Question for pastors whose churches use the NIV

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles? Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from? Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

Is anyone considering moving away from the NIV as a result of this change and if so, what are you moving to?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Pat Flanakin

I have a suggestion for pastors using the NIV...use the NASB.

William

As far as I know we are just staying with the current 1984 NIV and will likely change versions when it comes time to replace bibles......The NIV2011 is not as faithful of a translation.......I am trying to see it for myself, learning greek and hebrew on my own.

SteveF

Are you replacing your pew Bibles?

No (Would cost lots of $$$ to replace present 1984 NIVs)

Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from?

No (But there are already many differing versions used by individuals)

Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

Yes (But the "powerpoint" projected Scriptures will continue to be from the NIV1984)

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211817#Comment_211817

Have no intentions of changing from NIV in the foreseeable future, as there is no word about a new NIV - Anglicised Version.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211820#Comment_211820

We don't have pew Bibles; we print the Scriptures for the day in the bulletin, so we can use whatever version we want any given Sunday. We usually use NRSV, but sometimes NIV or The Message or whatever a guest preacher's preferred version is. We might use NIV2011 occasionally if the guy who does our bulletins likes it and has access to it online. But whenever it's up to me, I'll be using TNIV. I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure. I think the changes from NIV84 to TNIV were well thought out and prayerfully made, and justifiable in my limited understanding of Greek. I have a good friend, a lovely godly man (you've probably heard of him, and probably hold him in high regard if you have) who was on the translation committee. He was saddened by the blaming ("heretical") and boycotting and politics that forced the TNIV to be overridden by going partially backwards with the NIV2011. It seems economics ruled the day when it came to the publisher's decision. There's still a larger block of potential purchasers who prefer the old traditional male pronoun for people in general. If they try again in 20 years to re-introduce those changes, it will be a non-issue, I think.

Wes Saad

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211834#Comment_211834

I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure.

I was sort of glad they decided to return to at least a more faithful translation of Scripture (though they didn't go quite far enough) rather than giving in to the pressure of a postmodern politically correct attitude, but to each his own.

BillS

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles?

No. We're too small to replace Bibles before the language has changed (RSV, e.g.) or they're worn out.

Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from?

I suppose I'll mention it. But I already encourage them to bring whatever translation they'll read--even if I'll be preaching from the NIV. And I try to highlight significant differences in the translations, though I usually work back into it from the original languages when I discover that NIV didn't handle it well either. :-)

Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

Not as an intentional move, unless the translation happens to be better than the NIV in that spot.

Is anyone considering moving away from the NIV as a result of this change and if so, what are you moving to?

My "philosophy" is to preach/teach the text, not the version. If everyone in the congregation was using NIV, I might move to the NRSV just to help us hear the text better... in a different way than we're used to it, to make us think. Thinking about what we're reading / hearing is my goal.

BillS

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211837#Comment_211837

I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure.

I was sort of glad they decided to return to at least a more faithful translation of Scripture (though they didn't go quite far enough) rather than giving in to the pressure of a postmodern politically correct attitude, but to each his own.

[Y] +1

BillS

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211834#Comment_211834

There's still a larger block of potential purchasers who prefer the old traditional male pronoun for people in general.

In whatever translation I find it, this old traditional male tries to make read it as gender inclusive wherever the text allows it. However, I don't want the Scriptures to mask the fact that they're a product of a particular culture. To this old traditional male, that'd raise questions about what else was being hidden.

[:P][;)]

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211837#Comment_211837

I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure.

I was sort of glad they decided to return to at least a more faithful translation of Scripture (though they didn't go quite far enough) rather than giving in to the pressure of a postmodern politically correct attitude, but to each his own.

[Y][Y] +2

Chris Lohroff

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211845#Comment_211845

This was really intended to be more of a logistical question than a philisophical/theological question. I was hoping we wouldn't go down the path of debating the translation itself.

Wes Saad

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211851#Comment_211851

This was really intended to be more of a logistical question than a philisophical/theological question. I was hoping we wouldn't go down the path of debating the translation itself.

Our church has an odd mix - I preach from the ESV, many people use the KJV, and we have the older NIV in the pews. No plans to change the pew Bible any time soon. Generally, any texts I refer to in the sermon get projected onto the wall in the ESV.

