The NIV73, NIV78, NIV84, TNIV01, TNIV05, and NIV10

Well, the Newer and Improveder New and Improved New International Version is out. This post will be a work in progress, comparing any changes it may have made to those I suggested on this blog. I actually sent some suggestions in as well, but I forget now what they were.

developing . . .

Where my suggestion is in italics, it indicates that it was made somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but nonetheless would have brought the reading more into line with the CBT's expressed philosophy of translation.

#1. Numbers 6:2-3 1984
If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of separation to the LORD as a Nazirite, 3 he must abstain from wine and other fermented drink and must not drink vinegar made from wine or from other fermented drink.

Changed to:
If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of dedication to the LORD as a Nazirite, 3 they must abstain from wine and other fermented drink and must not drink vinegar made from wine or other fermented drink.

Suggestion:
‘If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of dedication to the LORD as a Nazirite, 3 they must abstain from wine and beer and must not drink vinegar made from wine or beer.

#2. Ezekiel 40:5 The conversion factor apparently being used in chapter 42 is 20.4 rather than 21 inches. That cubit just keeps right on growing, but just how long IS it anyway?

"six long cubits"

a.The common cubit was about 1 1/2 feet (about 0.5 meter)[=9 feet or 3 meters]. --ONIV (cubit = 18 or 19.6")

a.That is, about 10 feet or about 3.1 meters; also in verse 12. The long cubit of about 21 inches or about 52 centimeters is the basic unit of measurement of length throughout Ezekiel 40–48. --TNIV (cubit = 20 or 20.3")

a.That is, about 11 feet or about 3.2 meters; also in verse 12. The long cubit of about 21 inches or about 53 centimeters is the basic unit of measurement of length throughout chapters 40–48. --NNIV (cubit = 21 or 22"

Ezekiel 42:2 "a hundred cubits long and fifty cubits wide"
a. The common cubit was about 1 1/2 feet (about 0.5 meter). -ONIV
a. That is, about 170 feet long and 85 feet wide or about 52 meters long and 26 meters wide -TNIV (cubit = 20.4 or 20.47")
a. That is, about 175 feet long and 88 feet wide or about 53 meters -NNIV (cubit = 20.86 or 21")

Ezekiel 42:3 (ONIV as before) "twenty cubits"
b. That is, about 34 feet or about 10.4 meters -TNIV (cubit = 20.4 or 20.47")
b. That is, about 35 feet or about 11 meters -NNIV (cubit = 21 or 21.65")


Jonah 3:5 1984, TNIV
The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth.

Changed to:
The Ninevites believed God. A fast was proclaimed, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth.

I hadn't made a suggestion here, just pointed out the inconsistency in not translating "men of Nineveh" as "people of Nineveh," as the CBT did in Matthew and Luke. But note that the CBT did take notice of one inconsistency, that of blaming all the Ninevites for proclaiming a fast, when apparently it was only the men who did so. They couldn't come out and say that, even yet, so they just deleted the entire subject of 'declared a fast'. How duplicitous.

Matthew 8:28 only change was in the title: Jesus Restores Two Demon-Possessed Men
28 When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[a] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way.
Footnotes:
a.Matthew 8:28 Some manuscripts Gergesenes; other manuscripts Gerasenes

Suggestion:
"two demoniacs"

Matthew 19:29 1973-1978
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

1984
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother [Some manuscripts mother or wife] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

2001-2010
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife [Some manuscripts do not have or wife] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

Suggestion:
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or spouse or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

Mark 10:12 unchanged
12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

Luke 12:14 unchanged
¹⁴ Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?”

Suggestion:
¹⁴ Jesus replied, “Sheesh!" Who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?”

Allegedly, the CBT searched a database of English usage and found 'arbiter' to be on the lips of today's youth. And they remain convinced, by some tortured sociolinguistic reasoning, that the person here addressed was a male--when there is absolutely no hint in the Greek (of the kind they would normally accept) that this was so.

