Bible Study 121 Reasons why the NIV is a false bible

[Solo]

Re: Wrong

Much has been shown where the NIV omits scripture and changes the meaning of scripture. Any one that says that there is no difference between the two is being deceptive or is in self-denial mode. :o

That is my last word as those who continue on the NIV side just don't see.

You don't see, my friend. That is clear to almost everyone here. But I am going to demonstrate the reality of translation so that you can see how it is really done. Then, your remarks will be interesting to note.

What you fail - or perhaps are incapable of seeing because of your own chosen blindness - is that what the NIV "omits" is rather "text that should not be in the KJV in the first place." The NIV omits bad KJV text. That is the closest to explaining this as I can get.

Scott 8-)

The New International Version owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Without these demonstrably depraved manuscripts there could be no N.I.V., N.A.S.V., or R.S.V.

The former we have found to be so hopelessly mutilated that the marginal note "not found in the oldest and best" manuscripts becomes meaningless. The latter, with its 15,000 corrections, is about as useful as an old automobile that had been repaired 15,000 times; or as a very old man who had undergone 15,000 surgeries, would do as minister of health and fitness. This together with the fact that the two manuscripts are in constant conflict with one another to the tune of 3,036 times in the four Gospels, with a possible 7,000 times in the New Testament, renders their testimony against the Textus Receptus and the King James Version, null and void. From http://www.mag-net.com/~maranath/Niv.htm#Questions

http://www.mag-net.com/~maranath/bible.htm

 

[tzalam2]

KJV: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Niv: For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.

KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
NIV: you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth.

K:For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
N:OMITTED

KJV: 1Ti 2:7 truth in Christ
NIV: truth

MORE PROOF FOR YOU:
KJV: If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. NIV: OMITTED

K:And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.
N: But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.

K: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it.
N: The nations will walk by its light.

KJV: Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
NIV: "from such withdraw thyself" is omitted

KJV: Let us not fight against God.
NIV: OMITTED

K: Why callest thou me good?
N: "Why do you ask me about what is good?"

K: Ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
N: You do not know the day or the hour.

K:how hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
N.how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!

K:And Joseph and his mother,,
N, The child's father and mother.

K:Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. NIV:
Man does not live on bread alone.

K: Get thee behind me, Satan. N:OMITTED

K: He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
N: He who believes has everlasting life.

KJV: And when they heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out. .
NIV: those who heard began to go away.

KJV: I must work the works of him that sent me.
NIV: We must do the work of him who sent me.

K: I and my Father are one
N: I and the Father are one.

K: that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; N.he would place one of his descendants on his throne.

KJV: Thou shalt not bear false witness.
NIV: OMITTED

K : In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.
N;In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

K: God was manifest in the flesh. N: He appeared in a body.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html


FOR MORE: http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/preeminence.html proofs that the
NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel
Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ
NIV: created all things


FOR MORE: http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/preeminence.html proofs that the
NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel
Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ NIV: created all things

DO YOU SEE? The NIV, and all others like it, are dangerous, and could send a person for hell.
MY PEOPLE PERISH FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE!
Souls are in danger of eternal torment in FLAMES, and you don't CARE!
You want to destroy the Word of God. The devil destroys. The devil lies.
The devil is the father of all lies.
Resist the devil and he will FLEE from you! Submit yourself unto GOD!
PLEASE!

KJV: 1Ti 2:7 truth in Christ NIV: truth

 

[tzalam2]

Re: Ok

Here we go...are you ready...???

THINGS ARE NOT OMITTED in the NIV. THINGS ARE IMPROPERLY ADDED TO THE KJV!

THINGS ARE OMITTED IN THE NIV! THE KJV IS TRUSTWORTHY! THE NIV IS NOT!
THE NIV LEAVES JESUS OUT! Does that tell you something?

KJV: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Niv: For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.

KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
NIV: you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth.

