Customer Reviews

TNIV | The Message//REMIX Parallel Bible (Today's New International Version)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Both The Message and the TNIV are great Bibles. I was really looking forward to seeing them together. What a shock when I opened it to discover that it's printed in mouse type. That's 6 point type, the same size they use for the fine print in an insurance contract. A typical Bible is printed in 9.5 point type. So unless you're well under 40 years old, this book is not for you. For those of us on the far side of 40, reading this print for more than a few minutes will result in eye strain headaches--if you can read it at all.

I purchased this book as a gift and it has been well received. I'd buy it again in spite of the many warnings contained in other reviews.

As previously mentioned, the type is small and that can be a problem for many people, but I did find the pages to be bright. The bright page allows for a good contrast and aids the reader when looking into the small print.

As to the cover... This particular cover is hardback which is mentioned in the description. The hardback cover is stout and has a refined almost creamy feel to it. I was impressed with it for the low price.

Lastly, as a parent of teenaged boy that likes the paraphrase of The Message, I am particularly happy to see the coupling of the paraphrase with a quality translation like the TNIV. With this tool, I expect my teen will be able to enjoy the paraphrase while measuring it against true translation sciences.

Overall, this is a great bargain on a high quality offering.

This is a great bible to preach from - inclusive language - easy to read translation (that closely mirrors the NIV) and the soft cover allows it to lie well in your hands.

There are no study aids in this bible - except for the typical "weights and measures" that are found in the back of every bible.

However, do not be fooled by the description - you are not getting a "leather bound" bible. Not even close.

Zondervan's own website will tell you that the TNIV bibles are "Italian Duo-tone" covers. If these bibles were Leather, they would say "Leather."

What is Italian Duo-tone, you ask? Good question. Write an email to Zondervan and they probably won't write back. The truth is Italian Duo-tone is Zondervan's fancy way of saying "rubber."

Yes, rubber. (actually a mixture of rubber and polyester)

Italian Duo-tone is the book binders version of "naugohide" in other words it's man-made leather.

The sad thing is, you are paying for a leather cover (or at the very least a bonded leather cover) but you are getting manufactured imitation leather made from processed polyester that only looks and feels like leather.

I really like this Bible. I was hesitant to get it after reading other reviews complaining about the font size, but while the font is rather small, I do not have any vision problems so it hasn't bothered me at all. It's similar to the font that you get with the pocket-sized Bibles.

The Message Remix is the type of reference that you'd like to have handy, but don't want to use as your only resource, so I've found it very helpful to have alongside the TNIV, so I can read the TNIV and refer to the Message Remix whenever I want to get a fresh perspective on the text.

It is much bigger than the thin-line Bibles, but that's what you expect when you get two Bibles in one binding. Another thing to know is that there is no red text (customarily used to highlight the words of Jesus). This is more than compensated for by the Message Remix book introductions, which are a less than 1 page summary at the start of each book in the Bible describing the context in which that book was written and the general message. These introductions are probably my favorite part about this Bible, and make it something that would be very good as a gift to a new Christian or someone who is not a Christian.

Recently a friend of mine who is a new Christian commented how he was reading his TNIV and wondered why it made such a big deal about Jesus eating with "tax collectors". This example shows why this Bible is a great idea as a gift for people new to Christianity, because if he had had the Message Remix right next to the TNIV text, he could have looked over and seen that the Message version says "people of disreputable character", or something like that.

Great Bible, highly recommended for young readers (due to the font size, may not be good for older people or people with vision problems), people new to Christianity (because of the book introductions and the ability to use the Message Remix version to understand difficult texts), and people who have been Christian for a long time (because of the fresh perspective the Message Remix version gives you on the text you are reading!).

