One thing Zondervan learned from the mistake of the TNIV Reference Bible is to make the superscriptions indicating marginal notes smaller. The superscriptions in the TNIV Reference Bible regularly interfered with the text causing difficulty in reading God’s word. This problem has been corrected in this edition. I love that it comes with two ribbons, a surprise because I did not read that it came with two ribbons on Zondervan’s website, nor on CBD or Amazon. The only small complaint (and it is very small) is that the cover has stitching down the middle as if it were a two-tone imitation leather. I don’t understand this choice, but this should not prevent anyone from buying this beautiful Bible. There are probably many who think it looks good. To me it looks strange.

You can see pictures at the Sundry Times (though he has a bonded leather edition)

http://sundrytimes.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/first-look-niv-2011/

And you can see pictures at Inquiring Minds

http://theinquiringminds.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/niv-2011-premium-edition-review/

Now I have a fine, high quality calfskin leather edition for the ESV, HCSB, NIV, and NRSV. If you want a new NIV 2011, I strongly recommend you purchase this edition. The layout is pleasing to the eyes and encourages reading.

Next on my list is to read through this new edition and find out if the new NIV has fixed all the problems or if there are still some areas that miss the mark.

I just received an email that the NIV Thinline Reference Bible, Large print edition in ebony cowhide is on its way. I was lucky and found a website with this $129 Bible listed for $52. So I quickly jumped on that deal. The website no longer has this Bible at $52 but now at $90. Otherwise I would tell you where you also could get this great deal. I only wish that this edition was a single column layout rather than the standard double column. But everything else looks great on the web and I should have it in my hands by next week. I look forward to having an updated NIV in print (or perhaps more appropriately called the Revised TNIV, but RTNIV is probably too long for an acronym). Now as I carry out my studies and sermon preparations, I can consult the NIV 2011 and pass on my findings to you. Now I just need my Bible software program to make the updated NIV available and then I will be able to really dig into the new NIV.

By the way, I am currently reading A Slave by John MacArthur. If I find anything interesting or questionable from my reading I will be sure to share it with you.

“You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you” (ESV). The reader has to follow the train of thought by Paul one can no longer be submit the rule of sin and one’s own lusts but are to submit to the rule of the Spirit (7:6).

I think the revised NIV has done the best job in clarifying this difficult language of being “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit” without adding too much. “You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you.” (NIV 2011)

The old NIV read, “You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit….” In my opinion, the old NIV and the NLT lost the picture of being under the rule of the Spirit rather than under the rule of the flesh. The contrast of these two dominions in Romans 7 and 8 needs to be maintained. I believe the revised NIV may have found the best way to describe this picture using “realm of the flesh” and “realm of the Spirit.” This is at least one place where the new NIV has made a major improvement.

Most occurrences of “sinful nature” have become “flesh.” Especially in Paul, sarx can mean either part or all of the human body or the human being under the power of sin. In an effort to capture this latter sense of the word, the original NIV often rendered sarx as “sinful nature.” But this expres- sion can mislead readers into thinking the human person is made up of various compartments, one of which is sarx, whereas the biblical writers’ point is that humans can choose to yield themselves to a variety of influences or powers, one of which is the sin-producing sarx. The updated NIV uses “flesh” as the translation in many places where it is important for readers to decide for themselves from the context whether one or both of these uses of sarx is present.

__________________________

I am very excited about this change because I believed “sinful nature” was more misleading and confusing than “flesh.” An excellent decision by the committee.

11 A wife should learn quietly with complete submission. 12 I don’t allow a wife to teach or to control her husband. Instead, she should be a quiet listener. 13 Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14 Adam wasn’t deceived, but rather his wife became the one who stepped over the line because she was completely deceived. 15 But a wife will be brought safely through by giving birth to their children, if they both continue in faith, love, and holiness, together with self-control.

First, I believe the CEB unfortunately changes from “women” to “wife” in these verses. The same Greek word for “woman” or “wife” and the translators must decide which way to translate the text. However, no major translation renders the Greek word gune as “wife” in this paragraph, and with good reason. In verses 8-10 the apostle Paul has described the need for men (not husbands) to pray everywhere by lifting up holy hands. The CEB also translates this as men, not husbands. Paul continues by teaching that women (not wives) should wear modest clothing. The CEB also renders this as women, not wives. In verse 10 Paul teaches that women are wear what is proper for professing godliness. Wives are not the subject, but all women. To suddenly change “women” to “wives” in verses 11-15 is not natural to the reading. There is a footnote that reads, “Or a woman.” This leaves us with a translation that shows Paul teaching that wives cannot teach or have authority over their husbands, but women can teach and have authority over men. The force of the teaching only applies to wives, not to all women.

