What happened to NIV84?
We've been using it since we first started using Proclaim. It seems to have disappeared this week. It is the Bible Version we read from in service, and its distracting for the words on the screen not to match the words being spoken.
Comments
-
Hi Shannon
Shannon said:We've been using it since we first started using Proclaim. It seems to have disappeared this week. It is the Bible Version we read from in service, and its distracting for the words on the screen not to match the words being spoken.
This is pure speculation on my part.
But - as per http://community.logos.com/forums/t/47199.aspx - Logos were not able to continue showing NIV84 on Biblia and there is a lot of synergy between Biblia and Proclaim I guess this is Proclaim having to catch up with this decision.
But we would need confirmation from Logos on this
Graham
0 -
I look forward to their reply. It was frustrating for me this morning as the readings printed in our bulletin say one thing, then when we read from the bible it says another, and the verse on the screen is different. All the bibles we have out for people to use are 84. Most people who bring their bibles will have niv84. But it frustrating to not be able to make it match.
0 -
While I can't speak to it's use in Proclaim, I do know that it's more an issue of Zondervan not licensing NIV84 any longer, but only NIV2011. Most of our members have the NIV84, and not feeling comfortable with the changes in the NIV2011, we've opted to depart from the NIV completely so we won't have the two different readings issue.
0 -
Shannon said:
We've been using it since we first started using Proclaim. It seems to have disappeared this week. It is the Bible Version we read from in service, and its distracting for the words on the screen not to match the words being spoken.
Hi Shannon
Acknowledging the explanations given above about Zondervan's helpful attitude.
May I make a comment on coping with variations in translation between the various sources?
There is a danger that people come to think that the Bible they have in their hands is 'gospel'!Our minister uses the ESV to preach from - he thinks that it is a 'better' translation. The pew bibles are NIV 1984.
I have heard people comment that after following one and hearing the other that they hadn't realised how the emphasis on particular passage could change depending on which version was being read. This has helped them realise that the bible does deserver more than superficial study.
However I don't think that you will find much in the way of clashes of doctrine in any of the standard translations or paraphrases.
Please forgive the aside.
tootle pip
Mike
Now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs. Latest Logos, MacOS, iOS and iPadOS
0 -
Graham is correct: due to licensing issues, we are no longer able to continue showing the NIV84 in Proclaim. It did take a little longer for Proclaim to "catch up" to this requirement, but we are there now. We could have communicated better about the upcoming change on the forums, and for that and the resulting confusion I apologize.
0 -
Robert C. Kuefner Jr. said:
I do know that it's more an issue of Zondervan not licensing NIV84 any longer, but only NIV2011
Actually, to set the record straight. Zondervan isn't the "problem child" here.
The rights to the NIV are held by Biblica they are responsible for the decision to no longer license the NIV84 for publication, by anyone, including Zondervan (the exclusive publisher for North America).
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
I posted a comment at https://www.facebook.com/Biblica and https://twitter.com/biblicaministry. Maybe if plenty of people say something they will have a change of heart. I personally have started using a different version, but I know there are still plenty of people out there who prefer NIV 84.
0 -
Mike Binks said:
Our minister uses the ESV to preach from - he thinks that it is a 'better' translation. The pew bibles are NIV 1984.
At the church I attend all of the pew bibles are NIV. Often the preachers use ESV but sometimes NIV. A lot of people in the congregation will use the pew bibles, some bring their own which may be NIV, ESV or something else. In the bible study group I attend about half NIV but some ESV and some another translation. I will tend to use ESV but can switch to any translation I have on my iOS Logos app.
I can understand the desire for uniformity, probably even more so if the demographics of the congregation is that the majority are older folk who don't want to change translations at that point in their life. But at same time agree Mike thoughts.
