I believe that the history of the TNIV is
critical to understanding just why it is a concern and should cause us to question the motives behind it.
May 27, 1997 - a press release indicated that "
IBS (International Bible Society) has abandoned all plans for gender-related changes in future editions of the New International Version (NIV)." The Colorado Springs Guidelines (CSG) are drafted and signed by all participants, including the International Bible Society.
The CSG states, “
All participants agree that our overarching concern in Bible translating is to preserve the sanctity of the truth of sacred Scripture by rendering the most accurate translation possible. In the interests of such accuracy, we all agree that modern language is fluid and undergoes changes in nuance that require periodic updates and revisions. We agree that Bible translations should not be influenced by illegitimate intrusions of secular culture or by political or ideological agendas. Specifically, we agree that it is inappropriate to use gender-neutral language when it diminishes accuracy in the translation of the Bible, and we therefore agree to the attached guidelines for translation of gender-related language in Scripture.”June 24, 1999 - An online news service, Religion Today, published a feature story, "'Gender-accurate' Bible due to be published," in which it reported an interview with Steve Johnson, communications
director for the IBS, who said that a "gender-accurate" translation of the Bible is due to be published in 2003 or 2004.
Dr. R. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, told Religion News Service that he felt
'a sense of betrayal' because the agreement seems to have 'no effect.'"
January 18, 2002 - International Bible Society president Peter Bradley sent a
certified letter informing several key evangelical leaders that
since the May 1997 meeting, the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) "has continued its work of reviewing and updating the NIV." Since the CBT's new text, Today's New International Version (TNIV), did not conform to the Colordao Springs Guidelines (CSG), Bradley announced IBS's answer to their dilemma: "IBS is withdrawing its endorsement of the CSG." Bradley stated that
at the end of January 2002 "IBS will be sending out nearly 40,000 prepublication editions of the TNIV New Testament to key gatekeepers and evangelical leaders nationwide to solicit their feedback."
February 1, 2002 - 37 evangelical scholars issued a
joint statement stating, "In light of troubling translation inaccuracies-primarily (but not exclusively) in relation to gender language-that introduce distortions of the meanings that were conveyed better by the original NIV, we cannot endorse the TNIV translation as sufficiently accurate to commend to the church."
May 28, 2002 - 100 Christian leaders issued a
joint statement indicating that they "cannot endorse the TNIV as sufficiently trustworthy to commend to the church."
June 12, 2002 - At its annual meeting, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)
passed a resolution expressing disappointment with IBS and Zondervan and insisting that it could not commend the TNIV to Southern Baptists or the larger Christian community. In addition, Lifeway Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention announced that it would not carry the TNIV.
My heart breaks reading the history of this translation. I too have a feeling of betrayal. Lies, deceit, betrayal … why is it that after signing the Colorado Springs Guidelines which specifically addressed gender-neutral language, IBS and Zondervan would chose to "continue its work of reviewing and updating the NIV?" In 1997, they “abandoned all plans for the changes” and only 2 short years later, they announce the publication of the TNIV??? What on earth happened?