Eric Weiss

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211834#Comment_211834

I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure.

You can paint me hopelessly Egalitarian. I.e., I can't be unconvinced. [:)]

TCBlack

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles? Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from? Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

Is anyone considering moving away from the NIV as a result of this change and if so, what are you moving to?

Our church once upon a time purchased NIV pew bibles, while I have preached from the NASB95 for the last 12 years (...give or take a little...). Like Chris, several of our members use some mixture of NIV, NASB95, KJV, NKJV, Amplified and NLT with a smattering of ESV's being introduced.

I find that I must at least read these other versions during my prep time in order to be aware of word differences. Overall, I don't plan on making any reference to the NIV11 any more than I do to the now old NIV - which is to say, none at all.

I am in contemplation of moving our church to ESV pew Bibles or perhaps NASB Pew Bibles. If I do move to NASB Pew bibles no change will occur in my preaching. If I do jump on the ESV Bibles, I will probably change my preaching text to the ESV.

In brief, the NIV 2011 holds no place in my plans but that of an annoyance to reference. (<<<--- That sounds far more hostile than it is meant to be.)

Eric Weiss

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211834#Comment_211834

I don't like the way they backpedaled on the gender neutrality changes due to pressure.

Paint me hopelessly Egalitarian; i.e., I can't be unconvinced. [:D]

Nord Zootman

We do have NIV pew Bibles but I encourage people to bring and use their own Bibles, so we have a variety. I preach from the ESV most of the time anymore and occasionally from the NASB or NIV. Our people are used to dealing with holding a different translation in their hands than I am using. I have in the past given/recommended NIV Bibles to new believers. I am not sure what I am going to suggest in that regard. We will probably keep the NIV pew Bibles we have until they wear out.

Rich DeRuiter

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles?

No.

Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from?

As far as I know the 84 NIV's are still being sold. I visited Zondervan's site today and saw several 84 NIV's but no 2011 ones! (I just looked at Bibles, assuming that the 2011 NIV would be pushed. It wasn't in my browsing.)

I don't think the "Coke Classic" is going to phased out by the "New Coke" (am I showing my age?).

Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

No. It's too hard for new folks to understand what's going on when one version is in the pews and another version is being read. It's too confusing. If we ever decide to change our pew Bibles, I'll preach from the Bible that's in the pew.

Is anyone considering moving away from the NIV as a result of this change and if so, what are you moving to?

No. At this point, the NIV is still one of the easiest to read of the
major versions out there (IMHO), and I find it better than the NLT
(which is easier to read, but not reliable in a few places, IMHO). I
want to preach from a version that I'd like people to have in their
homes for personal and family devotions.

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211859#Comment_211859

We have NIVs in the pews for call to worship/responsive reading. We also have a NKJV on the ends of the pews since that is the translation I and the former Pastor preach from. However I am currently switching to the ESV as the text I will be preaching from.

We will not be replacing our pew Bibles, too much cost, would create too much confusion, and I believe it would have no significant (if any) spiritual impact. The issue of the new version might come up in casual conversation, but I wouldn't announce it in any formal way or bring up the issue during a sermon.

Eric Weiss

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211864#Comment_211864

No. At this point, the NIV is still one of the easiest to read of the
major versions out there (IMHO), and I find it better than the NLT
(which is easier to read, but not reliable in a few places, IMHO). I
want to preach from a version that I'd like people to have in their
homes for personal and family devotions.

Interestingly, Iver Larsen (I believe) over at Better Bibles Blog recently commented in a thread there that he always has 8 English versions in front of him as he's doing his translation work, and he's found that on the whole the NLT (2007 revision) has more often than the others been the best. I don't know what his other 7 or so translations are, as he didn't list them.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211845#Comment_211845

Agree on sticking to the original gender pronouns. The good apostle Paul said the bulk of the OT was as a tutor and of course the pronouns indicate who especially needed tutoring.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211868#Comment_211868

The good apostle Paul said the bulk of the OT was as a tutor and of course the pronouns indicate who especially needed tutoring.