I purchased this for my mom for Christmas this year and it just arrived. First, I was saddened to find it isn't actually leather. If the cover was leather it would be one of the coolest looking bibles I've ever seen. But it's man made so it's going back for that alone. Second, I purchased this particular one because of it's size. I thought a larger bible would have larger font. Absolutely not. I'm 26 w/ perfect vision and I had a hard time reading the text because of the font size they chose. Other than the two problems above, I really like the side by side passages and the feel of the book.

I love the style of it. And i love the fact that it's two Bibles in one. The TNIV is an awesome translation, and the Message Bible helps you get a better understanding of things. But the pages are too delicate. They're not as thick as i'm used to. I feel like i'm about to rip a page when ever i turn one. The font size is a bit smaller than what i'm used to, but not that much smaller. It's still readable without any problems, for me. I give this Bible four stars because i don't like how delicate the pages are.

Got this Bible as an anniversary present from my wife, and it was exactly what I was looking for! Great Bible. Love the parallel translations. Pairing the TNIV (essentially the same as the NIV) with the Message Remix (just the Message with the addition of verse numbers) is a great combination. The type face is readable - not too small (at least for me, a 26 year old with contact lens corrected vision). I was impressed by the appearance of this Bible. It's smaller than I expected - about the size of a normal hardcover novel - and the cover graphics are attractively designed. Seems durable - like it will hold up for a long time (perhaps until my small print reading ability lets out). I would recommend this Bible to anyone. Get the hardcover edition, instead of paying more for leather bound.

Why is the TNIV a more accurate translation over other Bibles?

When you think of purchasing a Bible translation, take these into serious consideration:
(1) This is the Word of God.
(2) It is to instruct your daily living and train you in righteousness.
(3) You have to understand the Word to "rightly divide it!"
(4) God is serious and so are His Words.
(5) Your spiritual maturity depends on your understanding!

No translation is perfect; ALL translations have errors. Yes, the Word of God is inerrant! But inerrancy is a theologically technical definition that applies only to the "original handwritten" autographs by the Biblical authors. Fact - no autographs have been discovered as of current. Thus, a translation is not inerrant it is a tool, a translation! The vast majority of Bible translations are very accurate to their source manuscripts. English translations are completely trustworthy as the Word of God. Most general readers, often lack sufficient knowledge concerning the transitional nature of Scripture (how it came from Jesus, the Biblical authors and moved from the autographs to manuscript copies) and the textual criticism tools used by scholars to produce an English vernacular translation.

Here is some manuscript textual criticism to help readers appreciate the textual improvements of the TNIV over other translations:

[1 Samuel 8:16]
KJV: "And he will take ... goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work."
ESV: "He will take... the best of your young men and your donkeys"
They footnoted: cattle
TNIV: "He will take...the best of your cattle and donkeys"

Which is correct? Why does the ESV footnote cattle?
The phrase `your cattle' is the rendering that comes from the Septuagint. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the OT made in Egypt around 250-150 B.C. The ESV takes "young men" from the medieval Hebrew text. Frankly, the linking of "young men" and "donkeys" is strange to scholars. The word for "young men" in Hebrew is bhrykm. The word for "your cattle" is bqrykm. In Hebrew, they are verbally about as similar as "Television" and "Telephone". This is how scholars know this is not an oral transmission error; they are too dissimilar orally! This was a coping error! In this textual variant, a single letter changed the meaning of the word from "your cattle" to "young men". The Septuagint was translated much earlier and retained the "your cattle." This is an example of how textual variants are researched and compared to obtain the `original' intended autograph reading. Yet the ESV & KJV translators choose to use a poor source manuscript over a more accurate one, why?

[Mark 1:2]
KJV: "As it is written in the prophets..."
ESV: "As it is written in Isaiah the prophet..."
Footnotes: some manuscripts in the prophets?
TNIV: "As it is written in Isaiah the prophet..."

