 Background
of the New International Version (NIV) Bible
The New International Version is a completely
new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred
scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew,
Aramaic and Greek texts. It had its beginning in 1965 when,
after several years of exploratory study by committees
from the Christian Reformed Church and the National Associations
of Evangelicals, a group of scholars met at Palos Heights,
Illinois, and concurred in the need for a new translation
of the Bible in contemporary English. This group, though
not made up of official church representatives, was transdenominational.
Its conclusion was endorsed by a large number of leaders
from many denominations who met in Chicago in 1966.
Responsibility
for the new version was delegated by the Palos Heights
group to a self-governing body of fifteen, the Committee
on Bible Translation, composed for the most part of biblical
scholars from colleges, universities and seminaries. In
1967 the New York Bible Society (now the International
Bible Society) generously undertook the financial sponsorship
for the project - sponsorship that made it possible to
enlist the help of many distinguished scholars. The fact
that participants from the United States, Great Britain,
Canada, Australia and New Zealand worked together gave
the project its international scope. That they were from
many denominations - including Anglican, Assemblies of
God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ,
Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene,
Presbyterian, Wesleyan and other churches - helped to safeguard
the translation from sectarian bias.
How it was made helps to give the New International
Version its distinctiveness. The translation of
each book was assigned to a team of scholars. Next, one
of the Intermediate Editorial Committees revised the
initial translation, with constant reference to the Hebrew,
Aramaic or Greek. Their work then went on to one of the
General Editorial committees, which checked it in detail
and made another thorough version. This revision in turn
was carefully reviewed by the Committee on Bible Translation,
which made further changes and then released the final
version for publication. In this way the entire Bible
underwent three revisions, during each of which the translation
was examined for its faithfulness to the original languages
and for its English style.
All of this involved many thousands of hours of research
and discussion regarding the meaning of the texts and the
precise way of putting them into English. It may well be
that no other translation has been made by a more thorough
process of review and revision from committee to committee
than this one.
From the beginning of the project, the Committee on Bible
Translation held to certain goals for the New International
Version: that it would be an accurate translation
and one that would have clarity and literary quality and
so prove suitable for public and private reading, teaching,
preaching, memorizing and liturgical use. The Committee
also sought to preserve some measure of continuity with
the long tradition of translating the Scriptures into English.
In working toward these goals, the translators were united
in their commitment to the authority and infallibility
of the Bible as God's Word in written form. They believe
that it contains the divine answer to the deepest needs
of humanity, that it sheds unique light on our path in
a dark world, and that it sets forth the way to our eternal
well-being.
The first concern of the translators has been the accuracy
of the translation and its fidelity to the thought of the
biblical writers. They have weighed the significance of
the lexical and grammatical details of the Hebrew, Aramaic
and Greek texts. At the same time, they have striven for
more than a word-for-word translation. Because thought
patterns and syntax differ from language to language, faithful
communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible
demands frequent modifications in sentence structures and
constant regard for the contextual meaning of words.
A sensitive feeling for the style does not always accompany
scholarship. Accordingly, the Committee on Bible Translation
submitted the developing version to a number of stylistic
consultants. Two of them read every book of both Old and
New Testaments twice - once before and once after the last
major revision - and made invaluable suggestions. Samples
of the translations were tested for clarity and ease of
reading by various kinds of people - young and old, highly
educated and less well educated, ministers and laymen.
Concern for clear and natural English - that the New
International Version should be idiomatic but not
idiosyncratic, contemporary but not dated - motivated
the translators and consultants. At the save time, they
tried to reflect the differing styles of the biblical
writer. In view of the international use of English,
the translators sought to avoid obvious Americanisms
on the one hand and obvious Anglicisms on the other.
A British edition reflects the comparatively few differences
of significant idiom and of spelling.
As for the traditional pronouns "thou," "thee"
and "thine" in references to the Deity, the translators
judged that to use the archaisms (along with old verb forms
such as "doest," "wouldest" and "hadst")
would violate accuracy in translation. Neither Hebrew,
Aramaic nor Greek uses special pronouns for the persons
of the Godhead. A present-day translation is not enhanced
by forms that in the time of the King James Version were
used in everyday speech, whether referring to God or man.
For the Old Testament the standard Hebrew text, the Masoretic
Text as published in the latest editions of Biblia Hebraica,
was used throughout. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain material
bearing on an earlier stage of Hebrew text. They were consulted,
as were the Samaritan Pentateuch and the ancient scribal
traditions relating to textual changes. Sometimes a varient
Hebrew reading in the margin of the Masoretic Text was
followed instead of the text itself. Such instances, being
variant within the Masoretic tradition, are not specified
by footnotes. In rare cases, words in the consonantal text
were divided differently from the way they appear in the
Masoretic Text. Footnotes indicate this. The translators
also consulted the more important early versions - the
Septuagint; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion; the Vulgate;
the Syriac Peshitta; the Targums; and for the Psalms the Juxta
Hebraica of Jerome. Readings from these versions were
occasionally followed where the Masoretic Text seemed doubtful
and where accepted principles of textual criticism showed
that one or more of these textual witnesses appeared to
provide the correct reading. Such instances are footnoted.
Sometimes vowel letters and vowel signs did not, in the
judgment of the translators, represent the correct vowels
for the original consonantal text. Accordingly some words
were read with a different set of vowels. These instances
are usually not indicated by footnotes.
