As an ardent supporter of the NLT – I’ve never read the NIV 2011. No need too. 
But this was a bit surprising.
In a surprising and dramatic move moments ago, messengers voted first to consider a resolution highly critical of the TNIV 2011 and then passed the resolution nearly unanimously. The resolution came from the floor — introduced by messenger Tim Overton — and not from the Resolutions Committee. Overturn’s appeal for messengers to consider the resolution passed by at least a 2-to-1 margin, and the resolution itself got only a handful of opposing votes. The Resolutions Committee had asked messengers not to consider the resolution.
Related articles
- NIV 2011 – Acts 3:21 (exegete77.wordpress.com)
- Anglicised NIV 2011: the secret uncovered (gentlewisdom.org.uk)
- Anglicised NIV 2011: a secret publication? (gentlewisdom.org.uk)
- Bible edits: Mary a ‘virgin’ or a ‘young woman’? (msnbc.msn.com)
Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. His interests include exploring the role of mimesis in human civilization, specifically in the study of religion and media, as well as science fiction and the way in which it has allowed mythology to be explored in light of scientific discoveries of the past century. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013) and a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013).
Website: → Unsettled Christianity
Connect
Way to marginalize yourselves even further, SBC.
Take it from this SBCer: using the TNIV or NIV 2011 won’t make you break out in a rash or get an angel sent to ask to check your baptism.
Phhfftt.
Wolf in sheep’s clothing … Burn him, I say … Burn him!
The translations I use regularly are (in this order)
1. NET
2. NRSV
3. NLT
4. HCSB
5. KJV
Indeed, I recently admitted an NABRE was my favorite bible edition of late
So yeah, “burn baby, burn”.
I wonder if this means Lifeway is gonna pull all the NIV 2011s from their store shelves?
Lifeway will probably do whatever will make them money. I went to nobts, and of that I am sure, lifeway is a business first and foremost.
Btw, your list of translations made me smile.
Shh. Don’t tell anyone but a local LIfeway is selling NRSV WITH Apocrypha Reader Editions.
Actually, they’ve shelved them. Whether any LIfeway customers will buy an NRSVA is another story.
I just gave my Sunday School teacher, a deacon, an NRSVA. Yeah, first hit of heresy is free.
No surprise here. The SBC like the NIV84, hated the TNIV and now has no use for the NIV2011. They have the HCSB.
And as long as its branded a Southern Baptist bible, how much market share can Holman Publishers hope for?
As an SBCer myself, I almost have to laugh. The convention has nearly turned into a circus sideshow, which is a real shame. There are a great many things the SBC does well, but running a convention is usually not one of them. The number of attendees goes down every year which makes it even easier for the fringe to get an airing.
If HCSB is branded as an SBC Bible where does the fault lie? I own a couple of HCSBs and I’m a Lutheran. I own an NIV84, aTNIV and an NIV2011. OK, I’m a Bible geek.
I sho at Lifeway occasionally. There is one nearby.
Me too. In fact, Lifeway is the only Christian bookstore within 30 miles. They are kind enough to order my NOAB 4th edition for me. Although I did get a funny look when I asked for the one with the Apocrypha.
Considering the slow death of the physical bookstore, I suppose we should be glad to have any bookstore around. I’m spoilt in having about six in reasonable range.
The Fundies don’t know what to be up to next.
I’ve lost my scorecard, so does anyone know which translations are verboten in the SBC? The only resolutions I can remember are the TNIV and now the NIV (2011 edition). Is it still ok with them to use the NRSV? Also, have they ever had a resolution against the JW Bible?
I grew up in the SBC (Merrimon Ave. Baptist Church, in NC), but I was confirmed in the Episcopal Church and still worship there. Our “official” Bible translation is the NRSV, in which the translators go to extraordinary lengths to avoid using “he, him, his.” Today’s gospel reading, Matthew 10:40-42, is a good example. A close translation of verse 42 would be, “And whoever gives one of these little ones only a cup of cold [water] in the name of a disciple [because s/he is a disciple], truly I tell you, will not miss his {autou] reward.” In contrast, the NRSV declines to translate autou in the final clause, since it sounds masculine, and the conclusion of verse 42 in the NRSV instead reads, “… — truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward,” which alters the wording a lot, IMHO. Taking my Greek Testament to church on Sunday mornings, just to see how much the NRSV translators changed or left out, has been a revelation. There are two types of translations on the market, I think: those that aim at accuracy, and those, like the NRSV and TNIV, that don’t.