Which is right? Why is there a difference? Why does the ESV footnote: in the prophets?
The TNIV has used the best and earliest manuscripts as a source text, thus, "Isaiah the prophet!" The KJV translation committee made use of what they had at the time, flawed manuscripts. The ESV translation committee also got this one mostly right! So what is wrong with footnoting in the prophets? All of the second century translations (Latin, Coptic and Syriac) have, "Isaiah the prophet!" However, there is one manuscript before the ninth century, which reads "in the Prophets..." The citation that Mark is using is a combination of Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3. It seems that this one copyist choose to "correct" Mark's original text to make it more precise! Sadly, the ESV included a footnote referencing an inaccurate manuscript as a legitimate source translation. The Committee on Bible Translation obviously rejected this one copyist's inaccuracy! I wish the ESV had done the same. The KJV was at the mercy of its errored source manuscripts.

[1 Corinthians 7:36]
KJV: "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry."
ESV: "If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed..."
Footnotes: virgin
TNIV: "If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to..."

What was the Apostle Paul intending to say?
ESV weaknesses: (1) It uses a technical word "betrothed" thus it doesn't resonate with an American culture; (2) The gender of the betrothed can only be determined from the preceding verses, 37 & 38; (3) Sadly, they footnoted "virgin" instead of keeping it with the text?
KJV weaknesses: (1) overly wordy, and it does not resonate with American culture; (2) "if she pass the flower of her age" while beautiful it leaves a lot up to dubious interpretation, this is very ambiguous and misses Paul's intended meaning.

[1 Corinthians 6:20]
KJV: "... therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."
ESV: "So glorify God in your body."
TNIV: "Therefore honor God with your bodies."

What happened? Which is right?

This example illustrates that copyist on occasion have made changes to the original text for theological reasons! The words, "and in your spirit, which are God's" are found in most of the late Medieval Greek manuscripts. However this phrase does not appear in any of the early Greek evidence! Nor does it appear in the Latin-speaking church in the West!

Sadly translations like the NKJV and HCSB included these later theological additions to their translations. The KJV version was again at the mercy of its source manuscripts. The ESV did a pretty good job except "in" doesn't really capture the meaning of "with" very well.

Had this phrase been included in The Apostle Paul's original it is impossible to explain how/why it would have been left out so early and so often. Then magically reappear in later manuscripts?

DO YOU KNOW THE HISTORY OF YOUR VERNACULAR TRANSLATION?

HOW DID WE GET OUR ENGLISH BIBLES?

"My concern is that some readers, whether they are educated or not, will realize that this translation does not agree with what they are accustomed to and will react against me with abusive language, calling me an evil person and a forger for having the audacity to add anything to the ancient text, as though I were trying to make changes or corrections to it." -Jerome 4th century A.D. concerning the Latin Vulgate

Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus. His job was to provide a revision of the Old Latin translation of the Bible. Jerome's concerns were justified! He, in fact, he received a great deal of criticism that followed him his entire life; yet, the version Jerome produced (the Vulgate) became the standard Bible of the Western church for... a thousand years!

It seems that history has recorded many occasions of rejection and outrage over translations! The English Bible is no different. It is ironic that given the harsh criticism Jerome received for even producing the Vulgate, that later Jerome's followers would have an extreme outcry against another vernacular translation. It would seem unbelievable? To Jerome's followers the Vulgate was viewed as the "real" Bible and they did have an extreme outcry against other vernacular translation attempts.

Other English translations followed after the Vulgate. The 1st English translation of the entire Bible was completed in 1382 under the direction of John Wycliffe. Wycliffe, an Oxford theologian, was protected from harm due to his influence and position. Wycliffe's work was denounced and his translation was condemned. However... Wycliffe's followers were not so lucky, many were: harassed, imprisoned and... burned at the stake by ignorant self-righteous zealots! Because of Wycliffe's controversial work in 1408, a synod was established by clergy, which forbid anyone to translate into the vernacular or read a vernacular translation without prior church approval. "Wycliffe was referred to as the, `great, arch-heretic' who undertook `of a malicious purpose' to translation the Bible into English and `purposely corrupted the holy text.'"