Luke 12:45 1973
But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the men and women servants

1978
But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the menservants and womanservants

1984
But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the menservants and maidservants

2001-2010
But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women,

Suggestion:
But suppose the overseer says to himself, 'Master is taking a long time to get back,' and begins to beat up the slaves--both men and women--

Wow. The CBT really had a hard time making up their mind on this one. But they're still not there yet; the abusive servant was definitely one in authority over the abused, but there's no indication whatsoever in the Greek that the abusive servant was a male--both of which points they appear to have missed in trying to settle on how to refer to the gender-specified slaves.

Suggestion:
But if that worker begins to say to themself, 'My boss will be late this morning,' and starts throwing their weight around and abusing their underlings
John 6:33 unchanged from TNIV; KJV, NIV had 'he who'
³³For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.

Acts 1:10-11 unchanged
¹⁰ They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. ¹¹ “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

Suggestion:
¹⁰ They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two angels dressed in white stood beside them.¹¹ “Galileans,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

If 'men' can be translated 'people' or even 'sisters' depending on the supposed context, why not as 'angels' when that is clearly what they were? How unfortunate for gender equality that supernatural beings never manifest as females on the pages of Scripture. And it seems quite reasonable, by CBT standards, to assume that women were also being addressed in v. 11. How could the CBT have missed the chance to do for the 'men' of Galilee what they'd done for the 'men' of Nineveh?

Acts 1:14 unchanged
¹⁴ They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

Suggestion:
¹⁴ They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers and sisters.

 The NIV now has a footnote, which they still haven't gotten around either to applying to this verse, or citing it for the one following:
Acts 1:16 The Greek word for brothers and sisters (adelphoi) refers here to believers, both men and women, as part of God’s family; also in 6:3; 11:29; 12:17; 16:40; 18:18, 27; 21:7, 17; 28:14, 15.


Acts 1:15-16 1984
Peter stood up among the believers^{[Greek: brothers]} (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) ¹⁶ and said, “Brothers,

TNIV
Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) ¹⁶ and said, “Brothers and sisters,
^{2010 [d] adds the footnote quoted above}


The explicit inclusion of women in the first exercise of church leadership is unchanged.

Acts 1:23 old & new NIV
So they proposed two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias.

TNIV:
So they proposed the names of two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 

Here is another place where the KJV did not have men, but the CBT nonetheless kept it when emasculating the 1984 NIV. The TNIV seems to have pulled 'names' out of thin air, and the CBT found it fit to remove; yet men still remains.

Acts 1:24 unchanged
Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen . . .

This is one gender-neutral change from the KJV that I have no problem with; men is not present in the Greek.

Acts 4:9 1973-1984
If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed,

2001-2010
If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed,

Acts 4:12 1973-1984

for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.

TNIV
for there is no other name given under heaven by which we must be saved.

2010
for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.

Thus the fixing of a classic problem passage. But how do we know that this name was not given to men? It was, after all, spoken by a group of men addressing a group of men.

Acts 4:13-17 1984
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. . . “What are we going to do with these men?”. . . we must warn these men to speak no longer to anyone in this name.

2001-2010

When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. . . “What are we going to do with these men?”. . . we must warn them to speak no longer to anyone in this name.

What? did Pete and Johnny suddenly cease to be the males of reference?

Suggestion:
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary folks, they were astonished and they took note that they had been with Jesus. . . “What are we going to do with these people?”. . . we must warn these people to speak no longer to anyone in this name.

Acts 4:36 (since 1984 the only change was from Son to "son . . .")

Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means "son of Encouragement"),

Suggestion:

Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Advocate),

The Greek idiom was left unchanged, despite its offensive gender specificity--apparently because we know from elsewhere that Barnabas was a man. As we pointed out, the latest revision of Acts 4 is replete with unnecessary male references.


Acts 11:15 unchanged

¹⁵ “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning.