The Greek text used in translating the New Testament was
an eclectic one. No other piece of ancient literature has
such an abundance of manuscript witnesses as does the New
Testament. Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators
made their choice of readings according to accepted principles
of New Testaments textual criticism. Footnotes call attention
to places where there was uncertainty about what the original
text was. The best current printed texts of the Greek New
Testaments were used.
There is a sense in which the work of translation is never
wholly finished. This applies to all great literature and
uniquely so to the Bible. In 1973 the New Testament in
the New International Version was published. Since
then, suggestions for corrections and revisions have been
received from various sources. The Committee on Bible Translation
carefully considered the suggestions and adopted a number
of them. These are incorporated in the first printing of
the entire Bible.
As in other ancient documents, the precise meaning of
the biblical texts is something uncertain. This is more
often the case with the Hebrew and Aramaic texts than with
the Greek text. Although archaeological and linguistic
discoveries in this century aid in understanding difficult
passages, some uncertainties remain. The more significant
of these have been called to the reader's attention in
the footnotes.
In regard to the divine name YHWH, commonly referred
to as the Tetragrammaton, the translators adopted
the device used in most English versions of rendering that
name as "Lord" in capital letters to distinguish
it from Adonai, another Hebrew word rendered "Lord,"
for which small letters are used. Wherever the two names
stand together in the Old Testament as a compound name
of God, they are rendered "Sovereign Lord."
Because for most readers today the phrase "the Lord
of hosts" and "God of hosts" have little
meaning, this version renders them "the Lord Almighty" and
"God Almighty." These renderings convey the sense
of the Hebrew, namely, "he who is sovereign over all
the 'hosts' (powers) in heaven and on earth, especially
over the 'hosts' (armies) of Israel." For readers
unacquainted with Hebrew this does not make clear the distinction
between Sabaoth ("hosts" or "Almighty")
and Shaddai (which can also be translated "Almighty"),
but the latter occurs infrequently and is always footnoted.
When Adonai and YHWH Sabaoth occur together,
they are rendered "the Lord, the Lord Almighty."
As for other proper nouns, the familiar spellings of the
King James Version are generally retained. Names traditionally
spelled with "ch," except where it is final,
are usually spelled in this translation with "k" or "c," since
the biblical languages do not have the sound that "ch"
frequently indicates in English - for example, in chant.
For well-known name such as Zechariah, however, the traditional
spelling has been retained. Variation in the spelling of
names in the original languages has usually not been indicated.
Where a person or place has two or more different names
in the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek texts, the more familiar
one has generally been used, with footnotes where needed.
To achieve clarity the translators sometimes supplied
words not in the original texts but required by the context.
If there was uncertainty about such material, it is enclosed
in brackets. Also for the sake of clarity or style, nouns,
including some proper nouns, are sometimes substituted
for pronouns, and vice versa. And though the Hebrew writers
often shifted back and forth between first, second and
third personal pronouns without change of antecedent, this
translation often makes them uniform, in accordance with
English style and without the use of footnotes.
Poetical passages are printed as poetry, that is, with
indentation of lines and with separate stanzas. These are
generally designed to reflect the structure of Hebrew poetry.
The poetry is normally characterized by parallelism in
balanced lines. Most of the poetry in the Bible is in the
Old Testament, and scholars differ regarding the scansion
of Hebrew lines. The translators determined the stanza
divisions for the most part by analysis of the subject
matter. The stanzas therefore serve as poetic paragraphs.
As an aid to the reader, italicized sectional headings
are inserted in most of the books. They are not to be regarded
as part of the NIV text, are not for oral reading, and
are not intended to dictate the interpretation of the sections
they head.
The footnotes in this version are of several kinds, most
of which need no explanation. Those giving alternative
translations begin with "Or" and generally introduce
the alternative with the last word preceding it in the
text, except when it is a single-word alternative; in poetry
quoted in a footnote a slant mark indicates a line division.
Footnotes introduced by "Or" do not have uniform
significance. In some cases two possible translations were
considered to have about equal validity. In other cases,
though the translators were convinced that the translation
in the text was correct, they judged that another interpretation
was possible and of sufficient importance to be represented
in a footnote.
In the New Testament, footnotes that refer to uncertainty
regarding the original text are introduced by "Some
manuscripts"
or similar expressions. In the Old Testament, evidence
for the reading chosen is given first and evidence for
the alternative is added after a semicolon (for example:
Septuagint; Hebrew father). In such notes the term "Hebrew" refers
to the Masoretic Text.
It should be noted that minerals, flora and fauna, architectural
details, articles of clothing and jewelry, musical instruments
and other articles cannot always be identified with precision.
Also measures of capacity in the biblical period are particularly
uncertain (see the table of weights and measures following
the text).
Like all translations of the Bible, made as they are by
imperfect man, this one undoubtedly falls short of its
goals. Yet we are grateful to God for the extent to which
he has enabled us to realize these goals and for the strength
he has given us and our colleagues to complete our task.
We offer this version of the Bible to him in whose name
and for whose glory it has been made. We pray that it will
lead many into a better understanding of the Holy Scriptures
and fuller knowledge of Jesus Christ the incarnate Word,
of whom the Scriptures so faithfully testify.
|
RSS Feeds
Search Bible by Verse
