The TNIV Debate: A Studied Response
by Bishop Emeritus Gerald Bates

What goes around comes around. In 1997 the owners of NIV, the International Bible Society (IBS), published a more gender inclusive version of the NIV New Testament in the United Kingdom. At that time James Dobson of Focus on the Family led a protest, threatening to use his massive mailing list to boycott the project. The IBS and Zondervan, their publisher, relented under pressure and scrapped the project. They have now revived the project with the publishing of Today's New International Version (TNIV) of the New Testament. (The Old Testament is due to follow in 2005). Many of the 1997 opponents have risen up to condemn the new version. The issue has hit the pages of religious journals and magazines including Christianity Today and Christian Century, along with many others. There are Web sites on both sides of the argument, some of which I will list at the end of this paper.

Bishop Emeritus Bates

In my opinion there is both more and less here than meets the eye.

The 'less' is that the TNIV certainly constitutes no threat to the integrity of the Scriptures. In fact what it represents is a quality language update responding to changes in modern English and well within the translation principles and standards of the Forum of Bible Agencies. The FBA, which represents more than 90 percent of Bible translation work in the world includes in its membership such diverse and eminent translators of the Bible as Wycliffe Translators, The United Bible Societies, Scripture Union International, Transworld Radio, The American Bible Society, Lutheran Bible Translators and New Tribes Mission.

On the other side the new version has been strongly denounced — Someone has said, 'almost anathematized' — by the Southern Baptist Convention. The attack on the TNIV is being led by the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, a group closely aligned with the Southern Baptists. In a statement coordinated by CBMW, signed by 100 evangelical leaders, the position is taken that the TNIV "makes significant changes" in the gender language in the NIV and "We believe that any commonly accepted Bible of the church should be more faithful to the language of the original." Among the signers were Charles Colson, Joni Eareckson Tada, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Bill McCartney, Chuck Swindoll and Jack Hayford.

In a response to this statement, Craig Blomberg, professor of New Testament, Denver Seminary, states, "The group that objects to the TNIV does not reflect a majority of evangelical New Testament scholars. In fact, most of these individuals have no translation experience."

I said above that there is both 'less' and 'more' than meets the eye in the discussion. The 'more' is that the Southern Baptist Covention's Lifeway Christian Resources is the parent of Holman and Broadman Publishers which is publishing the competing Holman Christian Standard Bible about which R. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville says he is excited "if for no other reason than we will have a major translation we can control."

What are the issues?
Much has to do with the philosophy and techniques of translation. Bible translation is a highly sophisticated art requiring many skills and the application of long experience with the Scriptural texts. A good translation is an accurate transmission of the content and meaning of the original into the receptor language as faithfully and naturally as possible. The goal is to preserve with integrity the author's intent and to elicit in the modern reader the same response as would have been true for the first readers of the original. Jerome, fourth century translator of the Latin Vulgate, stated that his ambition was "rendering sense, not words."

Some conservatives tend to favor a closer word for word rendering and are uncomfortable when words are added for clarification or when the text departs beyond a certain degree from its original form. All translations have to come to terms with the languages into which the Scriptures are rendered. In fact, there is no 'word for word' translation, including the King James with its elegant English usage. The disagreement is mainly over the degree of freedom allowed to the translators. Most translators will point out that a too-rigid adherence to verbal or structural equivalence can distort meaning and result in a text which is unnatural — or in some cases misleading — to the readers. The detractors of the TNIV are saying that it goes too far, while its supporters maintain stoutly that it is a more accurate translation, an improvement on the NIV, and faithful to the text.

Certain key expressions illustrate where some of the points at contest are found. For example, where the Apostle Paul uses the word 'brothers' in the Greek and the meaning is clearly addressed to the whole congregation, the TNIV adds 'and sisters.' The principal reason for this is that English usage has changed and that the generic masculine is seldom used. English speakers have been generally sensitized by society's accent on gender equality so that a statement such as "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men" grates on modern ears, especially in the younger generation. The TNIV renders it thus: "For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people," certainly more faithful to the meaning. Another example has to do with the Greek word for son or sons. It can also mean descendents. Romans 8:14 in the NIV says, "…because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." A worship leader using the NIV could feel some uneasiness in looking out into the face of a congregation over half female (and some new to religious language) and expecting them to identify with being 'sons.' The TNIV puts it, "For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God."

An excellent illustration of the restraint and sensitivity of the Committee on Bible Translation of the TNIV is given in Galatians 4:4-6. Considering the efforts at gender equality I was surprised when I first read this:

But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law that we might receive adoption to sonship. Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father."

A footnote explains that in verse five the Greek word for 'adoption to sonship' is a legal term referring to the full legal standing of an adopted male heir. Having presented the scheme of legal adoption, with the play on words of "Son/sons," verse 7 concludes, "So you are no longer slaves, but God's children, and since you are his children, he has made you also heirs." The translators are to be affirmed in their faithful handling of this passage, a confidence-builder for the serious reader.

Sometimes the generic masculine is circumvented by the use of plurals. An example of this usage is given in a letter in Christianity Today (May 21, 2002) where James Dobson (leading critic of the TNIV) is quoted as saying, "Shaking a baby can cause brain damage that will affect them the rest of their lives" (emphasis mine). The TNIV does something similar in translating Revelation 3:20. "If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with them, and they with me." (NIV "I will go in and eat with him, and he with me.")

The TNIV in references to God or Jesus is totally consistent in using he, father and son.

The Conclusion of the Matter
The TNIV, in my opinion, after considerable examination, is a responsible and accurate expression of the Greek text of the New Testament. I have not read every word or checked every reference, but it seems to me that the Committee on Bible Translation, which was commissioned in 1965 to develop the NIV, and which has now produced the TNIV, has maintained the same standard of excellence as that reflected in the earlier, highly-respected NIV. The Committee is composed of some of the most competent English-speaking linguists and scholars in the world. For their work to be maligned as it has been by some who differ with their philosophy of translation seems to be unnecessarily harsh and does not, in my view, serve the Gospel. Much of the barrage of criticism leveled at the TNIV, as has been noted, comes from those who, whatever their excellent ministries, are non-expert in the field of translation and whose anxieties reflect some fundamental misunderstandings of the requirements and objectives of good Scripture translation.

I conclude with two testimonials from respected sources:
John R. W. Stott states, "Today's New International Version is highly successful in combining both scholarly accuracy and linguistic relevance."

Terry C. Muck, Ph.D., Professor of Mission and World Religions at Asbury Theological Seminary says, "The new translation is the most accurate ever. It is more faithful to the actual Greek than any of the standard translations."

— Dr. Gerald E. Bates, Bishop Emeritus
Free Methodist Church of North America
M.Div. — Asbury Seminary
Th.M. — Western Theological Seminary
Ph.D. — Michigan State University

• www.crosswalk.com (TNIV Feature Forum)
• www.tniv.info (Search 'Forum of Bible Agencies' for a variety of information and documents)
  

For individual researchers' findings:

• www.brunswickislandbaptist.org
• www.rockypeak.org

Other sources consulted: Faith Today, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, May-June 2002, Christian Century (July 3-10, 2002) and various articles and letters in Christianity Today; Traduire sans Trahir, Jean Claude Margot (Lausanne: Editions l'Age d'Homme, 1979), Eugene A. Nida, Good News for Everyone (Waco: Word Books, 1977), and the standard Greek texts and Lexicons. The reference to Jerome comes from The Scripture of St. Paul, Dale E. Heath, 1994 (privately published).