2 of 3

In keeping with this approach, however, the translators may want to take a second look at 1 Timothy 3:11. The TNIV's translation, "women who are deacons are to be worthy of respect," seems more ideologically driven than "[deacons'] wives are to be women worthy of respect" (from the British version in 1997). Why not just translate it as "women are to be worthy of respect" and let the text speak for itself?

The TNIV's translators have been forthright for years about their efforts to create such a translation. In 1997, a group consisting mostly of opponents of the inclusive-language niv met in Colorado Springs and announced "Guidelines for Translation of Gender-Related Language in Scripture." John Stek, chairman of the Committee on Bible Translation, the body responsible for the niv text, told Christianity Today that the CBT did not consider itself beholden to the document, although two of its members had signed it. Under extreme pressure, the president and CEO of Zondervan also signed the document, as did the then-president and the current board chairman of ibs. The IBS says it withdrew its endorsement because the guidelines were too restrictive. But having buckled to bullying, IBS and Zondervan opened themselves to charges of betrayal.

There are such things as bad Bible translations, such as Oxford's 1995 New Inclusive Translation (with its "God the Father-Mother"). The TNIV is not one of them. Indeed, comments from a wide variety of pastors and Ph.D.s confirm that it stands firmly in the evangelical tradition. By their very nature, however, translations are not perfect. Might some miss the message of personal responsbility in a text that pluralizes words? Or might some women miss the personal applicability in a text that refers only to men?

The important lesson for all readers is to know well the Bible they are reading. Careful Bible study always involves careful engagement with the text, including the use of both "dynamic/functional equivalence" and "formal equivalence" translations. Knowing the theory behind your Bible's translation work and its relative strengths is nearly as important as knowing the message within the covers.

Copyright © 2002 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

Also appearing on our site today:

TNIV Critics Blast Scripture 'Distortions'But evangelical backers of the new translation say gender changes are 'accurate.'

Which Version Should We Use?What we said when the NIV was first published. A Christianity Today editorial

For coverage of the TNIV debate, see these articles from Christianity Today:

Christian History Corner: Translation WarsSharp as debate over the TNIV may be, the version's translators are getting off easy compared to John Wycliffe and William Tyndale. (March 1, 2002)

Weblog: The TNIV Battle ContinuesDobson and others launch "Kept the Faith" to accuse TNIV creators of violating their word and God's (Feb. 11, 2002)

Comparing the Three NIVsHow does the TNIV treat verses that were earlier criticized as theologically incorrect? (Jan. 31, 2002)

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

April 1 2002, Vol. 46, No. 4