William Tyndale has the distinguished honor to be the first to produce a printed English New Testament. It was the first English translation directly from the Greek. However, the 1408 synod rules still applied and Tyndale had to flee England. Tyndale's work was published in 1526 and copies were smuggled back into England. Tyndale's opponents followed him relentlessly. Tyndale was kidnapped in 1535. He was imprisoned and a year later executed... and his body burned, just to make sure!

Wycliffe, Tyndale and others help bring a growing acceptance of vernacular English translations.
Year 1539- The Great Bible
Year 1560- The Geneva Bible (Favored by the Puritans), (Had roots in Tyndale's work)
Year 1568 - The Bishop's Bible (official Bible of the Church of England) revision of the Great Bible
Year 1604- King James commissions a translation of the Bible
Year 1611- forty-seven leading British scholars translated in seven years the King James Bible.

However the King James Bible was not above criticism! The pilgrims refused to allow the new version on the Mayflower! One of the leading scholars of the day, Hugh Broughton wrote this regarding the KJV: "Tell His Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches... The new edition crosseth me. I require it to be burnt"

The King James translators expected such criticisms, which is recorded in the preface. The KJV translators affirm the need for continual revision and admit their work is far from perfect: "Truly, good Christian reader... we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one; ... but to make a good one better." The translators continue: "no cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." KJV translators acknowledge, "blemishes," even the "meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession...containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God." Consider the humble beginnings of the King James Version Bible and its received criticism.

Isn't it ironic (again) that for many of today's readers any Bible translation after the KJV is illegitimate and a corruption of the "real" Bible? As this brief historical introduction to vernacular translations has demonstrated; outrage, false accusations, irrational and ungodly behavior is nothing new in the history of new translations. I would hope that fellow believers would mature in their faith by recognizing the foolishness of prior Christian's concerning Bible Translation.

I hope this information would, for serious Bible students, underscore the following:

1.You need to use several good modern English translations to discover where textual variants lie.
2. Learn the limits of a translation and how to properly use a translation.
3. Christians believe in truth and should never shy away from examining new data.
4. An informed believer is far more effective at reaching others than the willfully or slothfully ignorant one.

When it comes to the TNIV; integrity, accuracy and truth count. For Christian groups to make irrational, uninformed and legalistic demands upon other translation committees such as the Committee on Bible Translation, stating to them to not translate the TNIV a specific way is wrong! This is nothing more than pure legalism. Christianity is not a religion of legalism.

So in light of Biblical scholarship and textual criticism that is used to develop a translation, and in light of the history of vernacular translations, how should Christians respond to groups that make false or hateful claims against other translations like the TNIV? I suggest always praying for those who disagree with you; and as the Holy Spirit leads, try and share factual information concerning Bible translation. Always keep in mind, facts are not always received as facts, often they are filtered with emotions and irrational thought. Simply, some people are unwilling to learn, unwilling to change and unwilling to be challenged, it is their way or the highway! This is extremely sad; these believers need prayer because they are supposed to represent our Lord Jesus.

Maybe you have listened to Dr. James Dobson's (psychologist) radio broadcast and its unbalanced and unrelenting bashing of the TNIV. Maybe you have read Wayne Grudem's mantra that the TNIV is "gender neutral!" Maybe you have heard RC Sproul's unbalanced and unrelenting radio broadcast blasting the TNIV as "Anti-Male!" I admit I greatly admire these men and respect them as Christian brothers in the faith. My heart is also very saddened by their blatant hypocrisy and their blindness to the male oriented literary bigotry that they are fighting for. All three of these men have accomplished many good things and have been used by God to impact the world around them. And I thank God for them! Members of the CBT and myself have made numerous attempts to meet with these men regarding the abusive and false accusations and divisiveness that they willingly seek to create within Christianity (They simply will not meet with CBT members, and they are not interested in really resolving the issue!).

