The publishers of the New International Version of the Bible have
produced a
n even worse version revision of the 1984 version (NIV1984) currently used in our synod. The NIV1984 will no longer be published and will soon become unavailable for purchase. And while it will still be possible to use quotations from the NIV1984, any publications making extensive use of the NIV will only be permitted to use the new version (NIV2011). That has made it
financially lucrative necessary for our synod to make a decision regarding which translation will be used in its publications.
The synod
definitely does have does not choose an “official” or “recommended” translation for use by congregations. A translation does, however, become more or less “official” when it is used in the three major types of publications (hymnal, catechism, and Bible history/Sunday school materials). This means that the choice of a translation for publications takes on great
financial significance, since the translation used in those major publications will, through usage and by default, be
forced upon adopted by the vast majority of WELS congregations for the next generation or two.
Really forever.
In 2010 the Translation Evaluation Committee (TEC) was appointed by the Conference of Presidents to evaluate the NIV2011 and other available translations and to report its
final initial conclusions to the 2011 synod convention. The purpose of this evaluation was to
quash, obliterate, and trash determine which, if any, existing translations would be suitable for use in our synod.
The TEC brought its initial findings to the 2011 convention as requested, reporting that it had reached a preliminary conclusion. The committee reported that the NIV2011 contained both positive and negative changes. After weighing those changes, it reported that it had reached consensus within the committee that, while some of the changes were not positive ones, they were not sufficient to prevent the NIV2011 from being adopted for use in our synod. The committee concluded that, while not perfect, the NIV2011 was the best and most suitable translation for use in WELS.
Finally, something developed to take the heat off the gay MLC video.
This report was received by the convention delegates with
hostility, disbelief, and damning faint expressions of thanks for the committee’s work.
One deluded delegate Some delegates voiced support for the conclusions; others expressed concern about some of the translation choices in the NIV2011, particularly in areas involving gender-inclusive language and messianic prophecy. After extensive discussion, the convention directed the committee to continue its work of evaluation and to lead continuing discussions regarding translation issues. It resolved that a final decision on translations should be made by a 2/3 plurality vote at the district conventions in 2012.
We can finesse that one, just as we did the amalgamation vote. Haha!
The convention recognized the importance of the translation issue in a church body that is committed to the Scriptures as the inspired, inerrant Word of God
even though our favorite seminaries are Fuller, Trinity, and Willow Creek. The decision made in the coming year will impact our
shrinking congregations and
fleeing members for a generation or more. Because of a desire to strive for the very best possible
cash flow translation, suggestions were made that we should consider the option of producing a new or revised translation if it would result in a translation that is more suitable than others now available.
Who writes this stuff? We cannot even turn out a decent magazine. For that reason, the convention also directed that a committee should be appointed to study the feasibility of producing either an entirely new translation or a new revision of one or more existing translations.
That was my idea, a red herring to keep the doctrinal hounds baying at the wrong thing.The committee was also asked to consider the feasibility of producing a study Bible if the NIV2011 is chosen.
Mark Freier will write the commentary on Adam making love to Eve, Gen 4:1.
The Translation Feasibility Committee has now been appointed.
NB. Thank Ron Ash for giving me these names. Committee members are Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary professors John Brug and Daniel Leyrer; pastors Phil Hirsch, Michael Jensen, John Koelpin, Jonathan Schroeder, and Paul Janke; and Northwestern Publishing House editor Curtis Jahn. In considering this option, the committee will address the questions such as our ability to produce a quality translation; the costs, time, and manpower involved; and the process by which such an effort could be carried out. The committee will bring its conclusions and recommendations to the district conventions in the summer of 2012.
There will be one choice: Une foi, un loi, un roi! Pardon my French.
Serving in Christ,
Mark Schroeder
