Dan Wallace just reviewed the updated NIV in four parts:
- Part 1: A Selected History of the English Bible
- Part 2: Praise for the NIV 2011
- Part 3: Weaknesses in the NIV 2011
- Part 4: Conclusion
Wallace is professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. He’s the author of the popular second-year textbook Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament and senior New Testament editor of the NET Bible.
Related:
- Rod Decker Reviews the Updated NIV
- The Best All-Around Book on Bible Translation
- Reproduce the Meaning
- Translation and the Doctrine of Inspiration
- Thank God for Good Bible Translators and Translations
- The Importance of Dignified Translations
- Correcting Bible Translations Can Seem Like This at Times
- The Problem of Religious Conservatism
- How Not to Argue about Which Bible Translation Is Best
Update on 3/31/2017: In my latest attempt to explain how to interpret and apply the Bible, I include a chapter on Bible translation (pp. 50–81).
What do you think of his assessment, Andy?
In general, I agree. Helpful perspective.
So are you generally open to the idea of changing original-text singular verbs and pronouns to plurals, in translation?
I believe that we should translate generic pronouns in accurate, clear, and natural English. That’s what the NIV attempts to do.
Cf. Rod Decker’s short blog post on this.
My short response is to cock an eyebrow at you. Details to follow, some time.
I really enjoy reading and listening to Dan speak on translation…
There are only two things that bug me:
(1) He seems to ignore the HCSB (which some would claim, is a similar philosophy to the NIV and NET but just does a better job at everything). Plus, the HCSB consistently ranks right behind the ESV in regards to sales and unit sales.
(2) He seems to disregard the NLT as a paraphrase, etc, and not include it in the rankings. I guess it depends on how you categorize paraphrase, but my understanding is the most scholars would not place the NLTse in the same camp as the message. Either way the NLT is a force to be reckoned with as it ranks right behind the NIV in sales, beating out the KJV, ESV, etc.
http://www.cbaonline.org/nm/documents/BSLs/Bible_Translations.pdf
Why I (a complementarian calvinist) switched from the ESV to the NIV 2011:
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1PZp8ZXEefTaHhshXa0TK-6CBTBAtFA7IHmZpCr_N2os&pli=1