholarly discussion about translating the bible and the 2011 NIV translation see the following page:

http://www.slowley.com/niv2011_comparison/perspectives_in_translation.html

"The Christian mind is the prerequisite of Christian thinking. And Christian thinking is the prerequisite of Christian action." - Harry Blamires, 1963

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Feb 15 2016 10:06 PM

JAL:

Erwin,

The variances in the two versions of the 1984 NIV have mostly to do with different conventions of spelling and grammar. There may also be some substitution of idioms. They are the same translation and I think most American readers would derive the same interpretation of the underlying texts from either one.

The 2011 NIV is a transition that offers different interpretation of many passages based upon more than a quarter century of continuing scholarship and cultural shifts. As with the 1984 NIV an Anglicised version is available for the 2011 translation.

For general information about the history of the NIV see the following linked article:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/niv.html

The websites at the following links provides a detailed record of the differences between the 1984 and 2011 NIV translations:

http://www.slowley.com/niv2011_comparison/index.html

http://www.biblewebapp.com/niv2011-changes/

For links to scholarly discussion about translating the bible and the 2011 NIV translation see the following page:

http://www.slowley.com/niv2011_comparison/perspectives_in_translation.html

Thanks JAL

Posts 101
David Couch | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Feb 16 2016 1:38 AM

Theres a good article here too: https://fiec.org.uk/what-we-do/strand-blog/lost-in-translation

Posts 2760
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Feb 16 2016 7:09 AM

David Couch:

Thanks David; Smile

BTW: The website address is good, but the hotlink directs to a Logos forum thread with "access denied". For the benefit of others also, here is the corrected link. https://fiec.org.uk/what-we-do/strand-blog/lost-in-translation

Thanks again.

Posts 2236
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Feb 18 2016 6:28 PM

Not a few of us still have an NIV from about 1978 and lots still have ESVs from 2007 or earlier. I have emotional attachments to the NIV 84 and more learned ones to the RSV. Little or none of it seems to matter when I sit and study.

The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter

Page 1 of 1 (18 items) | RSS