Of course you mean to imply that women are naturally holier than men[:D]

[Just joking folks, just joking]

spitzerpl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211869#Comment_211869

Of course you mean to imply that women are naturally holier than men

[Just joking folks, just joking]

MJ, you are indeed a brave soul :-)

BillS

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211869#Comment_211869

Of course you mean to imply that women are naturally holier than men

Marva Dawn (Reaching Out without Dumbing Down) would probably agree for theological reasons... In a way, when she suggests that God chose male imagery for Father/Son, because male / Father imagery needed redemption much more than did female / mother imagery, isn't she implying that the reason we have more positive imagery of women / mothers is because women are naturally holier?

[:D]

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211866#Comment_211866

Interestingly, Iver Larsen over at Better Bibles Blog recently commented in a thread there that he always has 8 English versions in front of him as he's doing his translation work, and he's found that on the whole the NLT (2007 revision) has more often than the others been the best. I don't know what his other 7 or so translations are, as he didn't list them.

One of the places I find the NLT unreliable is Ephesians 1:17-19, and Ephesians 3:17-19 (both are parts of Paul's prayers for the Ephesians). There are probably other places as well, but I remember these, having read through Ephesians using the NLT as part of our family devotions, after having preached through Ephesians from the NIV. Often I also find the NLT helpful. However, in these verses, and a few others, I find it deviating too much from the meaning of the original text--enough that I wouldn't use it regularly in a public worship setting, nor as a basis for a Bible study.

J.R. Miller

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles? Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from? Are you going to start preaching from the NIV 2011?

Is anyone considering moving away from the NIV as a result of this change and if so, what are you moving to?

Hi Chris, I did not use the NIV in my church plant, but your question got me thinking, "just how different is this new update?" I mean, even if the Pastor used NIV2011 and the pew Bibles were NIV1984, would it cause any confusion. So using the power of Logos' Text Comparison tool, I did a quick analysis. FWIW, I posted it here.

Blessings

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211884#Comment_211884

I did not use the NIV in my church plant, but your question got me thinking, "just how different is this new update?" I mean, even if the Pastor used NIV2011 and the pew Bibles were NIV1984, would it cause any confusion. So using the power of Logos' Text Comparison tool, I did a quick analysis. FWIW, I posted it here.

Blessings

Thanks Joe for posting, I found it very informative. Kind Regards

Ted

Edwin Bowden

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211864#Comment_211864

I'm curious how you're handling the release of the NIV 2011. Are you replacing your pew Bibles?

No.

Are you making your congregation aware that the update exists and that they new NIVs they bring won't jive with the version you're preaching from?

As far as I know the 84 NIV's are still being sold. I visited Zondervan's site today and saw several 84 NIV's but no 2011 ones! (I just looked at Bibles, assuming that the 2011 NIV would be pushed. It wasn't in my browsing.)

I don't think the "Coke Classic" is going to phased out by the "New Coke" (am I showing my age?).

When the NIV 2011 project was announced, Zondervan said that both the NIV (1984) and the TNIV would no longer be available. ONLY the NIV 2011 would be printed and sold. That is what is creating the problem for churches and individuals who have adopted and used the NIV as their standard. Their standard has been changed by almost 40% and the "original" will no longer be in print.

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211901#Comment_211901

When the NIV 2011 project was announced, Zondervan said that both the NIV (1984) and the TNIV would no longer be available. ONLY the NIV 2011 would be printed and sold. That is what is creating the problem for churches and individuals who have adopted and used the NIV as their standard. Their standard has been changed by almost 40% and the "original" will no longer be in print.

Where did you read this announcement. I can't find it on their blog, or on their web site.

Edwin Bowden

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211906#Comment_211906

When the NIV 2011 project was announced, Zondervan said that both the NIV (1984) and the TNIV would no longer be available. ONLY the NIV 2011 would be printed and sold. That is what is creating the problem for churches and individuals who have adopted and used the NIV as their standard. Their standard has been changed by almost 40% and the "original" will no longer be in print.

Where did you read this announcement. I can't find it on their blog, or on their web site.

That was in their official info when the project was announced, in response to the question of whether the new NIV would be referred to as NIV 2011. Their response was that they would be selling only 1 NIV. When the new one is released, the previous editions would no longer be available. I haven't looked back for that on the Internet.