K:For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
N:OMITTED

FOR MORE: http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/preeminence.html proofs that the
NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel
Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ
NIV: created all things

KJV: 1Ti 2:7 truth in Christ
NIV: truth

MORE PROOF FOR YOU:
KJV: If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
NIV: OMITTED

K:And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.
N: But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.

K: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it.
N: The nations will walk by its light.

KJV: Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
NIV: "from such withdraw thyself" is omitted


KJV: Let us not fight against God.
NIV: OMITTED


K: Why callest thou me good?
N: "Why do you ask me about what is good?"

K: Ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
N: You do not know the day or the hour.

K:how hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
N.how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!

K:And Joseph and his mother,,
N, The child's father and mother.

K:Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
NIV:
Man does not live on bread alone.

K: Get thee behind me, Satan.
N:OMITTED

K: He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
N: He who believes has everlasting life.

KJV: And when they heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out. .
NIV: those who heard began to go away.

KJV: I must work the works of him that sent me.
NIV: We must do the work of him who sent me.

K: I and my Father are one
N: I and the Father are one.

K: that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
N.he would place one of his descendants on his throne.

KJV: Thou shalt not bear false witness.
NIV: OMITTED

K : In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.
N;In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

K: God was manifest in the flesh.
N: He appeared in a body.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html


FOR MORE: http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/preeminence.html proofs that the
NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel
Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ
NIV: created all things

KJV: 1Ti 2:7 truth in Christ
NIV: truth

 

[von]

No, I'm not intellectually challenged. I happen to have a 4.0 average and if no one cares then why are you even bothering on this thread. I care and if I want to ask I will. Don't be so snippy just because you don't want to answer the question?
Okay, so what you are saying is that the NIV was translated from the original Bible? Is that what you are telling me? Since nothing is omitted and in the King James things are added? Okay, whatever.

 

[yesha]

The charge:

NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

The evidence:

A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel

I looked up this verse in a kjv interlinear, and found that "of Christ" are Strongs 9999
"
This word was added by the translators for better readability in the English. There is no actual word in the Greek text. The word may be displayed in italics, or in parentheses or other brackets, to indicate that it is not in the original text.
"

However, in my KJV these is nothing to indicate that these words were added by the translators.

However, the niv reflects the greek.

more evidence:

Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ
NIV: created all things

Again, "by Jesus Christ" is not in the original greek, according to the interlinear.
And again, the niv reflects the actual Greek.

Conclusion:

The only charge that can be made here is that the niv deliberately did not add the words that the KJV added to these scriptures.

I challenge anyone to come up with a doctrine that can't be discerned from the NIV, but can from the KVJ. Consider, that even with perfect inspiration of the written word, and perfect transmission, and then even perfect translation, you still have only words which do not perfectly preserve thought. Only with God's help can one understand what God wants that person to understand at that particular time. And God's ability to teach someone who wishes to know the truth is not frustrated by what some man might consider a poor translation of scripture. God is particularly skilled at turning weakness into strength. How little you must think of God to believe that God can't use anything but the KVJ translation for his own purposes. Tell me how many verses of scripture need to be read and understood in order for someone to have sufficient knowledge of salvation through Christ? Does anyone really know exactly how many times core doctrines are repeated again, and again, and again, in the scriptures? Is the covenant not written in the hearts of Christians? Is the Word of God not living within the Christian? How can anyone presume that the Word of God is so easily defeated by a presumed missing word?

John 5:39-40
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,
yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
(NIV)

 

[Free]

No, I'm not intellectually challenged. I happen to have a 4.0 average and if no one cares then why are you even bothering on this thread. I care and if I want to ask I will. Don't be so snippy just because you don't want to answer the question?
Okay, so what you are saying is that the NIV was translated from the original Bible? Is that what you are telling me? Since nothing is omitted and in the King James things are added? Okay, whatever.

If you have a 4.0, then you should be able to follow along. It is error, an error in reasoning, to believe that everything but the KJV omits verses when it is just as plausible that the KJV adds verses.

