Are Doctrines affected by Modern Versions?

[F345T]

Since the beginning, there have been those who have inserted changes to fit their own doctrinal bias. Because they are predisposed to mans 'ideas' and 'interpretation', rather than the truth, their can be changes by unscrupulous men or those who do not fear God. This was the reason the Jews would not change the text, but do a word for word translation or manuscript, and this is not the case at the least for most of these 'modern' versions.

Lets compare one verse, 1 John 4:3:

NIV - 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.

RSV - and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already.

ASV and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already.

KJV - 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.

We see here in 1 John 4:3 that the NIV takes out the whole point in the text, "NIV leaves out the fact that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh--yet another swipe at the divinity of Christ." https://mundall.com/erik/NIV-KJV.htm

Yes, modern translation bibles are a travesty to the original Bibles.

 

[reddogs]

Just a quick question here. Wasn't the only person Jesus told they had to be born again, Nicodemus?

So it should not apply to 'Christians'....

 

[reddogs]

Yes, modern translation bibles are a travesty to the original Bibles.

Here is one that is just a absolute untruth incorporated in by the NIV..

Mark 7:18-19

New International Version

​

18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

 

[reddogs]

The jehovahs witnesses bible, they are not and never have been part of any translation team, associated with any university or part of any revision team.
That you include them in with your list of suspect translations again shows that your research is flawed.

Didn't say that, as you can see they butchered the text and fit in what they wanted from several sources. But it's mainly the Holt and Westcott Alexandrian text for the most part..

 

[GodsGrace]

Here is one that is just a absolute untruth incorporated in by the NIV..

Mark 7:18-19​

​

New International Version​

​

​

18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

Is the bolded yours?

 

[GodsGrace]

The Alexandrian codices are the cause of all the confusion, and they make up the corrupted stream of text that is coming into our modern versions. If you look you will find there are only 2 streams of Bible versions, the true text of the Textus Receptus (Majority Text) on which the Authorized version and other tried and true text is based, and those which picked up the Alexandrian manuscripts (Minority Text) which have been shown to have deleted and changed many parts of the text and are unreliable. The Textus Receptus or Majority Text in which we find the vast majority of copies, has been attacked with changes, amendments, deletions, and what can only be seen attempts to diminish Gods truth. Many of the new modern versions such as the NIV and others are based on a few corrupted manuscripts which form the basis of the Minority Text, many which can be traced back to their original source, the Alexandrian codices. From what I have come across it seems that the Majority Text (Textus Receptus), also called the Byzantine Text is based on the vast majority of manuscripts still in existence. The manuscripts were brought together by many were faithful to its text such as Lucian, Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza and the Elzevir brothers to form the text known as Textus Receptus. When the Protestant Reformers decided to translate the scriptures directly from Greek into the languages of Europe, they selected Textus Receptus as their foundation Greek document and for good reason. So many of the new versions are based on the corrupted manuscripts and deletions which form the basis of the Minority Text, that its easy to pick one up and not notice. So how are Bible doctrines affected by these modern versions based on the Minority Text, lets take a look at what these changes do in this study I came across which states with Matthew:

Matthew 1:25 "her firstborn" is omitted. That Jesus was her firstborn indicates that Mary and Joseph had relations after the birth of Jesus and that others were born of her. The omission here seeks to add credence to the false doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church concerning the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Bible is clear that Jesus had brothers and sisters.

Matthew 5:22 "without a cause" is removed. In the Sermon on the Mount the Lord warned of judgment for those who were angry with a brother without a cause. Should this change be accepted everyone who is angry with his brother may be judged. (The effect is to bring Jesus into judgment for failing to observe his own words in Mark 3:5 "5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other." Such is contrary to the doctrine of the sinlessness of Christ.)

Matthew 6:4, 6, 18 "openly" is out. It is a Bible Doctrine that Christian work done unnoticed for the glory of the Lord will one day be rewarded openly (Col. 3:4).

Matthew 6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen" is deleted. This ascription of praise to "Our Father" is found in 491 out of 500 existing manuscripts.

Matthew 8:29 "Jesus" is left out. The demons bore witness to the fact that Jesus was the Son of God. It was an identification of Jesus (in humanity) as the Son of God (in Deity). It affects the doctrine of the Person of Christ.

Matthew 9:8 "marvelled" is changed to "were afraid." There is no reason to believe that the people were afraid because Jesus healed the sick of the palsy. There is every reason for them to marvel at the miracle.

