Monday, October 18, 2010

New NIV available from November 1

The press release today given at the 3rd Lausanne Congress says that the Updated NIV is going to be available electronically from November 1. I don't know what the textual decisions of the Updated NIV will be. However, the first text I'll look up will be Mark 1:41 to see whether they support the NIV 'Filled with compassion' or the TNIV 'Jesus was indignant'. I've just finished an article which I think deals a blow or two against the reading orgistheis here, but if I were a betting man my money would be on an agreement between the Updated NIV and the TNIV here (Note: ETC does not support betting).

Anyway, it would be good to get some running commentary on ETC on textual decisions of the translation as we become aware of them.

I am not quite sure what the Updated NIV will be called: surely not the UNIV or uNIV. Anyway, the way users will distinguish between the old and new NIVs may not be entirely in the publisher's control.

11 Comments:

Bill Combs said...

Their web site (http://nivbibleupdate.com) says it will be simply called NIV.

P.J. Williams said...

Yes, I understand that it will be called NIV by the publishers, but if there is any substantial difference from the old NIV then, of necessity, any scholar quoting one or the other will have to indicate which one is being quoted. I suspect, however, that this habit won't be restricted to scholars. It will also, I presume, receive a different 3 letter abbreviation in BibleWorks and in other such programmes.

I will wait and see, but I imagine that some new name will develop.

Bill Combs said...

"I imagine that some new name will develop."

I suppose, but I think they are trying to force an end to the controversy between the old NIV and the TNIV by stopping publication of both and only publishing one new edition and call it the NIV. Whether they will be successful, I don't know. Maybe they are following the example of the the NASB, which came out with a new edition in 1995. The new edition is still called the NASB. Most scholarly works refer to it as the NASB, 1995 edition. I don't think the old edition (1971) is even referenced anymore. Maybe the publishers hope that the new NIV will simply replace the old NIV and the old will just fade into the sunset as the old NASB did. Yet, it does not seem likely to happen.

James E. Snapp, Jr. said...

The CEB (Common English Bible) is also being released soon. It has hardly any text-related footnotes; it strictly follows the NA-27 text, as far as I can tell, with Mark 1:41 being a notable exception; I've put away my advance copy at the moment but I recall that it supported "angry" in the text, and there was a footnote there mentioning that critical editions of the NT say "filled with compassion" instead of "angry."

Text-related footnotes generally were present only in cases where the variant was long enough to disrupt the verse-numbering.

The Pericope of the Adulteress and Mark 16:9-20 are both included, with shaded borders and cautionary titles.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

Justin Kerk said...

Perhaps one could call it the "Newer International Version" :)

Anonymous said...

Dr Williams, would you be so kind as to tell what are these observations that blow orgistheis, unless you cannot do so because of publishing issues relating to the article.

Peter M. Head said...

UNIV has a good ring to it.

P.J. Williams said...

I don't want to give away too much of my argument, but I'll give just one of several observations: orgistheis was probably the most common verb form ending in -istheis in the environment of the early scribes. splagchnistheis by contrast would have probably been unknown amongst those not familiar with Christian discourse. This creates an environment in which a less common form might be corrupted (at first accidentally) and then later corrected to an intelligible (though theologically difficult) reading.

Obviously a lot more could be said in defence of what I've just written. There's a more powerful argument, however, which I haven't explained.

Eric Rowe said...

"Maybe they are following the example of the the NASB, which came out with a new edition in 1995. The new edition is still called the NASB. Most scholarly works refer to it as the NASB, 1995 edition. I don't think the old edition (1971) is even referenced anymore."

Both editions of the NASB are in Bibleworks, the former with the abbreviation NAS and the latter with the abbreviation NAU. I think Peter's probably right that something similar will happen with the NIV.

Chuck Hicks said...

Dr. Williams -- will your article be available for on-line reading?

Daniel Buck said...

It will be interesting how they handle Hebrews 9:16-17. The TNIV kept the NIV's archaic idea of a 'will,' but the NLT now gives the modern understanding of a 'blood covenant', at least in the margin.