Logos Responds to TNIV Disclaimer

I still find it odd that on the Logos Bible Software page for their TNIV module, they actually have a disclaimer about the translation:

SPECIAL NOTE: We understand, as does the publisher, that the TNIV is a particularly controversial Bible translation. Logos Bible Software does not endorse the TNIV, or any particular modern translation. We believe, though, that it is important to offer this translation in Libronix DLS compatible form for both its critics and supporters, and we would encourage you to look at it, as you would at any translation from the original, with a critical eye. Compare it to other modern translations, and, as you are able, to the original text. You may also wish to visit these two sites for more information supporting and criticizing this translation: http://www.tniv.info and http://www.no-tniv.com.

It's odd to me, because no such disclaimers exist for other translations. And note the wording doesn't just say that the TNIV is controversial; it says that it's particularly controversial. What exactly does that mean, anyway?

So last weekend, I took it upon myself to suggest to the fine folks at Logos that they take the disclaimer down. I first clicked on support, and then I clicked on "email support" which created an email addressed to tech@logos.com. Here's what I wrote:

Why is there a disclaimer on the TNIV?

What exactly is controversial about this translation--inclusive language? If this is the case, then why don't you also put the same disclaimer on the NRSV, NLT, the Message, the NCV and any other translation that employed gender inclusive language years before the TNIV.

I would ask you to remove the disclaimer. There's no reason to have it if you aren't going to include it on other translations that follow the same guidelines. It's a double standard and simply says to the customer, "Don't buy this Bible."

Thanks,
Rick Mansfield


Late yesterday, I got a response--and not just from Logos, from from Bob Pritchett himself--the president/CEO of Logos. Looking back at my initial email, I sure sound like I had a saucy attitude Saturday afternoon. I really didn't mean to come across that way. Heck, I thought some guy in Tech Support would receive it. I had no idea it would go all the way to the CEO.

Here's what Bob said (with his permission for me to quote him):

I agree that there are other translations that are similar in many ways to the TNIV; however they simply haven't generated the recent controversy that the TNIV has. (Probably because they either aren't as new, or aren't based on the best-selling modern translation, the NIV, about which people feel very strongly.)

The disclaimer is a response to the amount of controversy, argument, and advocacy (on both sides) we've heard from our users; that's why it links to both a supporting and critical site. If we had this much correspondence on another translation, we'd probably put a note on it, too.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts,

-- Bob


I appreciate Bob responding to the email personally--I really do.

But I still don't understand the need for the disclaimer. I mean, when I bought my electronic copy of the TNIV from Accordance, there was no disclaimer on their site. In fact, on the Accordance site, one reads "The TNIV is an uncompromisingly accurate Bible translation in today’s language from the translators of the most trusted modern English translation, the NIV." However, back on the Logos site, one reads "According to Zondervan, "It combines uncompromising reliability, the clarity of today’s language, and the heritage of the most trusted translation, the NIV" (emphasis added). Kind of a "Well, that's what they say..."

I don't know. Like I said, it's just downright odd. Do we need the electronic equivalent of cigarette health warnings on Bible translations? Can't customers think for themselves? Granted, it's their company and they can put whatever they want on their web pages. But no other software company I know of is doing that. What if Zondervan said, "Well, it's our translation. Take down the disclaimer or not only will we withdraw the TNIV, we might as well withdraw the NIV (the best-selling modern translation), too. Lots of other software companies around."

And I still don't know--even after all this time--what really makes the TNIV controversial, let alone particularly controversial. Sure, it's an update to the NIV, "the best-selling modern translation...about which people feel very strongly." But the International Bible Society has promised that the NIV will be with us at least through the second throne judgement. So it's not like the NIV is in any real danger of being replaced by the TNIV. And as I said in the initial email to Logos, the inclusive language is not new. So what's all the fuss about?

You know, now that I think about it, the only high-profile folks I've ever heard make a real fuss about the TNIV are usually associated in one way or another with one of two other recent translations of the Bible--one of which I really, really like and one of which...well...I really d...

Could such objection to the TNIV be a conflict of interest?

And now that I'm really pondering things, didn't Logos partner last year with the folks from one of those recent translations to produce that...what's it called?....Reverse Interl....

Nevermind.