Matthew 9:13 "to repentance" is left out. The Bible doctrine of repentance is one that men would like to do away with. God requires that in order to be saved one must truly repent (Acts 17:30; 2 Peter 3:9). The word means "a change of mind" and there must be that concerning God, sin and salvation. Men think that sin does not really separate them from God--they must change their mind about that. Men think that salvation is by works--they must change their mind about that. There is nothing more evident today than the absence of repentance among those who are professing to be converted.

Matthew 15:8 "draweth nigh unto me with their mouth" is left out. According to Isaiah 29:13 it belongs in because Isaiah prophesied of these hypocrites exactly that way.

Matthew 16:2,3 "When it is evening ... the signs of the times" is all omitted. The Pharisees and Sadducees came looking for a sign and the signs were all around them. Jesus called them hypocrites because they could not tell the signs of the times.

Matthew 17:21 Whole verse is left out. Power with God is to be had by prayer and fasting. That is a fundamental truth of the Word of God.

Matthew 18:2 "Jesus" is left out. This is done many times by the corrupt Alexandrian Greek Text of Westcott and Hort. The MAJORITY Text continuously places the word "Jesus" in the narrative with the definite article preceding it. Thus it places him in the center of things and in command. It is doctrinally unsound for such prominence to be discarded for the word "he."

Matthew 18:11 The whole verse is omitted. This verse tells us that man is lost, that he needs to be saved, and that the Son of man is the one who can do that. The doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ is affected by this change.

Matthew 18:15 "against thee" is omitted. This omission sets us up as watchdogs over others and if one sins we are to go and tell him. Such is not the teaching of Scripture. Were we to declare every sin we would be constantly busy (bodies) judging the actions and motives of everyone. This change is a very bad error.

Matthew 18:35 "their trespasses" is omitted. Same thought as mentioned in 18:15.

Matthew 19:9 "and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" is removed. This is a very important doctrinal change which concerns divorce and remarriage. A man who divorces his wife and remarries commits adultery, and also the man who marries the divorced wife commits adultery.

Matthew 19:16,17 "Good" before Master is omitted. In addition to that, the phrase "Why callest thou me good?" is changed to "Why askest thou me concerning the good?" Good Master is correct and Jesus responded to show the young man that only one was good and that one was God. The conclusion should have been obvious. Since Jesus was good he was necessarily God. The omission and change destroys the intended testimony to the Deity of Christ.

Matthew 20:16 "for many be called, but few chosen" is left out. The Lord would have us know that many are called to inherit eternal life, but few are chosen by virtue of believing in Christ. It is a Bible doctrine that God wants all men to be saved but few will come to Christ for salvation.

Matthew 21:12 "of God" is out. Jesus, who was God in the flesh, came to his own temple and said, "My house shall be called the house of prayer." It was the temple of God and the God of the temple was there.

Matthew 22:30 "of God" is removed. There are good angels and fallen angels. The believers, in the resurrection, will be like the good angels "of God" who alone are in heaven.

Matthew 23:8 "Master" is changed to "teacher." There are many teachers but only one master. The change here takes away the pre- eminence that God intends for his Son.

Matthew 25:13 "wherein the Son of man cometh" is omitted. The warning to watch is tied to the imminent return of the Lord. The omission here does away with the doctrine of the Lord's second advent.

It just goes on and on where the changes and omissions were purposely done to take away the divinity of Christ, confuse the issue, or totally wipe it out and keep it from the reader as this is the corruption of the Alexandrian Text or the Minority Text, and was a reason those codices were little used as they were avoided by believers from ancient times. They knew what was being done and we see it in Pauls warning..

2 Corinthians 2:17
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Hi reddogs,
I just wanted to say what a good job you did in investigating the above.
I find your threads to be very scholarly and show depth in study.

Although I understand your reasoning, I don't really participate too much in threads, and so didn't post much.

I wonder what you think about this however:

Our rapport with God has to be with faith and obedience in His commands (as much as possible - no one is perfect).
At that point, it seems to me that how something is written comes to matter little. If every word were so important, wouldn't Jesus have left us with something written by HIM? His goal was spiritual, I believe, and this goes beyond anything written.

The question is this:
Do you believe that these changes could affect future believers?
Could any one of those changes prevent someone from coming to God?
Do they affect the pillars of our faith?

You seem to think so.

Thanks.

 

[Who Me]

Didn't say that, as you can see they butchered the text and fit in what they wanted from several sources. But it's mainly the Holt and Westcott Alexandrian text for the most part..

If you are saying that the bib,especially we buy from bookshops are not trustworthy, are not God's word.What are you suggesting people should use?