Second, the CEB uses an idiomatic phrase in verse 14, “But rather his wife became the one who stepped over the line….” Most translations read, “And became a transgressor.” The Greek word parabasis means, “act of deviating from an established boundary or norm” (BDAG). While “stepping over the line” is a fairly appropriate explanation of the word parabasis, it loses the sinful force that Paul intends. To modern ears, “stepping over the line” does not carry much of a negative connotation, if at all. We speak of “crossing the line” as crossing our personal lines of morality and sensibilities. A person “crosses the line” by speaking to us in a way we do not like. I really like that the CEB uses a literal picture of what it means to transgress. However, perhaps a little bit more is needed to show that the stepping over the line is in terms of God’s law. Eve “stepped over God’s line” because she was completely deceived. Because we use “crossing the line” and “stepping over the line” as idiomatic expressions today, I am concerned that some may not understand the sinful force and strong negative connotation intended by Paul.

More to come as I continue examining the CEB.

While preaching through Romans, I found the NET to have a fantastic rendering of Romans 12:1-2.

Therefore I exhort you, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a sacrifice alive, holy, and pleasing to God which is your reasonable service. Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may test and approve what is the will of God, what is good and well-pleasing and perfect. (Romans 12:1-2; NET)

The first point that I really like was the change away from “living sacrifices” to “a sacrifice alive, holy, and pleasing to God.” The NET translation notes explains that there is no reason to move “living” or “alive” to be in front of the sacrifice. I think it slightly changes the force of what Paul was saying. Typically, most understand a “living sacrifice” to be in contrast to the dead animals that were sacrificed under the old covenant. While this observation is still useful, the NET’s rendering shows that the greater point may be that being a sacrifice means we are alive to God and live for God, a point Paul made earlier in this letter (Romans 6:12-14). It is striking to notice how word placement can cause one to see things differently. Paul is not just saying that live our lives as sacrifices to God but everything we do must show the world that we have been made alive by God and live to God. We belong to God because he has made us alive.

The second point is the NET’s choice of going with the rendering “reasonable service,” a choice most modern translations avoid except the NKJV. Most translations choose “spiritual worship.” While the rendering, “spiritual worship” has its merits, I think we should not ignore that Paul’s point could very well be that based on the mercies of God, it is logical, rational, and reasonable for us to give our bodies as sacrifices to God.

The third difference in the NET that I believe is useful is in verse 2, “that you may test and approve what is the will of God.” A number of translations have some funny renderings for this, but I think the NET does a great job giving the thrust of the meaning. The NIV and TNIV use the same combination of “test and approve.”

I wanted to give some praise to the NET as a very good translation that is worth having and using for study. You can use the NET Bible and its translation notes for free online:

http://net.bible.org/bible.php

Rather than putting the translation notes in the margins or as footnotes, all the information appears in the text surrounded by brackets. The scripture text is in bold print and the bracketed translation information is in regular print. This helps the reader’s eye stay with the scriptures and clearly identifies what is the additional information and not part of the translation. Here are few things that are found in the brackets of The Expanded Bible:

• Expanded translations bring out the meaning of words and offer alternatives.
• Literal meanings of terms from the original languages are included where they can provide more understanding.
• Traditional wordings assist recollection of familiar terms and expressions.
• Comments explain passages that can be understood better with a brief remark.
• Useful references supply rewarding opportunities for comparing other Scriptures.
• Variants display additional wording in some of the original language texts.

The translation notes are presented with this code:

Words in brackets [ ] without any notation are other possible ways of translating a word, phrase, clause, or sentence. [or] is a different translation possibility that takes the meaning of the original language in a different direction than the base text does. L is a more literal rendering of the original language, allowing the reader to see why translations make varying choices. T provides familiar terms and well-known renderings from past translations, especially those in the King James tradition. C is a comment that briefly provides historical, cultural, theological, or other explanatory information to help readers better understand a verse or passage. A scripture in brackets is a cross-reference. The bullet tells you what word or phrase the following bracketed information is referring to.

1 My friends [L Beloved], this is [L now]the second letter I have written you [C the first is probably 1 Peter] to help your honest minds remember [L awaken/arouse your sincere understanding/intentions with a reminder]. 2 I want you to think about [remember; recall] the words the holy prophets spoke in the past, and remember the command our Lord and Savior gave us through your apostles [Jude 17]. 3 It is most important for you to understand what will happen in the last days. People [L Scoffers] will laugh at [scoff at; ridicule] you. They will live doing the evil things they want to do [indulge their own desires/lusts; Jude 18]. 4 [L And] They will say, “Jesus promised to come again. Where is he [L Where is his promised coming]? [L For] Our fathers[ancestors] have died [L fallen asleep], but the world [L all things] continues the way it has been since it was made [it began with creation].” 5 But they do not want to remember [willfully forget/ignore] what happened long ago. By the word of God heaven was made [came to be; Gen. 1:3—20; Ps. 33:6; 148:5; Heb. 11:3], and the earth was made from water [Gen. 1:2; Ps. 24:2] and with water [Gen. 1:6—7, 9; Ps. 33:7; 136:6; Prov. 8:27—29]. 6 Then [L Through these; C either the water and the word of God, or the heavens and earth which poured forth their water; Gen. 7:11] the world was flooded and destroyed with water [L being deluged with water; Gen. 6—9]. 7 And that same word of God is keeping [reserving; holding in store] heaven and earth that we now have in order to be destroyed by fire [Deut. 32:22; Is. 66:15—16; Zeph. 1:18; Mal. 4:1]. They are being kept for the judgment day and the destruction of all who are against God [L the ungodly/impious people].

