This account suggests that the gender-neutered changes for which the NIrV and TNIV/NGV are rightly infamous may not survive in the next revision of the NIV. Now I should be happy about this, but I'm not, as the source indicates that political pressure, not principle, may be the reason. I'm far happier with an honest Zondervan/Biblica collaboration that rejects my view that translation ought to be "essentially literal" than with the same groups privately rejecting my views, but publicly appeasing them.
Seems that there was something in Exodus 20 about this, and I tend to agree with Ehrmann; Biblica was saying one thing publicly in 2005, now they're saying the opposite, and they've not released a significant document explaining their change of course. That would tend to indicate pragmatism (Zondervan saying "you're killing our profit margins!") instead of principle.
I hope I'm wrong here--who wants to accuse brothers in Christ of lying?--but that's where the evidence points now.
Whatever the outcome, I think I'll be sticking with the KJV, NKJV, Luther translation, and Berlenburger Bibel portions that I've got now. And hopefully learning a bit more Hebrew and Greek as well.
Sunday Sonnet - For those who have not been infused with the symbology of the Papists, the rose is for the virgin, the virgin is for Mary, and the sonnet is for the Assump...
12 hours ago