0 -
Personally I have more less abandoned the NIV years ago, it was overly masculine and the NRSV or NLT were much more suitable for me. Personally I have returned to using the NIV now that it has been upgraded. Ironically enough i remember numerous people very upset in 1984 when the first revision of the 1978 text was done. I also remember a fair number of people upset over the minor update of the NASB in 1995. People do not like change. You still hear people talk about the 1611 KJV, and some saying it is the only thing we should use, but it is the 1769 revision of the KJV we use today not the 1611. Personally I think it would be wise to have both 1984 and 2011 versions available for a while longer but then again, why not make sure the 1978 version is still published too…
-dan
0 -
One reason we try to maintain a consistent translation in public worship and teaching is that it encourages memorization. It's harder to hide God's Word in your heart when you're getting a slightly different variation on the words every time.
But we use the ESV for study because it's more transparent to the original languages.
0 -
Rebecca said:
One reason we try to maintain a consistent translation in public worship and teaching is that it encourages memorization. It's harder to hide God's Word in your heart when you're getting a slightly different variation on the words every time.
Rebecca - if this is the reason for using a 'Standard' text in worship then we will have to move on and choose a different translation. The 1984 version of the NIV soon won't be available in the shops (as stocks run out). New people (and we all pray for new people) just won't have access to the 1984 version so simply won't be able to use it at home for study and memorisation.
tootle pip
Mike
Now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs. Latest Logos, MacOS, iOS and iPadOS
0 -
No argument here. I was responding to the fear that people would begin to confuse their favorite translation with the inspired originals if they weren't hearing different translations all the time. When we need to address that, it's usually by going back to the original languages, rather than pulling out multiple translations.
The ESV has already been through some quiet updates, so we very occasionally have discrepancies between the printed Bibles in the pews and the various e-readers people carry. It's nothing nearly as dramatic as the NIV 2011, though. This move to pretend the NIV84 never existed is disturbing to me. But I suppose it will have to pass into the public domain eventually.
0 -
Rebecca said:
But I suppose it will have to pass into the public domain eventually.
The 1978 first edition will become public domain in the year 2048.
The 1984 edition will become public domain in the year 2054.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Golder said:Rebecca said:
But I suppose it will have to pass into the public domain eventually.
The 1978 first edition will become public domain in the year 2048.
The 1984 edition will become public domain in the year 2054.
Thanks for that Paul - please will you make a note in your diary to drop me an email to remind me? 😉
tootle pip
Mike
Now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs. Latest Logos, MacOS, iOS and iPadOS
0 -
Paul Golder said:Rebecca said:
But I suppose it will have to pass into the public domain eventually.
The 1978 first edition will become public domain in the year 2048.
The 1984 edition will become public domain in the year 2054.
The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 extended the copryright term for works of corporate authorship to 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication, whichever endpoint is earlier (at least in the US). Which means NIV84's public domain date is 2079 (1984 + 95) . I'm doubting most of us will be around for that. The recent US copyright acts have pretty much put the clamp down on stuff becoming public domain while people still care about it. Not sure what that means for people in other countries.
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
Paul Golder said:Rebecca said:
But I suppose it will have to pass into the public domain eventually.
The 1978 first edition will become public domain in the year 2048.
The 1984 edition will become public domain in the year 2054.
Not if the trend continues... every time Mickey Mouse is up for copyright expiration, lobbyists get Congress to pass an extension. I'm skeptical that there will ever be another work in the public domain at all.
0 -
You are right Todd, I had forgotten about the Disney law.
There is hope though. The Committee on Bible Translation (© holder of the NIV) is made up of experienced scholars, some of whom are close to retirement. It would take just a couple of the right people added to the committee to shift the consensus and release the 84 again.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Paul Golder said:
You are right Todd, I had forgotten about the Disney law.
There is hope though. The Committee on Bible Translation (© holder of the NIV) is made up of experienced scholars, some of whom are close to retirement. It would take just a couple of the right people added to the committee to shift the consensus and release the 84 again.
This begs the question as to whether the 'right people' would agree that the 84 is a more faithful translation than the 2011.
Do we want the 84 released again because of a democratic vote or because it is a more accurate interpretation of the original text?
tootle pip
Mike
Now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs. Latest Logos, MacOS, iOS and iPadOS
0 -
Mike Binks said:
This begs the question as to whether the 'right people' would agree that the 84 is a more faithful translation than the 2011.
