Glad cooler (and more informed) head prevailed.

When Dr. Thom Rainer first addressed the SBC during its annual convention he said "Lifeway is a ministry, not a business". How I wish he still had that perspective. Note above how the decision to sell the gender-neutral 2011 NIV was made from a "retail perspective". Do good ministries distribute inaccurate Bibles? Lifeway has just become another bookstore. . . Southern Baptists will not be happy about this.

For a scholarly critic of the gender-neutral 2011 NIV please visit http://www.cbmw.org/Resources/Articles/An-Evaluation-of-Gender-Language-in-the .

I know the argument has been made before and will be made again, but here it is - people no longer assume that masculine pronouns include both genders. Using pronoun choices that make the meaning of the text clear to the reader is a valid translation choice and does not distort God's Word so long as the translators make it clear in the preface that they have done this. We are not talking about making God a woman, but about including women where the text clearly means to include them. As a Southern Baptist, I can think of so many more important issues to address.

TJ, by linking to the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood all you have done is to underscore the fact that issue is not really about the accuracy of the translation, but about the fear that such a translation will support feminism within the church. However, the SBC Faith and Message already has an amendment about the "role of women", and it seems absurd to pick on the TNIV for translation choices that are used in other versions.

If only you could meet the scholar who worships with me at my church. He has been a lifelong pastor faithful to God's word and calling. He was one pastor working with others from many denominations to create another translation of God's word. It is useful in teaching non-Christians, immigrants, and older children because of its straightforward language. Some store won't sell? Their prerogative. Maybe I'll buy a copy for all my girlfriends who are part of the SBC!

Once again we return to the old days before the Conservative "takeover" of the SBC when the Convention agencies would freely ignore the direction of the convention messengers and the SBC churches they represent. Maybe it's time for another "Takeover" by the churches. Southern Baptists are tired of SBC agencies who put theological political correctness over the authority of the SBC churches over the SBC bureaucracy.

From my UK evangelical perspective this debate (about selling the NIV) looks totally bizarre.
I always thought that Baptist valued freedom of conscience. Maybe that's no longer the case.
PS It's ironic that one of the verification words I now have to add in order to post is 'scandalised'!

@ Ben Your observation is very relevant. The old use of the word Baptist and ideology that follows for the most part is long gone as it applies to conservative groups here in a America.

@Rick,

If you want a denomination like that you need to stop being Baptist. The whole point of the structure of SBC and baptists in general is autonomy. That is why all resolutions are suggestions and not binding. There is good in that, like in this decision, and there is bad. But you can't complain about the structure of SBC in a situation like this because the structure is working exactly as it was intended to work.

So proud of Lifeway. I spent years using a bible in another language where the third person singular was generic. One had to 'mark' masculine or feminine with different wording. It was lovely to be included in all the Scriptures..... And a note to the comment from the UK..in my experience it has been years since the SBC respected true freedom of conscience...

"We endorse what we publish, and the translation we publish is the Holman Christian Standard Bible. That is the translation that we endorse." Thanks for the warning.

I would suggest the following website
http://www.niv-cbt.org/niv-2011-overview/translators-notes/
This is an overview of the NIV written by it's translators. They are some of the most highly respected inerrantist Bible scholars in the world. Study the facts from those who have spent a lifetime studying languages and translation.

It is sad that people who know better (like many SBC scholars who serve in leadership of the SBC) are letting sexism and fear outrank their scholarly objectivity! Sad day for the SBC. Good for Lifeway for standing up to such sexism.

Why so much vitriol? It seems the issue is really one of formal equivalency
versus dynamic equivalency in translation. Both have a place. My preference is the former. But in teaching I will adjust or comment in a dynamic style in attempt to communicate accurately the author's intent. Unless the adjustment is blatantly demeaning or heretical, why waste time and energy arguing? Is there really a doctrinal issue at stake? Is sexism really the issue? In most cases I think not!

This is really weird. The NIV is excellent and it comes from the best scholars in the field. And linking to a cbmw article? Come on.

The NIV 2011 is a wonderful translation and is a real improvement to the TNIV thanks to constructive criticisms that were addressed. I think Doug Moo and his team have been extremely transparent about past mistakes in the process, but as far as the translation itself it is still the most readable and balanced in terms of accuracy and clarity.

Honestly, do people have nothing else better to do just than to complain about an inclusive Bible sheesh... So many problems that hurt us around the world and the SBC is worried about this.