The CBT is determined to stand by its claim that it NEVER diminishes the masculinity of God--even when there is no masculinity present in the Greek. Thus having decided to refer to the Holy Spirit as 'he' in 1973, the CBT durst never retreat. The KJV uses 'he' for the Spirit elsewhere--but not here.


Acts 21:4-5 changed to TNIV

Romans 4:1 1973-1984
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?
TNIV
What then shall we say that Abraham, the forefather of us Jews, discovered in this matter?
2010
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter?

Aha, 'flesh', which had been banned from all previous editions of the NIV, is back--even in verses which never had anything to do with the sinful nature. But 'forefather' is still in--allegedly because Abraham is specified, and we all know him to be a male. And "in this matter," which originally replaced "according to the flesh," was apparently left in as a pure oversight.

1 Corinthians 11:28 Changed to TNIV
Suggestion:

One ought to examine himself--and, in so doing, eat of the bread and drink of the cup.


Galatians 4:26 unchanged
But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

Suggestion:
Galatians 4:26
But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and it is our ancestor.

Hebrews 11:11 Changed to TNIV
Suggestion:

By faith also, Sarah--herself barren--received power to conceive seed, and, beyond the time of age, bore a child--because she considered faithful the one who had promised.
 
¹¹ And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she^[a] considered him faithful who had made the promise.

Footnotes:

1. Hebrews 11:11 Or By faith Abraham, even though he was too old to have children—and Sarah herself was not able to conceive—was enabled to become a father because he

Hebrews 11:35 unchanged
³⁵ Women received back their dead, raised to life again.

I guess it was a bit too much to expect to find gender neutrality applied when women, rather than men, were explicit in the original.

Iran War Update

In addition to what was mentioned in the previous post, the following is of relevance in the upcoming combat phase of the Persio-Israeli war:

- Israel continues to train for a long-range helicopter attack from the sea. This battle plan envisions takeoff from a carrier in the Arabian Sea, which will most likely necessitate American cooperation.

- The US is stockpiling bunker-buster bombs at its bomber base in Diego Garcia, a few hours' flight from Iranian shores.

- The Turkey-Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hammas alliance is shaping up to come under the cover of growing military superpower Red China, which is rather ironic considering that Turkey is still a member of NATO. Turkey, remember, refused to allow NATO forces passages across its border with Kurdistan for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Turkey's Anatolian Eagle air war games from Sept. 20 to Oct. 6 included Chinese aircraft taking the usual place of the American planes, which were pulled from the exercise when Turkey refused to allow Israel to participate.

And finally, although mutual combat has yet to occur except by proxy, the shooting war has actually begun:

- A top-secret Iranian military installation was ripped by a series of explosions last Tuesday. Tehran admitted to 18 soldiers killed in these explosions. The Revolutionary Guards Imam Ali mountain base in Lorestan held most of the Shahab-3 medium-range missile launchers pointed at Iraq and Israel--all of which were destroyed in the blasts. Tehran, of course, is calling it an accident. We only point out that for some reason, such 'accidents' are becoming commonplace.

- On October 9, the Baluchi separatist organisation Jundallah claimed responsibility for abducting nuclear welder Amir Hossein Shirani in the city of Isfahan. Until now Jundullah's operations were confined to Iranian Buluchistan. Its move into central Iran is an alarming new development.

Prisoner Exchange in the Offing?

Three men are currently languishing behind bars, despite being no threat whatsoever to the respective countries that imprisoned them. Two of them are Americans being held in Iran. One of them is an Iranian being held in America. As an impartial observer, I suggest to the respective governments that the two countries exchange prisoners.

On the one side are Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, Americans arrested for approaching the Iranian border with Iraqi Kurdistan back in July 2009. On the other side is Amir Sanjari, arrested one month before that for withholding court-mandated payments from his estranged wife.

