January (Web-only) 2002

ARTICLE TOOLS

Find similar articles E-mail this page

Southern Baptists will reconsider use of NIV because of TNIV
Without having actually read much of Today's New International Version, which was released yesterday (though it won't actually be in print until April), some conservative evangelicals are already very upset. "No one is authorized to treat the Bible like Silly Putty," William Merrell, vice president for convention relations of the Southern Baptist Convention executive committee, tells The Washington Times. "Whenever a translation occurs, a document's integrity can be skewed as a result. … It's threatened by intrusion of hypersensitivity and political correctness. You cannot apply the changing cultural mores to determine what the Word of God says." Despite these comments, Merrell apparently uses the New International Version of the Bible rather than the 1611 King James Version. But he tells the Times that the SBC "will reconsider using the NIV version of the Bible because of the publication of the TNIV." O brother. (Whoops. Now that the TNIV omits both the term "O" and uses some gender-inclusive language, that exasperated outburst should probably be "Sibling.") Merrill also talked to the Chicago Tribune, but his words were more guarded, and there was no threat of abandoning the NIV. "I believe the scholarly community among evangelicals and Southern Baptists will look with very close scrutiny at the translation. I would expect … that some of the Christian public will be upset," he said.

You can hardly blame some Christians for being upset: journalists are doing all right at reporting the basics of the story, but headline writers are misleading the public. The worst example is the Chicago Sun-Times, which posts above Associated Press writer Richard Ostling's article, ...