It seems to me that you don't understand what is behind Bible translation, not that most people know, but I'll leave the process of translation up to asb4God. What I will say is that the modern versions have far more Greek manuscripts to work from than the KJV, so the evidence tends to lean in their favor.

I challenge anyone to come up with a doctrine that can't be discerned from the NIV, but can from the KVJ.

And that is the bottom line. Both teach essentially the same thing.

Great post yesha.

I would also add that if the point of the modern versions was to remove the blood of Christ, to remove his deity, or any other charge that has so far been brought against them, then they did an absolutely pitiful job since they didn't bother to dispense with or alter numerous other verses in favor of those very things.


And just so everyone is on the same page: let's all keep from making personal attacks, including implying a lack of intelligence and especially that someone follows Satan just because of a difference of opinions on translations. Please stick to the issues. Thanks all. :D

 

[Solo]

The charge:

NIV deliberately leaves JESUS CHRIST OUT of scores of Scripture.

The evidence:
[quote:9a103]
A sample of what’s in store at that website:
KJV: Ro 1:16 gospel of Christ
NIV: gospel

I looked up this verse in a kjv interlinear, and found that "of Christ" are Strongs 9999
"
This word was added by the translators for better readability in the English. There is no actual word in the Greek text. The word may be displayed in italics, or in parentheses or other brackets, to indicate that it is not in the original text.
"

However, in my KJV these is nothing to indicate that these words were added by the translators.

However, the niv reflects the greek.

more evidence:

Eph 3:9
KJV: created all things by Jesus Christ
NIV: created all things

Again, "by Jesus Christ" is not in the original greek, according to the interlinear.
And again, the niv reflects the actual Greek.

Conclusion:

The only charge that can be made here is that the niv deliberately did not add the words that the KJV added to these scriptures.

I challenge anyone to come up with a doctrine that can't be discerned from the NIV, but can from the KVJ. Consider, that even with perfect inspiration of the written word, and perfect transmission, and then even perfect translation, you still have only words which do not perfectly preserve thought. Only with God's help can one understand what God wants that person to understand at that particular time. And God's ability to teach someone who wishes to know the truth is not frustrated by what some man might consider a poor translation of scripture. God is particularly skilled at turning weakness into strength. How little you must think of God to believe that God can't use anything but the KVJ translation for his own purposes. Tell me how many verses of scripture need to be read and understood in order for someone to have sufficient knowledge of salvation through Christ? Does anyone really know exactly how many times core doctrines are repeated again, and again, and again, in the scriptures? Is the covenant not written in the hearts of Christians? Is the Word of God not living within the Christian? How can anyone presume that the Word of God is so easily defeated by a presumed missing word?

John 5:39-40
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,
yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
(NIV)[/quote:9a103]
Romans 1:16
The portion of scripture translated "gospel of Christ" is found in the following Greek translations where "of Christ" is found:

Griesbach, 1805
Lachmann, 1842-1850
Tischendorf, 8th edition, 1865-1872
Tregelles, 1857-1872
Alford, vol. i. 1868; vol. ii. 1871; vol. iii. 1865; vol. iv. 1862, 1870
Wordsworth, 1870

 

[asb4God]

More Stuff

The New International Version owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Without these demonstrably depraved manuscripts there could be no N.I.V., N.A.S.V., or R.S.V.

Solo,
The “conservative†scholars with whom you agree on matters of theology would laugh uproariously at the above statement. All ancient manuscripts have their own problems. This does not make them useless or “depraved.†The process of translation involves comparing manuscripts to each other in chronological order and in text families. Furthermore, the statement “The NIV owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus†is ludicrous. It owes its existence to EVERY manuscript ever copied by a scribe throughout the history of the Church. The NIV is a “fresh†translation of all ancient documents.

The link you provided is to an article written by Cecil J. Carter. Who is that? Nobody anybody has ever heard of. He isn’t a Bible scholar. He looks to be a business man with a KJV-only agenda. He doesn’t even appear to have any firsthand knowledge of Greek or the translation process. Not a very worthwhile link.