After many months of confinement, all three men have seen their prospects improve slightly. Shane and Josh were charged with espionage, and held without bail. Amir was charged with contempt of court, and held in isolation. Amir is now imprisoned in Plainfield, IN. Although he is hundreds of miles from his friends and loved ones, he is allowed visitors, and will be eligible for parole in five years--if he behaves himself. Of course, he won't be able to make any payments to his wife as long as he stays locked up. Shane and Josh have been allowed one visit by their mothers and a few visits with each other.

What's the next step? Well, it's probable that Amir will eventually be repatriated to Iran anyway, where his wife will never be able to garnish his wages. And it's inevitable that Shane and Josh will eventually be released, once their propaganda value has been exhausted. So what I'm suggesting will only speed up the process. This is especially timely for Iran, which is suffering from a lack of nuclear physicists (Amir Sanjari's specialty) since they executed all those suspected of helping Israel infiltrate the Busheir nuclear reactor with the Stuxnet virus. They could really use Amir's services, and should be glad to get rid of the two Americans in exchange. Here's their chance to cash in at the most auspicious time.

UPDATE OCTOBER 2011: Well, all three Americans are "out on bail"--in other words, the Iranian officials were quite willing to take a bribe to release the hikers--there's no expectation that any of them will ever return to stand trial, and the money, I'm sure, has long been spent. Amir Houshang Sanjari, on the other hand, still has a about three and a half years to serve. According to precedent, however, he will be repatriated upon release.

Are Angels always White?

94020 As a White Man, I feel a bit uncomfortable with the idea that I may be a member of some favoured race. I imagine my readers would feel the same. But as I study the topic, it does appear that there is something behind the idea. I shall get to that in a moment, but first let me again dispel the myth that such a thing exists as a White Race.

Whiteness is nothing more than a condition in which an individual lacks the ability to spontaneously produce melanin in sufficient quantities to darken the skin. When the condition is localized, it is considered a disease and referred to as leucoderma or vitiglio. When it is systemic, it is considered a genetic condition. If it's caused by a single defective gene, it's known as albinism. But if it's part and parcel of one's hereditary package, there's really no name for this condition in the English language. African-Americans who suffer from it can, should they chose, "pass as White," as if Whiteness was something one can put on or take off. Whites who suffer from it will turn red in the sun, unless they use liberal amounts of sunscreen. But for some reason, putting on the sunscreen doesn't have any special name for it, such as "passing as coloured"--although this has been successfully done.

So, whiteness is something that can be experienced by any ethnic group. There are light and dark Africans, light and dark Indians, light and dark Asians. There just aren't any light and dark Frisians or Norsemen. These inbred ethnic groups are so genetically depleted that the melanin-producing genes have been totally eliminated from their national genome. Interestingly, Adolph Hitler supposed that this made them and their kind the most highly advanced race--a race to which he himself obviously did not belong. Such a claim, however, has nothing in history or science to back it up. The Whiteness of Norsemen was a major factor in the extinction of the first colonizers of Greenland; unlike the darker Eskimos, who relied on a steady diet of seals, whales, and fish to provide them with the Vitamin D they needed, the uber-white Norse Groenlanders figured they could survive on just what their farms produced (raw milk being a natural source of Vitamin D). When the Little Ice Age wiped out their pasture, and thence their cows, the vitamin D-starved Groenlanders perished, while a whole ocean of fishes lay at their feet. Their Whiteness, combined with their stubborn ethnic pride and unwillingness to 'go native' when out of their element, was their downfall. [but see last Update]

So, physically speaking, having white skin is nothing so special. But what about spiritually speaking? In the Bible, whiteness is almost always a sign of purity--the primary exception being that white skin was associated with the uncleanliness of leprosy. So why should angels manifest the appearance of white skin?

Joshua Milton was the rebel commander over a sector of Monrovia during the First Liberian Civil War. One day, shortly after pulling the heart out of a living child and passing it around in pieces for his boys to eat, he had a Damascus Road experience. Radiating brilliance, a man and woman appeared to him, and his first impression was that of a white man speaking to him in his own Krahn dialect: "My son, why are you living as a slave?" After a conversation with Joshua, the apparition ended, and Joshua was on his way out of the warlord business.

