A thought about the NIV
I'm not one to bash the NIV, especially not in the 'KJV 1611 only' sort of way, nor do I think of it is the Nearly Inspired Version as if the KJV was somehow purer. That is just silly. In fact, I most enjoy reading biblical prose in the NIV.
But reading through Paul in the NIV recently it struck me that the translators often side with an anthropocentric-individualistic reading. So at key points it has 'a righteousness from God' instead of God's own righteousness, 'faith in Christ' instead of the faithfulness of Christ, 'if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation' (2 Cor. 5:17) instead of 'if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation', 'put to death … whatever belongs to your earthly nature' (Col. 3:5) instead of 'earthly members' (where did the NIV get the word 'nature' from? – Paul thinks of the death of the whole person, not just a bit of the Christian) etc. This is not to say the NIV is wrong about these exegetical judgments (though I think they are), but it is the consistency that gives pause for thought.
So I ask, did the translators of the Pauline sections of the NIV function with a restricted anthropocentric-individualistic hermeneutic, one that Paul would perhaps say has insufficiently grasped the wide creation-to-new-creation scope of the gospel?
Well I think they're funny!