The sad truth is this, Dr. Dobson needs to "'Focus' on the Family." He openly admits his ignorance concerning these issues and has been badly informed by trusted colleagues as to the facts concerning the TNIV.

Dr. Wayne Grudem is the general editor of a competing translation (English Standard Version) (his translation seeks $ from NIV and TNIV losses due to media hype). Dr. Grudem has changed his view and position a number of times after being embarrassed and flatly proven wrong before other scholars. I seriously question Dr. Grudem's intellectual and academic integrity; he simply is incapable of being unbiased and honestly looking at the translation and textual issues, when he profits from attacks on the NIV and TNIV.

Also it is sad, but true, RC Sproul is also the general editor of another competing translation (The Reformation Study Bible- a spin off of the ESV).

Many notable Christian leaders have been blinded by their male oriented bigotry and simply accept the statements of these men without "thinking for themselves" and being a REAL Berean (Acts 17:11).

Friends be a REAL Berean and educate yourself as to what a translation is and what a translation is not. Do not be led with a ring in your nose to follow the most outspoken and accept their bellowing as "gospel truth." It is a bag of false goods friend!

The real truth is the TNIV is probably one of the most accurate and best-rendered English translations you can get. It has used a diverse scholarship and the best source manuscripts available to us currently. It has strived to really bring the original meaning of the source text into the everyday commonly spoken English language; and it does it with "class!" The TNIV is an excellent text for serious Bible study; it is nothing like a paraphrase Bible! The TNIV is a "meaning for meaning" translation! The Word of God is to be meaningful to us as believers; a real translation must be meaning oriented. I hope this is helpful to those who truly are seeking to live their Christian lives as real Bereans (Acts 17:11). The TNIV translation will be an excellent tool in helping you mature in your faith and be an effective witness for the cause of our Lord Jesus.

Bibliography:
==========

"How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth", by Gordon D. Fee, Douglas Stuart.
ISBN: 0-310-38491-5. (Chapter 2)

"Distorting Scripture? The challenge of Bible Translation & Gender Accuracy",
by Mark L. Strauss. ISBN: 0-8308-1940-1. (Chapter 1)

"Not so accurate" please refute something and provide specific supporting evidence. I am greatly interested in hearing and reading these specific "abuses" and I will address each one of them.

My first concern is that the textual criticism accounts were not addressed. Why would a Christian believer openly reject facts, if I have posted lies refute them. However, they are facts and regardless of how we feel about them, they are true.

My second concern is that the historical accounts of vernacular translations were not addressed. Again, why would a Christian believer openly reject facts concerning Christian translations? If these are lies please refute them. Again, however they are facts and regardless of how we feel about them, they are true.

In light of the history of vernacular translations, please explain why today's disproportionate ill reaction to the TNIV is different from previous historical accounts concerning vernacular translations?

It is stated: "The use of personal attacks should give a good indication of the agenda of the so called 'T Christian'."

Truth and integrity mean something to me; I am willing to be corrected. I am willing to honestly listen to those who disagree with me. But, I also believe in the truth; regardless of my feelings or what is popular to believe. If my review is so biased and wrong, what are we to make of these statements?

"...do not be fooled or overwhelmed..."
"The TNIV is...guilty of changing singular to plural"
"It is implied... wrong... as is implied."
"... use of personal attacks... good indication of the agenda..."

This does not sound like a well-reasoned review, it sounds like a disagreement regardless of facts. I do not understand how this is Christ honoring or profitable to the Christian body?

A point of clarification - my comments are specific to the TNIV only. I am not commenting on The Message paraphrase translation.

I will go back and correct my comments about the RSB as a spin-off. Clearly, I did not do a good job in communicating the breath of this translation. My point was that the ESV is now incorporated as an RSB text spin-off. I will review this and make more accurate adjustments. Thank you for the perspective information; it was at least useful.