Here we go...are you ready...???
THINGS ARE NOT OMITTED in the NIV. THINGS ARE IMPROPERLY ADDED TO THE KJV!
THINGS ARE OMITTED IN THE NIV! THE KJV IS TRUSTWORTHY! THE NIV IS NOT! THE NIV LEAVES JESUS OUT! Does that tell you something?

Yes. It does tell me something. It tells me that you still don’t understand the nature of Bible translation and how the KJV has added text that is unwarranted whereas the NIV has left out text that is VERY likely not original. So, in effect, what you have is the KJV doing exactly what Revelation says not to do! If there is a Bible translation on the planet today that has done what you decry, it is the KJV, not the NIV.

Okay, so what you are saying is that the NIV was translated from the original Bible? Is that what you are telling me? Since nothing is omitted and in the King James things are added? Okay, whatever.

Yes! That is exactly what I am saying. The NIV was, indeed!, translated from the Greek. It is not a translation of previous English Bibles, but a fresh translation straight from the Hebrew/Greek documents.

The portion of scripture translated "gospel of Christ" is found in the following Greek translations where "of Christ" is found:

Griesbach, 1805
Lachmann, 1842-1850
Tischendorf, 8th edition, 1865-1872
Tregelles, 1857-1872
Alford, vol. i. 1868; vol. ii. 1871; vol. iii. 1865; vol. iv. 1862, 1870
Wordsworth, 1870

It doesn’t matter that these 19th Century Bible translations have your preferred reading. Many documents have been discovered since that time and have demonstrably shown what the most likely original readings were. Furthermore, not having read these translations, or knowing how they were created, I don’t even know if they are translations themselves from the Greek. It is most likely that these translations relied on the textus receptus.

Be patient. I soon will demonstrate Bible translation so that you can see how this all works.

Scott 8-)

 

[tzalam2]

If you have a 4.0, then you should be able to follow along. And just so everyone is on the same page: let's all keep from making personal attacks, including implying a lack of intelligence

Hmmmm.....looks like a passive aggressive personal attack was just made by you.

You "SHOULD" be able to follow along?
:o
Kind of underhanded there, but, still, a veiled insult.

"IF" you have a 4.0??? Why would he lie? I don't think he's lying.
I believe he has a 4.0. He sounds quite intelligent.

 

[tzalam2]

Re: More Stuff

Solo,

Do you see what asb4God is doing to you?
He's insulting you, and trying to make you doubt your facts.
This is typical of a lost person.
I've seen this type of chiseling away done by lost people, on saved people, for YEARS. DON'T FALL FOR IT.
I'll highlight the little nasties he's using, to humiliate you.
Don't give in to it.

The “conservative†scholars with whom you agree on matters of theology would laugh uproariously
this is called "appeal to ridicule"
at the above statement. All
Another opinion. I seriously doubt he has read and understood a third of all the ancient manuscripts.
ancient manuscripts have their own problems. This does not make them useless or “depraved.â€Â
Straw man technique.
The process of translation involves comparing manuscripts to each other in chronological order and in text families. Furthermore, the statement “The NIV owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus†is ludicrous.
Name calling tactic.
It owes its existence to EVERY manuscript ever copied by a scribe
Petitio Principii
throughout the history of the Church. The NIV is a “fresh†translation of all ancient documents.
(his individual assessment of the NIV, not fact)

The link you provided is to an article written by Cecil J. Carter. Who is that?

Nobody anybody has ever heard of.
another debate tactic: let's call this one unproveable statements, since we can't poll the entire world.He isn’t a Bible scholar.
OH? You know that to be a fact,eh? Prove it. He looks to be a business man with a KJV-only agenda. He doesn’t even appear to have any firsthand knowledge of Greek or the translation process. Not a very worthwhile link.
Here, he's shifting the burden of proof onto you, his opponent.He probably wants to get you caught up in "proving" the validity of
your claims.
Dump him. There is a time for everything, and, it's best not to spend much more time with asb4god.

Here we go...are you ready...???
THINGS ARE NOT OMITTED in the NIV. THINGS ARE IMPROPERLY ADDED TO THE KJV!
THINGS ARE OMITTED IN THE NIV! THE KJV IS TRUSTWORTHY! THE NIV IS NOT! THE NIV LEAVES JESUS OUT! Does that tell you something?

Yes. It does tell me something. It tells me that you still don’t understand the nature of Bible translation and how the KJV has added text that is unwarranted whereas the NIV has left out text that is VERY likely not original. So, in effect, what you have is the KJV doing exactly what Revelation says not to do! If there is a Bible translation on the planet today that has done what you decry, it is the KJV, not the NIV.

ROTFL! Oh, how flimsy you are today. I can wait while you prop yourself up. How about a double bind? {{chuckle!}}} Methinks I'll observe anonymously that foul spirit. Venomous words are sure to be forthcoming from thee. Aren't thees and thous one of the arguments used to persuade young Christians to stay away from the KJV?
Why, YES, they are! :D

Okay, so what you are saying is that the NIV was translated from the original Bible? Is that what you are telling me? Since nothing is omitted and in the King James things are added? Okay, whatever.

Yes! That is exactly what I am saying. The NIV was, indeed!, translated from the Greek. It is not a translation of previous English Bibles, but a fresh translation straight from the Hebrew/Greek documents.

The portion of scripture translated "gospel of Christ" is found in the following Greek translations where "of Christ" is found:

Griesbach, 1805
Lachmann, 1842-1850
Tischendorf, 8th edition, 1865-1872
Tregelles, 1857-1872
Alford, vol. i. 1868; vol. ii. 1871; vol. iii. 1865; vol. iv. 1862, 1870
Wordsworth, 1870

It doesn’t matter that these 19th Century Bible translations have your preferred reading. Many documents have been discovered since that time and have demonstrably shown what the most likely original readings were. Furthermore, not having read these translations, or knowing how they were created, I don’t even know if they are translations themselves from the Greek. It is most likely that these translations relied on the textus receptus.

Be patient. I soon will demonstrate Bible translation so that you can see how this all works.

Scott 8-)[/quote]

 

[tzalam2]

Be patient. I soon will demonstrate Bible translation so that you can see how this all works.

Scott

OH, yes, illustrious and mighty grand poobah!! We shall all wait humbly at
your feet, till your prodigious ego fully inflates itself.

Let us now meditate on Scott the magnificent.
OHMMMMMMM
OHHHMMMMMM

 

[tzalam2]

Re: More Stuff

I don’t even know


The wee bit o' truth in scottie's post.

 

[asb4God]

Hmmm

Tzlam,

I think you are responding emotionally to the fact that you cannot back up your own position with anything rational. You will see what I mean when I do some translation work. It won't be "grand," but it will be illustrative.

I might deal with your other silliness directed to Solo, as well, but I've gotta run to a meeting just now.

See you soon,
Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Re: More Stuff

Solo,

Do you see what asb4God is doing to you?
He's insulting you, and trying to make you doubt your facts.
This is typical of a lost person.
I've seen this type of chiseling away done by lost people, on saved people, for YEARS. DON'T FALL FOR IT.
I'll highlight the little nasties he's using, to humiliate you.
Don't give in to it.

The “conservative†scholars with whom you agree on matters of theology would laugh uproariously
this is called "appeal to ridicule"
at the above statement. All
Another opinion. I seriously doubt he has read and understood a third of all the ancient manuscripts.
ancient manuscripts have their own problems. This does not make them useless or “depraved.â€Â
Straw man technique.
The process of translation involves comparing manuscripts to each other in chronological order and in text families. Furthermore, the statement “The NIV owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus†is ludicrous.
Name calling tactic.
It owes its existence to EVERY manuscript ever copied by a scribe
Petitio Principii
throughout the history of the Church. The NIV is a “fresh†translation of all ancient documents.
(his individual assessment of the NIV, not fact)

The link you provided is to an article written by Cecil J. Carter. Who is that?

Nobody anybody has ever heard of.
another debate tactic: let's call this one unproveable statements, since we can't poll the entire world.He isn’t a Bible scholar.
OH? You know that to be a fact,eh? Prove it. He looks to be a business man with a KJV-only agenda. He doesn’t even appear to have any firsthand knowledge of Greek or the translation process. Not a very worthwhile link.
Here, he's shifting the burden of proof onto you, his opponent.He probably wants to get you caught up in "proving" the validity of
your claims.
Dump him. There is a time for everything, and, it's best not to spend much more time with asb4god.

Here we go...are you ready...???
THINGS ARE NOT OMITTED in the NIV. THINGS ARE IMPROPERLY ADDED TO THE KJV!
THINGS ARE OMITTED IN THE NIV! THE KJV IS TRUSTWORTHY! THE NIV IS NOT! THE NIV LEAVES JESUS OUT! Does that tell you something?

Yes. It does tell me something. It tells me that you still don’t understand the nature of Bible translation and how the KJV has added text that is unwarranted whereas the NIV has left out text that is VERY likely not original. So, in effect, what you have is the KJV doing exactly what Revelation says not to do! If there is a Bible translation on the planet today that has done what you decry, it is the KJV, not the NIV.

ROTFL! Oh, how flimsy you are today. I can wait while you prop yourself up. How about a double bind? {{chuckle!}}} Methinks I'll observe anonymously that foul spirit. Venomous words are sure to be forthcoming from thee. Aren't thees and thous one of the arguments used to persuade young Christians to stay away from the KJV?
Why, YES, they are! :D

Okay, so what you are saying is that the NIV was translated from the original Bible? Is that what you are telling me? Since nothing is omitted and in the King James things are added? Okay, whatever.

Yes! That is exactly what I am saying. The NIV was, indeed!, translated from the Greek. It is not a translation of previous English Bibles, but a fresh translation straight from the Hebrew/Greek documents.

The portion of scripture translated "gospel of Christ" is found in the following Greek translations where "of Christ" is found:

Griesbach, 1805
Lachmann, 1842-1850
Tischendorf, 8th edition, 1865-1872
Tregelles, 1857-1872
Alford, vol. i. 1868; vol. ii. 1871; vol. iii. 1865; vol. iv. 1862, 1870
Wordsworth, 1870

It doesn’t matter that these 19th Century Bible translations have your preferred reading. Many documents have been discovered since that time and have demonstrably shown what the most likely original readings were. Furthermore, not having read these translations, or knowing how they were created, I don’t even know if they are translations themselves from the Greek. It is most likely that these translations relied on the textus receptus.

Be patient. I soon will demonstrate Bible translation so that you can see how this all works.

Scott 8-)

[/quote]
He has already shown to me that his goal on this forum is not to edify the body of Christ, but instead to find confirmation in his beliefs. His boastful manner to build himself up and those that are in agreement with him show his true purpose. Thanks for your able assistance.

 

[von]

"Dumb" as I may be, you few people should be the translators since there are so many versions of the Bible and all of them different and you are the only ones who have the proper understading.
Seems to me that the translators could have came up with some Bibles that are in agreement with one another. What is the point of having all of these versions of the Bible. If they are taken from the Greek and the Hebrew they should all be interpreted about the same.

 

[Solo]

"Dumb" as I may be, you few people should be the translators since there are so many versions of the Bible and all of them different and you are the only ones who have the proper understading.
Seems to me that the translators could have came up with some Bibles that are in agreement with one another. What is the point of having all of these versions of the Bible. If they are taken from the Greek and the Hebrew they should all be interpreted about the same.

