David Taylor Jr: I really don't understand why they don't let L4 and other distributors keep selling both versions. It's rather annoying really.
I really don't understand why they don't let L4 and other distributors keep selling both versions. It's rather annoying really.
This wasn't Zondervan's / News Corporation's decision, this in compliance with the copyright holders and producers of the NIV, namely The Committee on Bible Translation.
They have made this unilateral decision in keeping with their chief goal that every revision to the NIV text is to bring the translation into line both with contemporary biblical scholarship and with shifts in English idiom and usage. They also believe that the 2011 NIV matches statistically significant data on the state of spoken and written English at this given time in its history.
Finally they believe that the 1984 NIV no longer accomplishes this task, and therefore feel that the 1984 NIV is no longer the most useful text of their goal.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
Paul Golder:compliance with the copyright holders
Thanks Paul for this correction. I will refrain from making any further judgments on either Zondervan or the Committee's work. Or at least I'll try.
"For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power" Wiki Table of Contents
Jerry M: Paul Golder:compliance with the copyright holders Thanks Paul for this correction. I will refrain from making any further judgments on either Zondervan or the Committee's work. Or at least I'll try.
I don't know, judgment may be appropriate in this situation. One could argue that the 1984 NIV has become such an integral part of the English language Evangelical Church that taking it away, regardless of the right to do so, is somehow wrong.
I know that the original purpose of the NIV was to translate a Bible to late 20th century English, but they were working against a standard that was 400 years old, and to make such sweeping changes to a text that is less than 30 years old almost seems like pandering.
Then there is the argument that their motives are suspect. Shown by the fact that they made the TNIV as a "updated" option to the 1984, (an edition that is more like the 2011 than the 1984), and it failed when competing with the 1984. One could suggest that they are driving with an agenda, rather than responding to societal changes.
Take it for what it's worth, but the factual history does speak volumes...
I guess I a bit disappointed with NIV 2011 and feel that the respected work in the OT might be overshadowed by some small but annoying differences. One is the way they handled propitiation with the typical sacrifice of atonement and the footnote is not as strong as the older NIV. I like the OT reference, but I think the average reader who does not do a deep dive will miss this. This was a miss in my humble opinion.
Remaining in Him (1 John 2:28), Robert
Mac Book Pro, Windows 7 Professional, iPhone 4S, iPad 1
Paul Golder: This wasn't Zondervan's / News Corporation's decision, this in compliance with the copyright holders and producers of the NIV, namely The Committee on Bible Translation. They have made this unilateral decision in keeping with their chief goal that every revision to the NIV text is to bring the translation into line both with contemporary biblical scholarship and with shifts in English idiom and usage. They also believe that the 2011 NIV matches statistically significant data on the state of spoken and written English at this given time in its history. Finally they believe that the 1984 NIV no longer accomplishes this task, and therefore feel that the 1984 NIV is no longer the most useful text of their goal.
They are making the biggest mistake in marketing since "New Coke", and it will be harder to correct once the brand damage is done.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley
Richard DeRuiter:The NIV11 is about 95% identical to the NIV84, so it shouldn't be hard to work with.
Wrong. 95% is significant enough to cause it to fail in my eyes. Every translation is 95% acceptable.
Besides if NIV1984 was good enough for Jesus and St. Paul, it is good enough for me. I'm not changing, and if I do it will be to an entirely different version, not another NIV.
I am slow to change and slower to give up. Why, when I watch the movie "Gettysburg", I keep hoping Bobby Lee can pull it out on the replay. Never give up - especially the NIV84! Hey, I live in Mississippi, y'all!
Michael Childs: Besides if NIV1984 was good enough for Jesus and St. Paul, it is good enough for me.
Besides if NIV1984 was good enough for Jesus and St. Paul, it is good enough for me.
?
Teacher, Ministry Leader, Student, Author, Husband
How to upload logs
Visit My Site: Reformed Truths
David Taylor Jr: Michael Childs: Besides if NIV1984 was good enough for Jesus and St. Paul, it is good enough for me. ?
I think this was a joke, citing a common uneducated stance towards a certain bible version (often attributed to KJV-only advocates, don't know if it goes back to any real citation). It made me smile, at last.
Running Logos 9 latest (beta) version on Win 10
haha ok! I've never seen that said about another translation than the KJV
David Taylor Jr: haha ok! I've never seen that said about another translation than the KJV
Don't you know that NIV stands for "Nearly Inspired Version?"
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
Richard DeRuiter: David Taylor Jr: haha ok! I've never seen that said about another translation than the KJV Don't you know that NIV stands for "Nearly Inspired Version?"
This, of course, only applies to the one true 1984 version
Paul Golder: Richard DeRuiter: David Taylor Jr: haha ok! I've never seen that said about another translation than the KJV Don't you know that NIV stands for "Nearly Inspired Version?" This, of course, only applies to the one true 1984 version
I've always heard, Non-Inspired Version LOL
I do own both (print and ebook) and I must say I still prefer the 1984 edition.
When one of my fundamentalist friends tries to rib me with the Non Inspired Version or Eastern Standard Version, I just say KJV stands for Kindergarten Juvenile Version.
Rick Brannan (Logos):Reverse interlinears of the Old Testament typically take around a year of concerted effort on the part of an editor.
Rick, if OT RI's typically take a year, you'd expect an Apocrypha RI to take considerably less, so what's holding up the English-Greek Reverse Interlinear of the NRSV Apocryphal Texts?
"The Christian way of life isn't so much an assignment to be performed, as a gift to be received." Wilfrid Stinissen
Mac Pro OS 10.9.
fgh:what's holding up the English-Greek Reverse Interlinear of the NRSV Apocryphal Texts?
I think the answer is "concerted effort."
macOS, iOS & iPadOS | Logs | Install
I wish on their Logos.com site they'd at least be up front with people (dream on, I know).
What's the chance it's 'Under development'? When I was working, such labels inside a company would not be acceptable (generally someone trying to keep the heat off and hoping they won't be called on it).
I canceled my order twice (!), since it's not clear what Logos version it will ever come out under. I get the feeling the NT apocrypha are in the same world.
"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."
So this has now been completed and guess who has a scholars library that didn't get the revers int for the NIV Hebrew? This is so wrong Logos.
David Taylor Jr: So this has now been completed and guess who has a scholars library that didn't get the revers int for the NIV Hebrew? This is so wrong Logos.
Who said it was completed? Last I saw Rick said end of the year. Did you hear something else?
(The line item in the base package contents is just a license for it.)
Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Detailed Search Help - MacBook Pro (2014), ThinkPad E570
It was listed in the resources for L5 but you are saying it hasn't been completed? If that's the case I'm not as mad but still very disappointed about how they handled and are handling the L5 release.
David Taylor Jr:you are saying it hasn't been completed?
No, it's not completed yet.
David Taylor Jr: still very disappointed about how they handled and are handling the L5 release.
Certainly communication could have been better, but I don't see any reason to be disappointed. Minimal crossgrade pricing and free engine access is coming.