Do we want the 84 released again because of a democratic vote or because it is a more accurate interpretation of the original text?
And some of us believe that the NIV2011 is a more faithful translation compared to the NIV84.
0 -
Just released, an exerpt form the upcoming NIV 2015:
Ephesians 5:22-33 (NIV 2015)
22 Spouses, submit to your spouses as to the Lord.
23 For the spouse is the head of the spouse as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.
24 Now as the church submits to Christ,
so also spouses should submit to their spouses in everything. 25 Spouses, love your spouse,
just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for them 26 to make them holy, cleansing them by the washing
with water through the word, 27 and to
present them to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any
other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28
In this same way, spouses ought to love their spouses as their own
bodies. They who loves their spouse love themselves. 29
After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and cares
for it, just as Christ does the church-- 30
for we are members of his body. 31
"For this reason a person will leave his parents and be
united to his spouse, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a profound mystery--but I am talking
about Christ and the church. 33 However,
each one of you also must love his spouse as a person loves themselves, and the spouse must
respect their spouse.[:D][;)][:D]
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
So they're just going to copy the current NRSV, then?
0 -
And still can't spell 'Saviour' bring back the KJV [:D]
tootle pip
Mike
Now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs. Latest Logos, MacOS, iOS and iPadOS
0 -
Unfortunately, the latest advances in scholarship and what satan has been doing lately, are often the same thing. If the church figures out the distinction, it usually takes about 100 years.
"For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power"
Wiki Table of Contents0 -
Ok guys, this thread is about the availability of the 1984 NIV, not disagreement with the changes in the new one. Personally I agree with nearly all of the changes, and if you want to see some justification regarding how the English language has changed, read the translators' notes. They did their research. This Themelios review has more details, and sums up the strengths and weaknesses nicely in my opinion.
The short version is that they statistically evaluated the usage of gender in English, and found that in today's English language, masculine language is nearly always used exclusively. If I say I'm going fishing with my brothers (for example), I mean just men. If I meant my brothers and sisters, I would have used both the masculine and feminine terms (or said "siblings"). In Greek, as I'm sure you all know, that's not the case. If I mean just men, I use masculine, and if I mean a mixed group I would also use masculine. We don't know what the authors had in mind in each instance, so all translation will necessarily either widen or narrow the scope compared to the original meaning, but that's the game and there's no changing it. "Brothers" is no more "literal" a translation of adelphoi than "brothers and sisters", and only context can tell us which is correct.
That said, I still think they should make the 1984 edition available, for the multitude of reasons mentioned in this thread. It still is the most popular translation ever, a ton of existing resources refer to it, and many congregations use it and cannot afford to upgrade their pew Bibles.
0 -
Jerry M said:
Unfortunately, the latest advances in scholarship and what satan has been doing lately, are often the same thing. If the church figures out the distinction, it usually takes about 100 years.
Jerry, just to let you know that I find this posting offensive. To state that modern scholarship is the work of "Satan" is simply uncalled for.
0 -
Yes it was uncalled for. Of course you misquoted me. By definition any scholarly work in theology that doesn't have its origin and direction from God is evil. There are many godly modern scholars and we all appreciate their work. I was offended by earlier posts and had a weak moment.tom said:modern scholarship
"For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power"
Wiki Table of Contents0 -
While my previous post was in jest, there are some serious problems with the 2011. For example:
- Taking the prophecy out of David's words, Psalm 8:4-6:
- NIV 1984:
- What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet.
- NIV 2011:
- What is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor. You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet.
- NIV 1984:
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 - Taking the prophecy out of David's words, Psalm 8:4-6:
-
Paul Golder said:
While my previous post was in jest, there are some serious problems with the 2011. For example:
Paul, this is not the place to discuss the merits or failings of any translation. Can we drop this, or take it to Faithlife, or another place?
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Wow...glad I asked?
Shannon
0