So, why was this African visited by God or an angel in the guise of a White Man? I don't know. Perhaps it was the impression generated by the extreme brilliance that radiated from the manifestation. Perhaps, in another context, angels appear as Black Men. Anyone have any such stories to report?

ETA: According to Joshua at about minute 7 on this video, it was due to the extreme brilliance; he couldn't look at the person speaking to him.

UPDATE AUGUST 2014: I have been informed that Liberians put more stock in a white Bible when used for talismanic purposes.

UPDATE DECEMBER 2016: Someone has submitted an example of a Sudanese giant in the uniform of a Russian communist official appearing and disappearing as would an angel; a man was in a long line to get an official permit, and, realizing he couldn't possibly get through the line in time, suddenly saw a seven foot tall jet-black official beckoning him to the front of the line. When he got there, the official had disappeared, and when he went back to the line after receiving his permit, the people who had been in line with him assured him, as had the officials at the front of the line, that there hadn't been any tall black man; they had just seen him suddenly move to the front of the line while people just moved out of his way. Apparently the angel appeared this way for the specific purposes of:

1) ensuring the believer would realize it must have been an angel, as no other explanation was possible;
2) helping to convince those who heard that story that God is no respecter of persons.

UPDATE AUGUST 2018: This website makes the case that it may have been the availability of cheaper elephant ivory in Europe, combined with feudalism's lack of personal freedom that always exacerbates famines, that brought economic activity in Greenland to an end.

A bungled attempt at censorship

As the darkness of despotism descends over the United States, censorship is growing. Citizens are jailed for filming policemen defending the peace, and individuals are slapped with wiretapping charges for recording their own arrests. But in the once place where censorship actually makes sense--where national security is allegedly at stake in wartime--the censors aren't doing a very good job. Witness the experience of Anthony Schaffer when he published a first-person history of the intelligence war in Afghanistan.

Shaffer’s chain of command in the Army Reserve cleared his manuscript for release, but the Pentagon intervened with additional security concerns in early August, after the books had been printed but before they had gone on sale.

The upshot was that the Pentagon paid $47,300 in taxpayer money for the 9,500 books that constituted almost the entire first print run of the book and had the volumes destroyed Sept. 20, while the publisher, Thomas Dunne Books, an imprint of St. Martin’s Press, issued a second edition Sept. 24 with roughly 200 words or passages blacked out.

The Defense Department’s action had two effects:

First, it drew attention to a book that otherwise had generated little prepublication buzz. The redacted version of “Operation Dark Heart” made it to No. 1 on Amazon’s overall best-seller list, and a week after going on sale, it was on its third reprint with 50,000 copies sold or on sale, said Joe Rinaldi, spokesman for Thomas Dunne Books.

Second, because St. Martin’s had sent what Rinaldi estimated at “60 to 70, at most” advance copies of the first edition to news organizations, including Army Times, journalists and others can compare the original and censored versions.

The Defense Department was forced into arranging for the books to be destroyed because “the book was not referred to the original classification authorities for a proper information security review until July 2010,” said Air Force Lt. Col. Rene White, a Pentagon spokeswoman. “We are looking into why this happened.”

As for the advance copies that were sent out to the news media, the department “has no plans to purchase the editor’s review copies,” she said. “We had hoped to recover these review copies before they became publicly available. In light of recent events, this has become more difficult.”

Oh boy. Nothing like yelling, "NOBODY LOOK!!!" to get everybody to look.

Among the revelations deleted from the book:

- Among the Taliban troops the US is fighting in Afghanistan are Pakistani Intelligence officers.
- Among the countries giving material aid to the Taliban in their war against the US is Iran.
- The US has successfully penetrated the Iranian intelligence by electronic means.