The New and Improved NIV 2011 Bible?

The Evangelical community has been anxiously (and cautiously) awaiting the new NIV 2011 translation of the Bible. It is certainly a large task to change the most popular translation of the Bible.

Here’s the concern, the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) has several versions of the NIV. There is the one most loved by many Christians. This is the NIV 1984 which has been very popular for a very long time. Then there is the TNIV. The TNIV came out in 2002 and is a thoroughly gender-neutral translation of the Bible. Thus it has been very controversial.

Both translations are being discontinued. The CBT is using the TNIV as their starting point for the NIV 2011. Early indication is that the NIV 2011 is much less gender-neutral than the TNIV but more gender-neutral than the NIV 1984 (which is not gender-neutral at all).

The CBT gave several reasons for the changes. First, they cite changes in the English language. This is perfectly legitimate. Second, they cite progress in scholarship. This is a little fuzzier, but so far, okay. More study is needed here. Last, they cite a concern for clarity.

 CBT says that most of the well-known texts in gender roles have not been changed from the NIV 1984 – but some have been changed (Romans 16:1-2; I Corinthians 11:10; I Timothy 2:12; I Timothy 3:11). The Counsel for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) has pointed out some problematic passages in their initial examination.

 As a result, the CBMW has stated, “We still cannot commend the new NIV 2011 for most of the same reasons we could not commend the TNIV.” This is a huge loss of endorsement for the new NIV 2011.

The CBMW fully endorses the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), the New American Standard (NASB), the New King James (NKJV) and the English Standard Version (ESV). CBMW says that of the 3,600 gender-related problems with the TNIV, a large percentage of their concerns still remain in the new NIV 2011.

 We should begin seeing the new NIV 2011 in March of this year. The CBMW will conduct a full detailed analysis at a later time. I am with holding my recommendation until I read more analysis from different sources.

For more information, check out the CBMW website: http://www.cbmw.org

 Brad Ferguson