Chris Lohroff

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211864#Comment_211864

As far as I know the 84 NIV's are still being sold. I visited Zondervan's site today and saw several 84 NIV's but no 2011 ones! (I just looked at Bibles, assuming that the 2011 NIV would be pushed. It wasn't in my browsing.)

I don't think the "Coke Classic" is going to phased out by the "New Coke" (am I showing my age?).

Actually, the old NIV's are not going to be published after the new ones are printed in March.

From http://www.biblica.com/niv/

To continue your analogy (which was a good one!), the old Coke IS going away. Perhaps zvan will discover (as Coke did) that this is a mistake and will reintroduce the old version as NIV Classic.

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211911#Comment_211911

Actually, the old NIV's are not going to be published after the new ones are printed in March.

From http://www.biblica.com/niv/

Q. Are you going to continue to publish the current NIV or the TNIV?
As
we stated at the NIV update announcement in September 2009, we will not
be releasing any new products in either the 1984 or TNIV texts after
the updated NIV has been published.

To continue your analogy (which was a good one!), the old Coke IS going away. Perhaps zvan will discover (as Coke did) that this is a mistake and will reintroduce the old version as NIV Classic.

Thanks for the info. I hadn't seen that before.

Still, reading between the lines, I don't read them saying specifically that they will stop selling the 84 NIV. At least not here.

Edwin Bowden

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211915#Comment_211915

Publishing & Product

Q. When will the updated NIV be available?
The updated text is available for review online at www.Biblegateway.com and www.Biblica.com, and we plan to release the first wave of updated NIV products at the beginning of March 2011.

Q. Will the revised edition be called NIV or NIV 2011?
The 2011 update of the NIV will be called, simply, the NIV.

Q. Are you going to continue to publish the current NIV or the TNIV?
As we stated at the NIV update announcement in September 2009, we will not be releasing any new products in either the 1984 or TNIV texts after the updated NIV has been published.

Q. What happens to all the old NIV Bibles that you don’t sell or that churches replace with the updated NIV?
We plan to donate out-of-stock NIV Bibles once the updated version is available, and we will work with churches and ministries to get their Bibles into the hands of people in need. This honors the ministry mandate of the publishing partnerships behind the NIV – Biblica, the worldwide publisher and copyright holder, Zondervan, the North American publisher, and Hodder, the U.K. publisher – each of whom contributes to donating millions of Bibles every year to people around the world.

Q: Will all NIV products be immediately converted to the new text? How long will the transition take?
We have hundreds of NIV-related products that will need to be migrated to the new version, so the introduction of the updated NIV will involve a carefully managed transition process. When we shifted from the 1978 version of the NIV to the 1984 version, the process took 24 months to complete, so you should expect something similar this time.

We plan to release a wide array of text and digital Bibles beginning with the updated NIV text in March 2011, and have an aggressive schedule for getting all of our NIV products converted to the new text.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211851#Comment_211851

This was really intended to be more of a logistical question than a philisophical/theological question. I was hoping we wouldn't go down the path of debating the translation itself.

Addressing this logistically: If everyone used The Living Bible paraphrase, there would be no need to update.

If a congregation participates in responsive readings (and does not project the text on screen or print it in the bulletin like Rosie's church,) it would be a necessity to make the upgrade. Or just ignore the new version.

My church hasn't upgraded in 400 years and likely won't. [6]

ONLY the NIV 2011 would be printed and
sold. That is what is creating the problem for churches and individuals
who have adopted and used the NIV as their standard. Their standard has
been changed by almost 40% and the "original" will no longer be in
print.

Just so long as Zondervan does not replace the content of these collections in future updates:
Zondervan Bible Reference Bundle (87 vols.)
Zondervan Bible Reference Bundle 2 (47 vols.)

I don't mind future revisions for future users who prefer NIV 2011, I just want to stick with what I've got.

Michael Anda

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211952#Comment_211952

I've taken to bringing Logos 4 to church. I hate trying to follow along from a different version. Is there a reason English speaking people don't just standardize on the NASB95? It seems totally perfect to me. [8-|]

Question: What is it about the ESV that has so many people switching over to it?

Question: Why is there suddenly an explosion of new Bible versions coming out in English? Is this happening in other languages? John Piper says this of the ESV, "The rightful heir to a great line of historic translations, it provides the continuity and modern accuracy I longed for." What does this mean, anyway?

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211975#Comment_211975

Question: Why is there suddenly an explosion of new Bible versions coming out in English?

Indeed, the proliferation of versions is pretty ridiculous. You might be interested in Ward Gasque's article "The Multiplication of Bibles and the Decrease of Bible Knowledge" (Ward Gasque was a founding member of the faculty of Regent College; he is now a pastor and dean of the Koinos Seminars which he developed to empower the laity with good theology).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211987#Comment_211987

You might be interested in Ward Gasque's article "The Multiplication of Bibles and the Decrease of Bible Knowledge"

What I found most interesting was his statement:

Nor is it the custom to read aloud large portions of Scripture as a part
of the worship service. As a result people who attend church regularly
are exposed to 52 short paragraphs of the Bible at most.

This would be the minority experience for Christianity as a whole. However, it also raised a question in my mind. I know, for example, that Standard Publishing Co. includes daily readings in their Commentary on the International Standard Sunday School Lessons (available in Logos). I know that the RCL now has a daily lectionary with readings preparing for or building upon the Sunday readings. I know the Mennonites have a daily prayer book with short Bible readings.

How much overlap is there between the "52 short paragraph" churches and these other prescribed readings resources? And what other "prescribed readings" resources am I ignoring? [I am aware of tables in some denominational hymnals but am uncertain whether this is used or theoretically used [:)]]

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211975#Comment_211975

Question: What is it about the ESV that has so many people switching over to it?

Question: Why is there suddenly an explosion of new Bible versions coming out in English? Is this happening in other languages? John Piper says this of the ESV, "The rightful heir to a great line of historic translations, it provides the continuity and modern accuracy I longed for." What does this mean, anyway?

The ESV stands in the tradition of the King James as it is a revision of KJV revisions. If you look you should be able to find a flow chart of what Bible versions are a revision of what.This lineage tends to give the ESV a more literary feel (IMO) than some other translations. A lot of theological terminology tends to be drop in more dynamic equivalence translations is retained by the ESV; hence the continuity comment. And the modern accuracy... that means Piper likes the decisions the translation committee made and perhaps is a reference to the textual basis (mostly the NA27).

Jerry M

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211975#Comment_211975

I've taken to bringing Logos 4 to church. I hate trying to follow along from a different version. Is there a reason English speaking people don't just standardize on the NASB95? It seems totally perfect to me.

Question: What is it about the ESV that has so many people switching over to it?

I use the NAS for study and have loved it for years, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if the ESV became the standard Bible in the English speaking world. I feel a lot of seminary educated people feel the same way. It is just a good translation.

TCBlack

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/211975#Comment_211975

Question: What is it about the ESV that has so many people switching over to it?

In addition to Kevin's comments consider also the translation theory of the ESV. On the sliding scale of Dynamic -vs- Formal equivalence the ESV is an "essentially literal" translation. Which is to say it has more in common with the NASB than the NIV in that the translators focused on more of a word for word -vs- thought for thought translation. At the same time the translators focused on modern English usage more perhaps than did the NASB translators.

Here's a helpful little chart from evangelicalbible dot com.

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212043#Comment_212043

Not sure Thomas that the ESV/NASB is more literal than the KJV/NKJV as in the chart you supplied above. More like the chart below from Robert L. Thomas book 'How to choose a Bible Version'. Ted

Bohuslav Wojnar

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212089#Comment_212089

Thanks Ted. I saved the picture for the future reference. [Y]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212007#Comment_212007

What I found most interesting was his statement:

Nor is it the custom to read aloud large portions of Scripture as a part of the worship service. As a result people who attend church regularly are exposed to 52 short paragraphs of the Bible at most.

This would be the minority experience for Christianity as a whole. However, it also raised a question in my mind. I know, for example, that Standard Publishing Co. includes daily readings in their Commentary on the International Standard Sunday School Lessons (available in Logos). I know that the RCL now has a daily lectionary with readings preparing for or building upon the Sunday readings. I know the Mennonites have a daily prayer book with short Bible readings.

