For new version, head of NIV translation committee admits they are man-pleasers

New version of Bible backs away from ‘inclusive’ language – thestar.com
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/894798–new-version-of-bible-backs-away-from-inclusive-language

Not a direct quote, but here is a paragraph from the article:

“…Doug Moo, Wheaton Bible College scholar and head of the translation committee for the NIV, says he hopes the new version will please everyone….”

They’re admitting they made the 2002 version more “inclusive”, so now they’re putting back in some words they took out, like “man” or “mankind”, because the changes 2002 version were “not well received”.

Showing fluency in the other modern language known as Doublespeak, he also told the Nashville Tennesseean, “We really tried to get it right this time…. …We tried to be careful about not bowing to any cultural or ecclesiastical agenda.”

Note the difference in the article between this quote:

“The majority of what has changed involves comparatively minor matters of vocabulary, sentence structure and punctuation: changes that move the NIV from the English of 1984 to the English of 2011,” according to translation notes on the NIV website.

…and this one:

“In any instance where we became convinced that past decisions failed to live up to this standard, we did not hesitate to change them,” its website says. “If there was compelling new data on the state of contemporary English usage, or if a compelling exegetical argument was made — whether it involved moving backward or forward — the committee made the changes that were necessary.”

After hoping everybody likes this one, and after selling an edition that bows to gender contortions, they’re telling us they’re “giving up on bowing to cultural or ecclesiastical agenda”??!!??

Wishy washy wishy washy, every wind of doctrine and market share.

–aec

Advertisements

2 Responses to “For new version, head of NIV translation committee admits they are man-pleasers”

  1. Christopher M. Says:

    I believe you kinda stretched that out a bit. This is suggesting Modern English Relevancy and you are implying Change of Doctrine. I guess what your saying about this translation can be put on every translation known.

  2. trutherator Says:

    Hey Christopher! — Although there are numerous changes in the NIV that do affect doctrine, this post was about the fact that they admit they are man-pleasers, because they changed some things people didn’t like.

    These are the same people remember that did the TNIV for us, which almost nobody can dispute changed doctrines to please the feminists and other Bible detractors!

    And yes, it can be said about every modern English translation. Not so the King James Bible.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: