A: The NIV charter laid the groundwork for the creation of a Bible translation focused on bringing modern readers as close as possible to the experience of the original audience: providing the best possible blend of transparency to the original documents and ease of understanding in every verse.

The NIV project was initiated by the formation of the Committee on Bible Translation in 1965, and the CBT’s original constitution remains the same today.

COMMITTEE ON BIBLE TRANSLATION CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE I – Name
Section 1. The name of the Committee shall be COMMITTEE ON BIBLE TRANSLATION.
Section 2. The Committee, called into being by the Palos Heights Bible Translation Conference (August 26 and 27, 1965), shall be a self-perpetuating body, independent of all ecclesiastical organizations, educational institutions, committees, and other associations.

ARTICLE II – Purpose
Section 1. The purpose of the Committee shall be to prepare a contemporary English translation of the Bible as a collegiate endeavor of evangelical scholars, and to pursue matters related thereto.

ARTICLE III – Membership: Limitations/Qualifications, Admission, Tenure
Section 1. At the time of the adoption of this Constitution and its By-Laws, the membership of the Committee shall be declared to be:
E. Leslie Carlson, Earl S. Kalland, Francis R. Steele, Edmund P. Clowney, Kenneth S. Kantzer, John H. Stek, Ralph Earle, Charles F. Pfeiffer, J. C. Wenger, Burton L. Goddard, Stephen W. Paine, Marten H. Woudstra, R. Laird Harris, Charles C. Ryrie.
Section 2. The size of the Committee shall be limited to fifteen members.
Section 3. Only those shall be eligible for membership on the Committee who endorse the purpose for which the Committee exists, and who are willing to subscribe to the following affirmation of faith: “The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written, and is therefore inerrant in the autographs”; or to the statements on Scripture in the Westminster Confession, the Belgic Confession, the New Hampshire Confession, or the creedal basis of the National Association of Evangelicals; or to some other comparable statement.
Section 4. Admission to membership on the Committee shall be by invitation of the Committee only.
Section 5. Membership on the Committee shall be for indefinite tenure as regulated by the By-Laws.

ARTICLE IV – Organizational Structure
Section 1. The officers of the Committee shall be: Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary, all of whom shall be elected by the Committee from its own membership.
Section 2. The officers of the Committee shall be elected to serve for a period of three years and shall hold office until their successors are installed. They shall be eligible for re-election.
Section 3. The officers of the Committee shall constitute its Executive Committee.

ARTICLE V – Election of Officers
Section 1. The officers of the Committee shall be elected at the last regularly scheduled plenary meeting of the Committee in the calendar year in which their terms expire.
Section 2. Newly elected officers of the Committee shall assume office January 1 of the next calendar year following their election.

ARTICLE VI – Meetings
Section 1. The time and place of regular meetings of the Committee shall be at the discretion of the Committee.
Section 2. Additional meetings of the Committee may be called at the discretion of the Executive Committee, with due notice to all the members.

ARTICLE VII – Projected Translation
Section 1. All those engaged by the Committee as translators or editors shall be required to affirm the following article of faith:
“The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written, and is therefore inerrant in the autographs”; or the statement on Scripture in the Westminster Confession, the Belgic Confession, the New Hampshire Confession, or the creedal basis of the National Association of Evangelicals; or some other comparable statement.
Section 2. The Committee shall see to the safeguarding of the integrity of the text of the projected translation by making adequate provision for its copyright.
Section 3. The Committee shall seek to make provision for the availability of the projected translation, apart from the normal channels of trade, to Bible Societies, and similar distributing agencies.
Section 4. The Committee shall for a reasonable time provide for a periodic review and revision of the projected translation with a view to improving its renderings, embodying the fruits of future biblical scholarship, and keeping its idiom current.
Section 5. This article shall be applicable also to any revision(s) of the projected version (NIV) under whatever name such revision(s) may be published.

ARTICLE VIII – Amendments
Section 1. The only parts of this Constitution not subject to amendment are articles II, III.1, .2, .3, .4, VII.1, and VIII.1.
Section 2. Amendments to the Constitution of the Committee shall be made only at a regularly scheduled, or properly called, plenary meeting of the Committee, and only when the specific proposal to amend has been submitted to the Committee at its last preceding plenary meeting, and has been recorded in the minutes of the meeting. Such amendment shall require a two-thirds vote of the members present.
Section 3. Amendments to the By-Laws of this Constitution may be made by the Committee at any of its plenary meetings by a two-thirds majority vote of the members present.

A: The chief goal of every update to the NIV is to ensure that the text reflects the latest and best biblical scholarship and established shifts in English idiom and usage. The 2011 NIV update represents our latest effort as a committee to articulate God’s unchanging Word in the way the original authors might have said it if they had been speaking in English to the global English-speaking audience today. This is the reading experience that the NIV seeks to recreate.
Our aim is to translate the NIV is such as way as to provide the optimum combination of transparency to the original documents and ease of understanding in every verse. To learn more about the NIV translation philosophy and its application to the recent update, see Updating the NIV for 2011.

A: Members of the committee work individually – each in their own particular areas of specialty – as well as in small groups and as a full committee. In addition to considering proposals from within the committee, we also solicit and receive input from Bible scholars, ministers, missionaries and lay-people. Every proposal is evaluated with many leading to revisions to the text, while others are tabled for discussion at future meetings for potential inclusion in later updates. And changes are not made easily. At least 70 percent of the committee members present at the time of the voting are required to agree before the text can be altered. This ensures that no individual, indeed not even a large group of individuals, can hold sway in the committee.

A: The committee represents the very best in evangelical biblical scholarship, and our members are drawn from various denominations and from some of the finest academic institutions in the world. A complete list of the CBT members can be found in the Who We Are section of this website.

A: The CBT was formed in 1965 to create a modern English Bible translation from the oldest and most reliable biblical manuscripts available. Since then, the committee has continued to meet each year to monitor developments in biblical scholarship and English usage and to reflect these developments in periodic updates to the text. The committee represents the very best in evangelical biblical scholarship. Our members – a self-perpetuating, independent body of 15 – are drawn from various denominations and some of the finest academic institutions in the world.

A: As a committee, our priority is to accurately translate God’s unchanging Word into contemporary English, incorporating the best available biblical scholarship. In any instance where we became convinced that past decisions failed to live up to this standard, we did not hesitate to change them. If there was compelling new data on the state of contemporary English usage, or if a compelling exegetical argument was made – whether it involved moving backward or forward – the committee made the changes that were necessary.

We are not wedded to any particular verse as it currently stands or as it has stood in any previous edition of the text. We are simply committed to our responsibilities under the charter: to render God’s Word in English as it is spoken and understood by the broadest possible audience.

A: The committee wishes to express its thanks to every Bible scholar, minister, missionary and lay person who responded to our call for suggestions as part of this revision process. Every proposal was evaluated. Many of these proposals have led to revisions to the text and others, purely due to shortage of time, have been tabled for discussion at future meetings for potential inclusion in future updates.

Maintenance and improvement of the NIV is a never-finished work, and we count ourselves blessed to have such a rich engagement with thoughtful and critically-thinking Christians who share our devotion to the unchanging truth of God’s Word.

A: As a committee, we use what Bible translators call an “eclectic text” drawing on all the major published original texts, but making our own decisions about the textual variants found in those traditions.

For guidance in determining the nature and extent of change in English usage, especially in the area of gender language, the committee initiated a relationship with Collins Dictionaries to use the Collins Bank of English, one of the world’s foremost English language research tools. The Collins Bank of English is a database of more than 4.4 billion English words that provides objective, statistically significant data on the state of written and spoken English at any given point in the history of the language. Working with some of the world’s leading experts in computational linguistics and using cutting-edge techniques developed specifically for the NIV update project, we gained an authoritative, objective and previously unavailable perspective on contemporary linguistic norms. (See Collins Research summary)

A: The original NIV charter requires us to constantly monitor developments in biblical scholarship and changes in English usage and to reflect these changes in periodic updates to the text. Without these periodic updates the NIV would be unable to maintain the priorities that have drawn people to it over the years: providing the optimum blend of transparency to the original text and ease of understanding for a broad audience.

In this update, about 95% of the text remains exactly the same as the1984 NIV that it replaces, based on the number of word changes.

A: The CBT was formed in 1965 to create a modern English Bible translation from the oldest and best-attested biblical manuscripts. From its inception in the 1960’s to the emergence of the first complete NIV text in 1978, the NIV translation team has continued to meet, year after year, reviewing developments in biblical scholarship and changes in English usage – revising the translation to ensure that it continues to offer readers an experience that mirrors that of the original audience. The 2011 update is the latest fruit of this process.

A: The first wave of updated NIV products are planned for release in March 2011. For more information and updates, you can go to www.theNIVBible.com.

A: The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) has completed the translation process. The text was made available online for public viewing at www.Biblegateway.com and www.Biblica.comon November 1, with print products scheduled to release in March 2011.

A: The updated NIV returns with fresh focus to the principles that stood behind the original NIV charter, seeking to reproduce, as closely as possible, the reading experience of the original audience. The original Bible documents let people hear exactly what God wanted to say in language that was natural and easy for them to understand. That’s the experience we want to give the Bible readers of our time, and that’s what the updated NIV exists to do.

A: The updated NIV builds on both the original NIV and the TNIV and represents the latest effort of the CBT to articulate God’s unchanging Word in the way the original authors might have said it if they had been speaking in English to the global English-speaking audience today. About 95% of the text of the updated NIV is exactly the same as the 1984 text it replaces, based on the number of word changes.

As part of the process of revision for 2011, the CBT also reviewed and reconsidered every single change introduced into the TNIV relating to inclusive language. Some changes were preserved, some were rescinded in favor of the 1984 rendering, and many were re-worded in a third, still different way.

A: All the changes in the updated text are attributable to at least one of the following factors: changes in English, progress in scholarship and concern for clarity (See Updating the NIV for 2011) About 95% of the text of the updated NIV remains exactly the same as the1984 text it replaces, based on the number of word changes.

As part of the process of revision for 2011, the CBT reviewed and reconsidered every single change introduced into the TNIV relating to inclusive language. Some changes were preserved, some were rescinded in favor of the 1984 rendering, and many were re-worded in a third, still different way. The committee took all the major published comments on their approach into consideration, and particular attention was paid to external feedback in the area of gender language.

A: The approach to gender usage in the TNIV represented the committee’s best efforts to articulate God’s unchanging Word in contemporary English as we understood it at the time. As part of the process of updating the NIV for 2011, we reviewed and reconsidered every single change introduced into the TNIV relating to inclusive language. Some changes were preserved, some were rescinded in favor of the 1984 rendering, and many were re-worded in a third, still different way.

The committee took all the major published comments on our approach into consideration, and particular attention was paid to external feedback in the area of gender language. As part of the update process, the CBT also initiated a relationship with Collins Dictionaries to use the Collins Bank of English, one of the world’s foremost English language research tools, to conduct a major new study of changes in gender language. Working with some of the world’s leading experts in computational linguistics and using cutting-edge techniques developed specifically for the NIV update, the committee gained an unprecedented and authoritative perspective on contemporary linguistic norms. (See Collins Research summary)

A: Our mandate under the NIV charter is to maintain the NIV as an articulation of God’s unchanging Word in contemporary English.  To the extent that gender-inclusive language is an established part of contemporary English and that its use enhances comprehension for readers, it clearly was an important factor in the decisions we made.

As the committee stated in announcing the planned update, every single gender-related change made from the 1984 NIV to the TNIV was reconsidered. We divided the entire Bible into six major sections, each of which was fully reconsidered, taking into account all the major published comments on our approach, as well as external submissions. Some changes were preserved, some were rescinded in favor of the 1984 rendering, and many were re-worded in a third, still different way.

In addition to considering feedback from scholars, pastors and laypeople, the committee also initiated a relationship with Collins Dictionaries to use the Collins Bank of English, one of the world’s foremost English language research tools, to conduct a major new study of changes in gender language.  The Collins Bank of English is a database of more than 4.4 billion English words that provides objective, statistically significant data on the state of written and spoken English at any given point in the history of the language. All gender decisions for the updated NIV were subjected to rigorous scrutiny in the light of this data to ensure that the words chosen maximize comprehension of the original meaning. (See Collins Research summary)

For more detail on our approach, see “What was decided about inclusive language” in Updating the NIV for 2011.