Truth claims without evidence:
"It is implied that Dr Grudem is driven by financial considerations, wrong, he does not receive ongoing royalties as is implied" Please provide evidence to the contrary. Please show us how Grudem does not profit by any means, i.e. radio spots, articles, book deals, speaking engagements and so forth. However, I did not, nor did I imply that Dr. Grudem profited personally; however, I did intend to state that his translation the ESV does profit from attacks against the TNIV (again I will go back and communicate this better). Also, and more importantly, please give us factual evidence that the ESV translation does not profit from attacks against the TNIV. Maybe you are unaware, but here in the states we are bombarded with thirty second radio spots by the ESV at least five or more times a day on most major Christian radio stations.

Also I do not consider facts a personal attack.
I have read both of Dr. Grudem & Vern Poythress works:

"The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy, Muting the Masculinity of God's Words", Publisher: Broadman & Holman publishers, Nashville Tennessee 2000; ISBN:080542441-5

"The TNIV and The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy";
Publisher: Broadman & Holman publishers, Nashville Tennessee 2004;
ISBN: 080543193-4

Both Vern Poythress and Wayne Grudem's flip flopping are evident in the changes of arguments/facts about alleged abuses when you compare these two texts. Simply put, their arguments are inconsistent between these writings in a major way.

Also, I have read the following:

"The Inclusive Language Debate, a plea for realism" by D.A. Carson;
Published by IVP and Baker Books, ISBN:0-8010-5835-X

"How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth", by Gordon D. Fee, Douglas Stuart.
ISBN: 0-310-38491-5. (Chapter 2)

"Distorting Scripture? The challenge of Bible Translation & Gender Accuracy",
by Mark L. Strauss. ISBN: 0-8308-1940-1. (Chapter 1)

Another thing I would really like you to address is the accusation that changing a singular to a plural is inherently "guilty" or wrong.

Also, you claim that you cannot go wrong with the following translations:
"For serious Bible study you can't go wrong with the NASB, ESV, NIV or NKJV."
Are you aware that Wayne, Vern, Sproul, Dobson and others have openly criticized the NIV and dynamic equivalent translation methodology? So according to them the NIV is as bad a translation as the TNIV!

Also brother, please keep in mind I have contacted Wayne Grudem, who was quick to not honestly answer my arguments but rather push a copy of the Biblical Manhood and Womanhood guidelines propaganda into my hands. I have also spoken with Tim Dick the vice president of Ligonier ministries to arrange a meeting with CBT members. They were unwilling to commit to such a meeting. I have also contacted John Fuller of Focus on the Family to inquire if such good Christian people are behind the TNIV translation, why were they absent from their radio broadcast. Dobson's group basically told me to look elsewhere to advertise our perspective; they were not willing to meet to CBT members either. Frankly, this is nothing more than unaccountable radio ministries grossly misinforming believers and creating a very fake and one-sided argument, without adequate and equal representation. Christians should not reward such bad and unbiblical Christian behavior. Yet, somehow I am biased for seeking out the truth and working collaboratively to resolve the issue?

Please do not be fooled or overwhelmed by the length of the 'T Christian' review.
The TNIV is not 'More accurate' than the ESV, NASB, far from it, it is guilty of changing singular to plural in so many instances.
It is implied that Dr Grudem is driven by financial considerations, wrong, he does not recieve ongoing royalties as is implied.
Also the Reformation Study Bible is not an 'off shoot' of the ESV, The RSB existed before the ESV, so could hardly qualify as an 'off shoot'. You can get the RSB using the ESV text, but you can also get the RSB using the NKJV text which pre-dates the ESV by some years.
The use of personal attacks should give a good indication of the agenda of the so called 'T Christian'.
The Message cannot be used for serious Bible study because although it maintains the sense of the text some of the time, there are too many places where it changes the meaning drastically.
Don't take my word for all this - do your own research and comparisons.
For serious Bible study you can't go wrong with the NASB, ESV, NIV or NKJV.