A Brief History of the NIV Bible

Last week I said that I'll go over how the NIV was constructed.

So here we are.

A couple weeks ago I said that the NASB tends to render a more literal translation over the NIV, which sits at the center of the literal v. metaphorical scale of Bible translations.  That wasn't exactly accurate.

The NASB tends to translate things on a word-by-word basis, switching word order so that the phrases will make syntactic sense.  The MSG, tends to translate on a phrase-by-phrase basis, with an emphasis on readability over scholastic accuracy. Is this bad? No, I don't think so.

If you look at the history of the Bible, you'll notice that God never wanted people to be unaware of His power and grace.  Think about all the times the various patriarchs set up altars to God, and then the writer would remark "and it is still there to this day".  Now think about how many times the leaders of Israel made public announcements about God's plans and laws.  Now think about how Jesus went straight to a temple (the common meeting house of the Jews), and read from the scroll that spoke a prophecy about him, in front of the whole assembly.  Again and again you'll see how God wants his character and nature to be publically known, and even one of Jesus's last commandments was to go out to the entire world and teach people how to become disciples (Matthew 28:18-20).  Making a version of a Bible that was accesible to the common people wouldn't be unusual then.

This is why Martin Luther's Gutenburg Bible became so wildly popular: the Bible was no longer reserved for study by the clergy, but written in the language the people spoke and understood.  Shortly after, the Geneva and King James Bible followed suit, and the common people now had access to it.

It was with this mind that a few Bible scholars came together in the 1970's and decided to render a translation into modern English.  Since then, the Committe for Bible Translation has done a few updates to keep pace with the changing English language. 

Don't believe that the NIV needed to update itself into modern English?  Fifty years ago, the word "gay" used to mean "happy", but now (mostly) means "homosexual".  The first NIV came out forty years ago, so yeah, the English language changes and English Bibles need to keep pace with it.

Even in the 2011 version, the NIV changed the term "man", referring to the whole of humanity, to "humankind", because in popular language "humankind" is in far more prevelant use over "man".  These distinctions remain slight, but it is staying relevent and not stubbornly holding on to tradition.

Lastly, the NIV didn't solely rely on scholars, but retained a plethora of translators and commentators of various degrees of experience and beliefs to encompass the most complete and whole understanding of God's Word.  This was done to expand the scope of the NIV's translation, and try to render a translation that transcended factional beliefs, and it worked (for the most part).

When you get a copy of your Bible, be sure to read the section that describes the process and intent behind that particular translation.  The best way, of course, is to look stuff up in the original Greek and Hebrew, and try to fuzz all of it out, but I tend to be of the scholastic bent when it comes to studying my own Bible.

Honestly, this series took a lot out of me, and I'll be happy to start up a new series.

Thanks for reading, and I hope you have a lovely day!