The layout of The Expanded Bible is excellent. The print is dark and the font selection is easy to read. The paper is thick so there is not any ghosting from other pages. Scripture references are at the top outer corner of each page to help the reader quickly find scriptures. The Expanded Bible is also in a single column paragraph format. Single column paragraph is my favorite layout and I wish more Bibles came in this format. Verse numbers are dark and easy to find and the chapter numbers are large. It even has 1 1/2 inches of margin space for note taking. The paper is so thick that one could take nearly any type of pen and write their notes in this expansive space. Only the occasional heading is set in this margin, leaving lots of free space for recording your observations. There are no maps, index, glossary, or concordance, which is fine with me. The Expanded Bible is a very handy size: 5 3/4″ x 8 1/2″ and it stands 1 1/2″ thick. This is pretty thick for just the New Testament, which reveals the thickness of the paper used. It is very nice. I expect when the full scriptures are released that they will have to change the paper weight or else it will be in the neighborhood of 4 1/2″ thick.

It takes a little bit of time to get used to reading The Expanded Bible because the translation brackets are in every verse. But with some practice, one easily gets used to the layout. For the student who wants to study the scriptures, but does not want to swim through commentaries to learn the other possible ways the text can be worded will find The Expanded Bible to be a very useful resource. I can see that some people would be disappointed with this work if all they intend to do is read the Bible. The Expanded Bible has a different purpose: to give access to the meanings behind the words to the average reader. This will be an excellent study tool for those who are new to the scriptures and for those who do not have a number of biblical resources to dig deeper into God’s word. The Expanded Bible cannot replace biblical dictionaries, commentaries, and reference works. But it does not try to replace those tools. The Expanded Bible gives its readers quick access to the nuances and deeper meanings in the scriptures. Understanding this purpose, I believe The Expanded Bible has attained its goal. As an evangelist, I look forward to consulting this work for years to come.

When we tell you these things, we do not use words that come from human wisdom. Instead, we speak words given to us by the Spirit, using the Spirit’s words to explain spiritual truths. (1 Corinthians 2:13; NLT)

There are places where I believe the NLT really hits a “home run” in its translation. This is one of those places. I think the NLT perfectly reflects Paul’s point and also clarifies the difficult phrasing. The other mainstream translations reflect this difficulty.

…which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. (NASB)

We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual things to spiritual people. (NRSV)

And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. (ESV)

This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit—taught words. (TNIV)

Scholars admit the difficulty of translating this verse. It is one reason why there are so many different renderings of 1 Corinthians 2:13. But the NLT maintains the integrity of the Greek while revealing Paul’s argument that he did not preach worldly wisdom, but God’s wisdom in spiritual truths through the Holy Spirit’s words. The TNIV gets pretty close to the NLT, but “spiritual realities” is not very clear.

I like giving kudos to a translation when it is able to take a difficult text, maintain the integrity and meaning of the verse and make it easy to read and understand. Nice job, NLT!

By the way, I am examining the Common English Bible (CEB) and its release of the gospel of  Matthew. I am also examining The Bible As Poetry, which has been emailed to me. I plan to give my thoughts on these translations in progress. As soon as I have some time for a more lengthy post, my review of The Expanded Bible will come.

1. Less accessible to average readers. One of the values of the HCSB is its readability. It is accurate, fairly literal, but easy to read. There are many places, like Philippians 2:6, where the HCSB goes with the meaning of the text rather than a literal translation of the words. I repeatedly praise the HCSB for its translation choice in Philippians 2:6. Go with an understandable, yet accurate translation. Many in the congregation where I work like the HCSB because of these features. Increasing the use of Yahweh decreases readability. While those highly knowledge in the scriptures will understand who is being referred to when reading the term Yahweh, I think the majority of people will not understand this term.

2. Increased confusion. “But Jehoshaphat said, ‘Isn’t there a prophet of the LORD here? Let’s inquire of Yahweh through him’” (2 Kings 3:11). Does this passage make more sense than just staying with a consistent use of LORD? I don’t see how this is an improvement in translation.

3. Lack of acceptance. I do not foresee people getting on board with this change. I don’t think people are going to stop using LORD for the name of God and start using Yahweh instead.

4. Not functional. I know the common, un-churched, non-religious person has no idea who Yahweh is and who you are talking about if you said, “Yahweh.” Not only is using Yahweh less readable, but I believe it will cause an additional hindrance when trying to teach people. Rather than know that the LORD is the subject, an explanation will need to be given to unbelievers about the name Yahweh in any sermon or class that has this rendering. This is not a fruitful use of one’s time when trying to teach and preach.

What do you all think about the HCSB increasing the use of Yahweh? While I believe an argument can be made that it is more literal or accurate, it is certainly not helpful. I believe it causes more problems than it solves and causes the scriptures to be less accessible to the lost. There must be moderation between literal translation and comprehension. Otherwise we would all use interlinear Bibles. But anyone who has used one knows that an interlinear does not lead to ease in understanding or comprehension. I think the HCSB is going the wrong way with this change. We don’t need to be using words that make the scriptures harder to understand when translating to the English language.