Von,
Don't forget what the tactics of the deceiver are and have been from back when. His only weapons are lies and deception. If he can convince Peter to operate in the flesh and make mistakes, then I suspect that he can do the same thing with men/women today. We don't battle flesh and blood but instead we battle spiritual darkness. If you have determined that the NIV or KJV is good for you, and the differences posted do not have any sway on your beliefs and that of others around you, then study and read the translation that you have peace with. I found peace with the KJV after finding problems with the NIV.
Michael

 

[asb4God]

Re: More Stuff

Solo,
Do you see what asb4God is doing to you?
He's insulting you, and trying to make you doubt your facts.
This is typical of a lost person.
I've seen this type of chiseling away done by lost people, on saved people, for YEARS. DON'T FALL FOR IT.
I'll highlight the little nasties he's using, to humiliate you.
Don't give in to it.

Actually, I am presenting objective evidence for why you are both wrong. That is all. You have not provided objective evidence to the contrary. You are merely parroting the same thing over and over: “the NIV is omitting what the KJV has rightly included.†This is objectively false. Others on this thread have already objectively demonstrated the falsity of this claim. I can and intend to demonstrate this fact, as well, in another manner. Neither of you has demonstrated that your assertion is objectively true.

Funny that you claim I am nasty, but then – and have continually done so – claim that I am “lost,†i.e. not saved, i.e. not a Christian. Yeah, that’s polite! In fact, throughout this thread it has been the contention of both of you that those of us who do not accept the KJV only stance are probably not saved. You have, at the very least, implied this. Kinda seems nasty to me.

The “conservative†scholars with whom you agree on matters of theology would laugh uproariously

this is called "appeal to ridicule" at the above statement.

They would, though. Nobody believes such nonsense that these documents are depraved. I have read these conservative scholars, their journal articles, commentaries and books. Nobody with any integrity in the scholarly world believes this. Yes, I am indeed ridiculing the “idea†that these are “depraved†manuscripts. Such faulty ideas deserve ridicule.

I seriously doubt he has read and understood a third of all the ancient manuscripts.

I have never said anything remotely similar to the fact that I have read “a third of all the ancient documents.†Have I? Nor do I need to read them all to understand how to judge them or translate them.

ancient manuscripts have their own problems. This does not make them useless or “depraved.â€Â

Straw man technique.

I don’t think that fallacy means what you think it means. It is, in fact, TRUE that ancient manuscripts have problems with which the translator must deal. This, in fact, does not mean the documents are “depraved,†which is the judgment made by Cecil J. Carter. That is not what a “straw man argument†is.

The process of translation involves comparing manuscripts to each other in chronological order and in text families. Furthermore, the statement “The NIV owes its very existence largely to the authority of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus†is ludicrous.

Name calling tactic.

Wrong. It is not name calling to say that a statement is ludicrous. Read again what I wrote: “the statement…is ludicrous.†Yes, Cecil’s statement is ludicrous. I also did not merely call the statement ludicrous, I demonstrated objectively why it is so.

It owes its existence to EVERY manuscript ever copied by a scribe throughout the history of the Church. The NIV is a “fresh†translation of all ancient documents.

(his individual assessment of the NIV, not fact)

Wrong. Actually, it is fact. Why would you say it is not? Because you are simply unaware of the process whereby the NIV was translated.

From the International Bible Society’s own website:
“The New International Version is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts.â€Â

See? What I stated was not my “individual assessment,†but was fact.

The link you provided is to an article written by Cecil J. Carter. Who is that? Nobody anybody has ever heard of. He looks to be a business man with a KJV-only agenda. He doesn’t even appear to have any firsthand knowledge of Greek or the translation process. Not a very worthwhile link.

another debate tactic: let's call this one unproveable statements, since we can't poll the entire world. He isn’t a Bible scholar. OH? You know that to be a fact,eh? Prove it.

Ok. Here you go. Here is my Google cache for this search; check it out for yourself – he has no academic credentials of any kind, at least none that I could discover. In his articles he doesn't even list his academic credentials. I imagine he has none. If you can find something reputable that suggests he is educated in this field, then I am willing to entertain such a notion. Until then, Cecil J. Carter is unqualified to speak about such things from an authoritative standpoint. He is merely speaking of his own assessment and opinion. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="Cecil+J.+Carter"&btnG=Google+Search)

Here, he's shifting the burden of proof onto you, his opponent. He probably wants to get you caught up in "proving" the validity of your claims.

Heavens no! I would never expect an “opponent†to prove the validity of his claims! Actually, I am attempting to prove the validity of MY claims, so why should my “opponent†not be held to the same standard? In fact, did you just say to me “prove it†about something a few paragraphs back?

Dump him. There is a time for everything, and, it's best not to spend much more time with asb4god.

Dump me if you wish, but let’s be clear that the reason you choose to do so is that you cannot back up your claims about the KJV and NIV and want to take your ball and go home. You do not wish to see what an objective analysis reveals about your beliefs. You simply want to hold onto them like grim death in the face of evidence to the contrary.

ROTFL! Oh, how flimsy you are today. I can wait while you prop yourself up. How about a double bind? {{chuckle!}}} Methinks I'll observe anonymously that foul spirit. Venomous words are sure to be forthcoming from thee. Aren't thees and thous one of the arguments used to persuade young Christians to stay away from the KJV? Why, YES, they are! :D

I’m really not sure what any of that means. I stated quite clearly that your arguments for KEEPING the KJV additions is what Revelation argues against; quite an ironic twist on the matter. You reacted emotionally and implied that Satan was at work. You have yet do objectively demonstrate that I am incorrect.

Scott 8-)

 

[asb4God]

Don't forget what the tactics of the deceiver are and have been from back when. His only weapons are lies and deception. If he can convince Peter to operate in the flesh and make mistakes, then I suspect that he can do the same thing with men/women today.

Can you, for even one moment, entertain the possibility that he is causing you to make mistakes in this area, that he is deceiving you? Or is such a thing impossible for "true" Christians, i.e. those who use the KJV?

Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Don't forget what the tactics of the deceiver are and have been from back when. His only weapons are lies and deception. If he can convince Peter to operate in the flesh and make mistakes, then I suspect that he can do the same thing with men/women today.

Can you, for even one moment, entertain the possibility that he is causing you to make mistakes in this area, that he is deceiving you? Or is such a thing impossible for "true" Christians, i.e. those who use the KJV?

Scott 8-)

The KJV is the Bible that is more accurate than any other Bible that I have studied. I understand some of the problems that others have accused the KJV of, but the message contained therein is clearer than all of the other versions that I have studied. If you prefer the NIV, read it until your heart is content. The NIV changes meanings and understandings of the Word of God, and after studying the translation years ago, I became confident in the KJV over the NIV. Here these twenty years later, the TNIV follows in the NIV footsteps, and I am confident that the entire reason for the NIV translation was to bring about a more liberal understanding of God's word. I have confidence in the Holy Spirit and His interpretation of the word of God. It is the Holy Spirit that guides me, not the deceiver.

 

[cubedbee]

Seems to me that the translators could have came up with some Bibles that are in agreement with one another. What is the point of having all of these versions of the Bible. If they are taken from the Greek and the Hebrew they should all be interpreted about the same.

They are all interpeted about the same. There is not one single message of truth that can be found in the KJV that is not found in the NIV. Every single doctrine that is covered by these "ommitted" verses can be found clearly stated in dozens of other places in the NIV. Almost every single example of an "ommitted" verse is actually an addition by the KJV translators based on manuscripts of questionable reliability, and every single one of these is noted in the footnotes. There is absolutely no difference in message between the NIV and the KJV---they both contain the exact same outline of the salvation plan and the exact same truths about God.