How much overlap is there between the "52 short paragraph" churches and these other prescribed readings resources? And what other "prescribed readings" resources am I ignoring?

He's talking mostly about American Protestant churches probably, particularly smaller ones (under 200 members), as that is his area of expertise. The fact that their denominations might have prescribed daily lectionaries does not mean the church attendees actually read those readings at home on a daily basis. They show up at church, and a paragraph or a few excerpts here and there (from the RCL) or maybe if they're lucky a full chapter of Scripture is read on Sunday and preached on, and that's all the Scripture they hear in a year. And that's for the ones who go to church every Sunday. I don't think his characterization is too far off base. He's been studying this phenomenon and teaching lay people for decades and has been appalled at the lack of biblical knowledge out there.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212096#Comment_212096

Thanks Ted. I saved the picture for the future reference.

Bohuslav ,

You probably have that book in Logos. It's in every base package.

Here's a link to the image: logosres:htchsbibvrs;ref=Page.p_96

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212134#Comment_212134

He's talking mostly about American Protestant churches probably, particularly smaller ones (under 200 members), as that is his area of expertise.

This was my assumption but from a book on the history of Methodist worship, I also knew his assessment didn't apply to all Protestants ... I want to get a better handle on who it does apply to.

The fact that their denominations might have prescribed daily lectionaries does not mean the church attendees actually read those readings at home on a daily basis.

This is certainly true. But it does give me a sense of how the Church views the role of Scripture.

I do like his analysis and would have only one small quibble. At least in rural America, local sports are more of a constraint on time than TV ... I don't know if that is true in Canada. Thanks for bringing the article to our attention - it brought to my attention a hole in my knowledge.

TCBlack

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212089#Comment_212089

Not sure Thomas that the ESV/NASB is more literal than the KJV/NKJV as in the chart you supplied above. More like the chart below from Robert L. Thomas book 'How to choose a Bible Version'. Ted

That is a great chart - but it's only about deviation in the book of Romans. There are other books in the Bible to consider. As for the chart I used: I just remembered seeing that one a few weeks/month ago as I was browsing.

Part of me wants to note that the KJV may have been more literal hundreds of years ago, but I thinketh that it's forsaken grammar hath rendered it less understandable to the masses - hence less literal by virtue of modern English - it is almost another language dialect of its own right now.

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212143#Comment_212143

Thanks Ted. I saved the picture for the future reference.

Bohuslav ,

You probably have that book in Logos. It's in every base package.

Here's a link to the image: logosres:htchsbibvrs;ref=Page.p_96

Peace, Todd! *smile*

That is a resource that I was unaware I had. Appreciate your pointing it out!

Jonathan West

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212406#Comment_212406

On translations, I strongly recommend "How to Choose a Bible for All Its Worth" by Fee and Strauss.

In particular they examine what is meant by "literal" translation - and in fact to my mind show that such a concept is a misnomer at best!

Not sure this is in Logos format or not - if not it should be!

Michael Sullivan

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212425#Comment_212425

++ edited rant, just left this one point++

I am dissappointed with the new NIV and how a clearly messianic text like Hebrews 2:6-9 gets muddled up because of gender neutral language.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212436#Comment_212436

I am dissappointed with the new NIV and how a clearly messianic text like Hebrews 2:6-9 gets muddled up because of gender neutral language.

Yup, that's one example that the NIV 1984 does better.

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/212406#Comment_212406

That is a great chart - but it's only about deviation in the book of Romans. There are other books in the Bible to consider. As for the chart I used: I just remembered seeing that one a few weeks/month ago as I was browsing.

Part of me wants to note that the KJV may have been more literal hundreds of years ago, but I thinketh that it's forsaken grammar hath rendered it less understandable to the masses - hence less literal by virtue of modern English - it is almost another language dialect of its own right now

There are other comparisons that have been done by others that confirm Robert Thomas findings. Given the time I could dig them out - See this link http://bible-researcher.com/nkjv.html where the NKJV is compared with the NASB[:)].

From my findings the ESV is not more literal than the KJV/NKJV or the NASB. I hear the ESV occupies a middle ground between NKJV/KJV, NASB and other translation on being literal and readable. Blessings

Ted