King James Version (KJV) v New Internation Version (NIV)

[Christ4Ever]

Dear Brothers & Sisters in Christ Jesus. I provide this posting for your consideration.

King James Version (KJV) versus New International Version (NIV)

Whenever I do research I've normally used the KJV, YLT, and on some occasion others as well. When I was first introduced to the NIV I found it an easy read compared to the KJV. It utilized the English I was more accustomed to hearing and using in school. I assumed that if some words were missing because of its not being used in all manuscripts (footnotes), that the basic meaning would remain the same and nothing would be lost regardless of the version used.

When I first used the NIV, context was not something I took into account in the reading of Scripture. I've grown some since those youthful years, and find context more important when taking into consideration subjects, necessitating accuracy, due to the ever changing views in the world as well some churches who have turned what is communicated as truth (The Word of God) upside down. Unused words or sentences, or even the used words can imply something totally different thereby changing the meaning of the verse, and if done strategically affect also chapter, book, testament as well. Even to the point of how one might view Christ Jesus! So when the NIV will say at the footnotes: "Some manuscripts...then put the word, phrase there; or Many ancient manuscripts add..." it leaves me troubled since now I'm doubting the accuracy of what I've read as well as what has been written within the context of this Bible as a whole.

I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but truth be told, when I'm reading the Bible, I don't look to the footnotes unless I'm researching. Reading for the enjoyment of just allowing my eyes to rest on upon God's Word moves me while glancing at footnotes interrupts the flow of my reading. Which makes it more like research, then just pleasurable reading.

Another thought to keep in mind is that with the advent of technology, those very footnotes we reference in the book are not always available in other mediums. Example is even here at TJ. Float your mouse over one of the verses that is excluded in the NIV and see what you get; or one of the partial notations. Are there footnotes? This is not to denigrate the Bible engine used on TJ, but being aware that the easy or convenient way of reading scripture, might not always provide the greatest or most complete depiction of what is meant to be communicated to us through God's Word. Though time consuming, cross referencing sources is one way of prayerfully being able to see with a greater clarity, and so communicate to others the joy of a discovery in His Most Holy Word. (I do believe that only revelation through the Holy Spirit can one truly find complete understanding of His Word.)

What I've added below in this KJV v NIC, just might have you troubled and asking yourself the very question I alluded to earlier and which I have asked myself. If you are willing to add it to the footnotes, why not include it within the text itself?

If the purpose was just to let the reader know that other manuscripts were out there that did contain such information, without advancing the point of view that they were incorrect. Why not provide the reasoning for doing so besides an entry stating "...there was a need for a new translation" (NIV Preface). That explains exactly zero. Explaining the who, what, when, where etc. would be a book by itself! So I'll stop here, before I go too far afield from providing this comparison.

Since as you will see, what is left out at times goes to the very heart of Christianity. You might be able to see in part what seems to be missing, at least within the manuscripts used to bring the NIV into fruition. Without many of them, we are diminished and not increased in our very understanding of our God, our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus. Understand this is but a sampling of the differences.
YBIC
C4E

Note: I've put in bold the parts within the KJV that were left out of the NIV and have added questions at the end of some of the NIV entries. These are questions I have or in my research others have had in comparing these versions. You might be able to answer them or even add some questions as well.

KJV v NIV Comparisons
​

[TABLE="width: 720"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TH][/TH]
[TH]King James Version[/TH]
[TH]New International Version[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; (Matthew 5:44)[/TD]
[TD]But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (Matthew 5:44)

Q: How must we deal with our enemies?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. (Matthew 9:13 (Mark 2:17))[/TD]
[TD]But go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice, For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Q1: Is repentance important?
Q2: What should sinners do?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting. (Matthew 17:21)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Matthew 17:21

Q: Why couldn't his disciples cast out the spirit?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. (Matthew 18:11)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Matthew 18:11

Q: Why did Jesus come to earth?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor. (Matthew 27:2)[/TD]
[TD]They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor. (Matthew 27:2)

Q: What was Pilate's first name?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet. They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots. (Matthew 27:35)[/TD]
[TD]When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots. (Matthew 27:35)

Q: Does showing fulfillment of OT Prophecy serve any purpose? [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils: (Mark 3:15)[/TD]
[TD]And to have authority to drive out demons. (Mark 3:15)

Q: Did Jesus give His disciples power to heal?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]If any man have ears to hear, let him hear. (Mark 7:16)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Matthew 7:16[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. (Mark 9:29)[/TD]
[TD]He replied, "This kind can come out only by prayer."

Q: Besides praying what else must we do?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses. (Mark 11:26)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Mark 11:26[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him. (Luke 2:33)[/TD]
[TD]The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.

Q: Was Joseph really the father of Jesus?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he. (Luke 7:28)[/TD]
[TD]I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John: yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." (Luke 7:28)

Q: Was Jesus identifying John the Baptist as being the greatest individual or prophet ever born of woman? [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. (Luke 9:55)[/TD]
[TD]But Jesus turned and rebuked them, (Luke 9:55)

Q. Why were their actions rebuked?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village. (Luke 9:56)[/TD]
[TD]And they went to another village. (Luke 9:56)

Q. Why did Jesus come to earth?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. (Luke 22:14)[/TD]
[TD]When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. (Luke 22:14)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. (Luke 23:38)[/TD]
[TD]There was a written notice above him, which read: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. (Luke 23:38)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]17[/TD]
[TD]And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. (Luke 24:42)[/TD]
[TD]They gave him a piece of broiled fish, (Luke 24:42)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]18[/TD]
[TD]And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (John 3:13)[/TD]
[TD]No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven - the Son of Man. (John 3:13)

Q: Would knowing He is currently in heaven be worthy of special consideration? [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]19[/TD]
[TD]For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. (John 5:4)[/TD]
[TD]There is no John 5:4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]20[/TD]
[TD]Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. (John 6:47)[/TD]
[TD]I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.

Q: In whom must you believe to be saved?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them.) (John 7:50)[/TD]
[TD]Nicoldemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked, (John 7:50)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father. (John 16:16)[/TD]
[TD]"In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me."

Q: With who did Jesus go to be with?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]23[/TD]
[TD]And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (Acts 8:37)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Acts 8:37[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him. Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. (Acts 9:6)[/TD]
[TD]"Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." (Acts 9:6)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]25[/TD]
[TD]Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. (Acts 15:34)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Acts 15:34[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD](6) Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: who we took, and would have judged according to our law. (7) But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands. (8) Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of who thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him. (Acts 24:6-8)[/TD]
[TD] (6) And even tried to desecrate the temple; so we seized him. (8) By examining him yourself you will be able to learn the truth about all these charges we are bringing against him." (Acts 24:6-8)

There is no verse 7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. (Romans 16:24)[/TD]
[TD]There is no Romans 16:24[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]28[/TD]
[TD]Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. (I Corinthians 5:7)[/TD]
[TD]Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast-as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

Q: For whom did Jesus die?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]29[/TD]
[TD]But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof: (I Corinthians 10:28)[/TD]
[TD]But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience sake

Q: Who is in charge?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]30[/TD]
[TD]And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angles, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (I Timothy 3:16)[/TD]
[TD]Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angles, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. (I Timothy 3:16)

Q: Where is the Deity of Jesus Christ?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]31[/TD]
[TD]And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (I John 4:3)[/TD]
[TD]But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

Q: Is confession of Christ in the flesh optional for identifying the spirit of antichrist?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD]For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (I John 5:7)[/TD]
[TD]For there are three that testify:

Q: Trinity anyone?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. (I Peter 4:14)[/TD]
[TD]If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. (I Peter 4:14)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]34[/TD]
[TD]Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. (Revelation 1:11)[/TD]
[TD]Which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea."

Q: Once again, the Deity of Jesus Christ?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]35[/TD]
[TD]Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. (Revelation 22:14)[/TD]
[TD]Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.

Q: Doing His commandments or washing of robes?[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]

NOTE 2: If after reading the above comparisons of what has been left out partially or completely, you believe that some of the text should have been included, you then must ask yourself: Is the NIV version of the Bible the one I should be using? Whatever choice you make KJV/NIV, another version or all versions. Keep what you read in context of the entirety of scripture. Continue to read and study God's Word to show yourself approved of God! Last example below.

2 Timothy 2:15

NIV - Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.
KJV - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

[james1523]

The NIV was translated from the earliest and best manuscripts.
Of course, the doctrine of the Trinity as a doctrine was not developed until after the scripture was written. So any Trinitarian-like verses are there because scribes added them in.
The question we have to ask ourselves, is not so much why does the NIV remove verses, but why the KJV adds them?
We have better reasons to believe that a well-meaning scribe inserted the verse deliberately than that he omitted it unintentionally.
It is interesting that some of what is in the more traditional bibles eg the KJV, is what the scribes would want us to believe, rather than what the ancient manuscripts actually say.
This is done deliberately because the KJV is a book with an intent - to further the doctrines of the Church of England, rather than an honest translation from unbiased scribes.
The KJV was created because the Church of England did not agree with John Calvin's Geneva bible.
But I don't consider the difference of words or verses here and there is important. There is enough even in the NIV to gain the Spirit of the Word, even if the letter is sometimes inaccurate.
And to think of the millions of Christians who face persecution and difficulties without bibles at all, without even a page of the new testament. We are blessed to have the option of choosing between 10 or more English bible versions.
Pity the 2000 languages in the world who do not have a bible in their own language. I don't think the sky will fall down if one or two verses are omitted. For example even though Mark 11:26 about forgiving others, may not be in the NIV, we can know from other verses in the bible that we should forgive others, and confess our sins, such as Matt 18:35, and in many ways, it is plain common sense.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Dear James,

The NIV was translated from the earliest and best manuscripts.
Of course, the doctrine of the Trinity as a doctrine was not developed until after the scripture was written. So any Trinitarian-like verses are there because scribes added them in.

I'll not banter with you the Doctrine of Trinity with you since that is not the purpose of what I posted. However, in a little bit I will make mention of the verse that I'm sure triggered this response.

The question we have to ask ourselves, is not so much why does the NIV remove verses, but why the KJV adds them? We have better reasons to believe that a well-meaning scribe inserted the verse deliberately than that he omitted it unintentionally.

Actually, if you've read what I posted, you would see that your question is better asked of those who compiled the NIV. I quoted their very own words within the footnotes, that they identified that other manuscripts had such entries.

It is interesting that some of what is in the more traditional bibles eg the KJV, is what the scribes would want us to believe, rather than what the ancient manuscripts actually say.
This is done deliberately because the KJV is a book with an intent - to further the doctrines of the Church of England, rather than an honest translation from unbiased scribes.
The KJV was created because the Church of England did not agree with John Calvin's Geneva bible.

Let's add the Geneva Bible to what you seem to highly disagree with (your opening on the Trinity):

Number 32: 1 John 5:7

Compare what the Geneva Bible says in this verse: "For there are three, which bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one."
To which does the Geneva seem to agree with, KJV or NIV?

Now I haven't done a full comparison of all three, but let's try number 30 which is 1 Timothy 3:16.

"And without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness, which is, God is manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of Angels, preached unto the Gentiles believed on in the world, and received up in glory."

I leave it to you and others to decide what rendering more closely agree.

As far as bias, I cannot say, for I never knew them. However, could that not be said of everyone but one?

But I don't consider the difference of words or verses here and there is important. There is enough even in the NIV to gain the Spirit of the Word, even if the letter is sometimes inaccurate.

If you don't believe the difference of words or verses here and there is important, why did you bother to post? It does matter does it not? If the Deity of Christ Jesus is questioned, or placed in doubt, this would not be sufficient reason, as you say below, to those who don't even have bibles, to hear this truth and believe? Romans 10:4 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? (NIV) Are the unprepared sent to spread the Gospel? Were those in NT unlearned of what Christ Jesus said and did? So I added at the end of my initial post: Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

And to think of the millions of Christians who face persecution and difficulties without bibles at all, without even a page of the new testament. We are blessed to have the option of choosing between 10 or more English bible versions.

Pity the 2000 languages in the world who do not have a bible in their own language. I don't think the sky will fall down if one or two verses are omitted. For example even though Mark 11:26 about forgiving others, may not be in the NIV, we can know from other verses in the bible that we should forgive others, and confess our sins, such as Matt 18:35, and in many ways, it is plain common sense.

If this is what you feel you should readily read these verses, in whatever version is of your preference.

Revelation 22:18-19
Deuteronomy 4:2
Proverbs 30:5-6

As far as what does it matter if one or two verses are omitted? How many generations before the Nation of Israeli moved away from God's precepts? Was it one day to the next or a gradual eroding of the Society that Found more and more of the bible or should I say God's Word corrupted, since in many ways it is plain common sense? To whom?

If you haven't realized it yet James, Man is devoid of common sense outside of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit in revelation. Last week somebody, sent the below to me, which I gladly share with you about the Obituary on Common Sense. Humorous, but in some ways very true. Sorry about mentioning truth, read the end of this Obit to see what happened to truth.

As far as the KJV v NIV. All I can do is present, it is for others to digest to either agree, disagree or ignore James. However, I would suggest one do this prayerfully!
C4E
Philippians 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
____________________________________________________________________________________

The Death Of Common Sense
Obituary

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.

He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

- Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
- Why the early bird gets the worm;
- Life isn't always fair; and
- Maybe it was my fault..

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge). His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.

It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers:

I Know My Rights
I Want It Now
Someone Else Is To Blame
I'm A Victim
Not many attended his funeral because
so few realized he was gone..

 

[NetChaplain]

Hi C4E - The written Word of God has always been the prime target of the Enemy from the start until now. His intention (which will never succeed) is to produce confusion as to the validity of the Word by various means. The first was with Eve when he was able to get her to test (temp) the Lord's word by presenting doubt by saying, "Ye shall surely die" (Gen 3:4) and this was after deceiving her into thinking God was withholding good from her by saying, "Ye, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

From here all through this life his failed attempts have been unending. His primary advantage is using the ignorance of man concerning God's Word, but this can only delay and never hinder. The base of Scripture is the manuscript source, thus to attempt effect against it is to address the source, which means the production of false manuscripts.

Without being too involved at this time, I just want to share with you that in my research on this concept, I have discovered there are such false manuscripts, which is still not common knowledge in modern Christendom. I believe the key to reasoning out this issue is by seeing which manuscripts were the most used by the early Church copyists, which is the Majority Text, and the reason why they aren't, on the average, that ancient is because they were used the most and before one became illegible, the copyist destroyed the exemplars so they could not be misused. So the older a copy is, the more corrupt it is, and the reason why some are as ancient as they are is because the copyists wouldn't use them and thus they didn't wear out.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Hello NetChaplain,

The adversary will hit us where it has worked in the past. Our own ego, and our reasoning outside of God are areas well used by him to bring our downfall.

With the above being said Only one problem I see with the reasoning of older verses newer is that the copies then become the newer manuscript, and the unused one the older. I'm sure that the early church did not perceive what varied manuscripts would create in the future. The desire to preserve, and spread God's Word to the world and future generations I believe was one of their main concerns, as well as heresies that were coming at them left and right.

Thanks for sharing. I do agree with what you've said.

C4E

Bible
Read it to be wise.
Believe it to be safe.
Practice it to be Holy.

 

[Brother Paul]

Hi..I am new to this forum and I know the KJV has its definite problems (as do any third generation translation) but here is what I learned about the NIV...

The NIV translators for me seems to be a problem..were they really trustworthy?

First issue is that it is based on the Westcott/Hort critical text as their default text…

Secondly, it has a built in bias being primarily translated by the National Association of Evangelicals (who’s president that approved the translation was exposed as having a relationship with a homosexual prostitute for quite a long time). These translators were not objective because as we know, they favor a “standard evangelical doctrine” and thus reworded portions of text from the original Greeks to support their doctrine..

Now though no modern translation is totally reliable here are some of the problem factors with the NIV translation:

Genesis 2:7 says “"but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die."

While the NIV Translators (from now on the NTs) change the text to say

“but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil for when you eat of it you shall surely die"

Again in Genesis 2 they are confused by the second set of animals created after Adam, and thus add the word “had” which is not in the text.

'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.' Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name."

In Genesis 15:2, they render Adoni YHVH, the covenant name of God, usually translated ‘Lord GOD’, as ‘Sovereign LORD’. Thus hinting at a meaning they more fully implant later which agrees with and allows them to preach their view of what being Sovereign means.

In many other places all throughout they switch “the Lord of hosts” to “the Lord Almighty” and though this IS another name or title for God its inference in the context carries a different meaning altogether.

In Psalm 23:6 they change “mercy “ to “love” giving the first time readers a whole different understanding compared to the Author’s intent (who is the Holy Spirit…may the lord forgive them)

Look at Isaiah 9:3 the Greek clearly says You have multiplied the nation and NOT increased the joy but the NTs deleted the word not so that it says “and increased their joy” The total opposite of the inspired word.

Jeremiah 7:22 says "For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices,” as it was some 40 days later.

But the NTs being confused by what they erroneously saw as a contradiction with Exodus 18 and 20 again added to the word of God and say

“For when I brought your forefathers out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices."

Which now makes the story in context incorrect (as to the timeline), making the day He spoke to them the very same day that they left. Absurdity!

The Hebrew particle “na” which means an urgent entreaty or request is ignored sometimes softened to mean a casual request or in some cases like having Abram say to Sarai “Say you are my sister” or Moses tell God “show me your glory” they make these entreaties a hard command (which is simply not in the text). Or in Judges 19 when speaking to the sodomites at the door, instead of saying “No my brethren, I pray you, do not so wickedly” the NIV says “no my friends, don’t be so vile” see how it is softer in its rebuke?

They utterly delete the word “Behold” in many places (ex. Genesis 1:20 and 12:11 and more) thus “taking away”.

They totally omit John 5:4 (why, who says they may pick and choose what to “take away” when God says they may not do it?) as well as Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44; 9:46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 23:17; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; Romans 16:24, and others. They just cut them out as irrelevant or not meaningful but was that really the motive? Hmmm? As if this is not bad enough they have taken away over 6,000 words. In the Lord’s prayer in Luke 11 they totally remove “who is in heaven” “Your will be done, as in heaven so on earth” and “deliver us from evil”…WHAT? Can we really cut and paste as we see fit? In Matthew 27:35 they take away notice that this was a fulfillment of prophecy (a very important aspect of that verse totally gone)

“Christ” has been taken away from Romans 1:16; Acts 16:31, and more)

Jesus name has been removed from Matthew 8:2; 2 Corinthians 5:18, and more, and even the word “Lord” in relation to Jesus has been removed in some places.

Why did they change 2 Samuel 21:19 to make it seem like another killed Goliath inviting accusation of contradiction where none exists in the LXX or the pre-JPS Masoretic (or the Peshitta, or the Byzantine Majority Text, or the Vulgate, or the Geneva Bible, or the KJV, and on and on)

They change “light bearer” (which is allegedly Satan) of Isaiah 14:12 into “morning star” (which is clearly Jesus in Revelations 22:16)…why? What are they trying to say? Are they meaning to make people misunderstand the text or leave open the possibility our Lord is Satan? Or are they saying Jesus rebelled against Gid and was cast out of heaven? See the confusion these NTs have caused…the undiscipled and unlearned pass right over these issues and make the connectiuons unconsciously believing what they are reading are God’s breathed words…

They seem to take these liberties, adding to the text in many places, what they think clarifies the text (making it to agree more with their preconceived conclusion) all the way up to and including 1 Peter 4:6 (where they make “the dead” those who are “now dead”.

Now in light of God’s command not to add to or take away from, they should have at least been faithful to the corrupted Westcott/Hort text they relied on and not corrupted it further.

Thirdly, their approach was the modern Dynamic Equivalent method which means that to them the alleged thoughts, phrases, or truths expressed in the writings are more important than the actual words, however what we always end up with in these translations is what the translators think were their thoughts, phrases, or truths. This method is notorious for unintentionally (and in the case of the NRSV intentionally) implanting the human factor into the text (sometimes choosing obscure never used meanings to most commonly rendered words). So what happens is the translators opinion of what the reader needs to see takes precedence over the actual words and phrases of the inspired text (making themselves lords of the text). One might as well read the NWT as they follow the same approach.

So my vote? No! They are not trustworthy translators….

But do as you will…

In His love
Paul

 

[NetChaplain]

Hello NetChaplain,

The adversary will hit us where it has worked in the past. Our own ego, and our reasoning outside of God are areas well used by him to bring our downfall.

With the above being said Only one problem I see with the reasoning of older verses newer is that the copies then become the newer manuscript, and the unused one the older. I'm sure that the early church did not perceive what varied manuscripts would create in the future. The desire to preserve, and spread God's Word to the world and future generations I believe was one of their main concerns, as well as heresies that were coming at them left and right.
.

Thanks for your reply and comment. As you may know, the "elect" (all who are reborn in Christ) will not fail, regardless the Enemy's attempts because they cannot ultimately be deceived (Matt 24:24), and this is due to the Holy Spirit's teaching ministry to the believer (1 Cor 2:13). I believe the present situation is that Christian learning is very slowed among believers and this is the most the Enemy can do concerning growing in the Word. Paul did warn about others attempting to falsify the Apostles teachings, esp. concerning Christ's return (2 Thess 2:2).

 

[Bambi]

I just so happen upon a verse on one of the pages here at Talk Jesus(lower right side of page) and saw this verse from Proverbs. It didn't look right so I looked it up in the KJV and sure enough it's meaning was different. Then I discovered that it wasn't just an NIV translation but an NIV reader's version.

http://www.talkjesus.com/bible-study-hall/46947-comment-church-age-6.html# Today's verse.

NIVRV Pro 10:18 Anyone who hides hatred has lying lips. And anyone who spreads lies is foolish.

NIV Proverbs 10:18 Whoever conceals hatred with lying lips and spreads slander is a fool.

KJV Proverbs 10:18 He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool.

 

[james1523]

If you don't believe the difference of words or verses here and there is important, why did you bother to post? It does matter does it not? If the Deity of Christ Jesus is questioned, or placed in doubt, this would not be sufficient reason, as you say below, to those who don't even have bibles, to hear this truth and believe? Romans 10:4 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? (NIV) Are the unprepared sent to spread the Gospel? Were those in NT unlearned of what Christ Jesus said and did? So I added at the end of my initial post: Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I posted to enlighten yourself and others that the difference of words or verses here and there is not so important.

A matter of importance would be one in which it affected the person's salvation or their growth or walk with the Lord.

There is no where in the new testament or old testament that states that our faith is based upon the accuracy of Scriptures.

The deity of Christ or the doctrine of the Trinity does not rest upon the accuracy of one verse alone but upon the whole revelation of scripture.

Any truth of scripture does not rest up on one verse in isolation.

I believe the expression, in the words of Christ, is not to "strain gnats and swallow camels".

It means we should not major on minor matters and minor on major matters.

A different word here and there changes the meaning only for those who are following the letter rather than the Spirit of the Word.

Those who follow the Spirit of the Word can gain the true intent of the Scripture no matter what bible version they read.

I would suggest using my common sense, that the accuracy of Scriptures started to erode well before the NIV, when the bible was first translated into English in he 1300's. Whenever a document is translated from one language to another, in a different time period with different cultural understandings and catch-phrases, there is always the chance and likelihood that there are either some omissions or additions from the original intent. This is coupled with the bias that particular bible translations such as the KJV have. The KJV was authorized and intended for the purposes of a particular branch of Christianity (i.e. by the religio-political institution known as the Church of England, which disagreed with the Calvinistic doctrine of the Geneva bible, so decided to write their own). Such was the situation that the early versions of the KJV were burnt, if my understanding of history is correct.

There is also the matter of the person(s) who gave us the bible chapter and verse numbers. In some instances they are wrong and give different meaning to the scripture. For example, a change of chapter indicates a change of topic. A change of topic in the wrong place gives the wrong meaning. It is remarkable that these errors continue to exist in every bible translation, as no one has to my knowledge attempted to correct the verse and chapter numbers. Anyone versed in Hebrew or Greek can know where these errors lie, as I found from my scholarly Hebrew reading Jewish friend - they are more obvious in the original languages.

Every bible translation is riddled with obscurities; from wrong capitlization, punctuation, or verse and chapter numbers, to poor word choices or obsolete words that have since changed meaning or no longer in our vernacular.

Those with understanding and common sense can know this, accept it, and be fruitful in their walk with God despite the differences. Those who are offended or shaken by differences in single words are yet to learn that their faith does not depend upon human theologians or accuracy of translations but upon the Spirit of the Word dwelling within them.

When we are considering the accuracy of our English versions, of which we are blessed to have at least 200 of them, spare the thought for the millions of Christians around the world who do not have or cannot obtain any bible and the thousands of languages yet to have a bible translated into their own language.

 

[clark thompson]

The NIRV comes from the NIV so they would be similar or the same. The KJV is translated differently then the NIV.