From my reading of articles on the bible I see that translators are 99% sure they have an accurate version of the bible.
If that is correct your whole thread is a waste of time!

 

[GodsGrace]

If you are saying that the bib,especially we buy from bookshops are not trustworthy, are not God's word.What are you suggesting people should use?

From my reading of articles on the bible I see that translators are 99% sure they have an accurate version of the bible.
If that is correct your whole thread is a waste of time!

There are some small variations.
But the message remains the same.

 

[Josef]

Hey All,
Some of the modern translations read like they are trying to appease men rather than teach men. When I see homosexuality changed to sexual immorality, I view it as political correctness trying to weave its way into Scripture.

Scripture has say what it means.

Or it no longer means what it says.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz

 

[Who Me]

There are some small variations.
But the message remains the same.

Yes that is true facts, unlike the blatant miss information contained in some posts here.

 

[reddogs]

Hi reddogs,
I just wanted to say what a good job you did in investigating the above.
I find your threads to be very scholarly and show depth in study.

Although I understand your reasoning, I don't really participate too much in threads, and so didn't post much.

I wonder what you think about this however:

Our rapport with God has to be with faith and obedience in His commands (as much as possible - no one is perfect).
At that point, it seems to me that how something is written comes to matter little. If every word were so important, wouldn't Jesus have left us with something written by HIM? His goal was spiritual, I believe, and this goes beyond anything written.

The question is this:
Do you believe that these changes could affect future believers?
Could any one of those changes prevent someone from coming to God?
Do they affect the pillars of our faith?

You seem to think so.

Thanks.

So if they take the verse out, do you think it makes a difference..

 

[GodsGrace]

So if they take the verse out, do you think it makes a difference..

I don't know what verse you're speaking of.
I'd have to say that taking one verse out makes no difference.
UNLESS it changed a doctrine.
I can't think of any error, change, mistake, in the NT that would change a doctrine necessary for Christianity.

 

[GodsGrace]

Here is one that is just a absolute untruth incorporated in by the NIV..

Mark 7:18-19​

​

New International Version​

​

​

18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

Is the above the verse you're referring to?

 

[Vinny37]

Hey All,
Some of the modern translations read like they are trying to appease men rather than teach men. When I see homosexuality changed to sexual immorality, I view it as political correctness trying to weave its way into Scripture.

Scripture has say what it means.

Or it no longer means what it says.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz

Lv.18:22; 20:13: KJV = lie with mankind; NIV84/11 = lies with a man; TNIV = sexual relations with a man

Rm.1:27: KJV = men with men working that which is unseemly…‌error; NIV84/11 = men committed indecent acts with other men…‌perversion; TNIV = men committed shameful acts with other men…‌error

1 Cor.6:9: KJV = effeminate/‌abusers of themselves with mankind; NIV84 = male prostitutes/‌homosexual offenders; TNIV = male prostitutes/‌practicing homosexuals; NIV11 = men who have sex with men

1 Tm.1:10: KJV = defile themselves with mankind; NIV84 = perverts; TNIV/NIV11 = practicing homosexuality (see https://archive.org/details/the-words-gone-global-exploring-bible-versions-2017-231024/mode/1up pp80-5).

Might it be that the KJV was soft on homosexuality by trying to appease King James?

 

[Vinny37]

Here is one that is just a absolute untruth incorporated in by the NIV.
Mark 7:18-19: New International Version

18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)​

Mk.7:15 had already spoke of foods being intrinsically kosher (even if still unkosher to eat under Sinai): eg pork was not an evil contamination.

Mk.7:19 “Because it entreth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?” (KJV). What would “purging all meats” mean, and why would messiah have said that?

The authorised version of 1881 twigged that the last few words–καθαριζων παντα τα βρωματα—were editorial comment, and worded it so, and its idea has been generally accepted.

Mk.7:19 “‘For it doesn’t go into his heart but into the stomach and is eliminated’ (thus he declared all foods clean)” (CSB). Is it not an absolute truth incorporated in by the NIV, too?2

Peter had real issues about the transfer from Sinai (and its people-defining commands) to messiah. For years he ignored evangelising the gentiles, even—reading between the lines—arguing to God that they were still unclean, unkosher (Ac.10:15). Paul ticked Peter off later for some similar throwback (Gal.2:11): revisiting Sinai remains risky. So when it comes to Mk.8:19, it would be even more poignant if Peter had been the source for Mark, and had commented as Mark was writing that in fact what Jesus had said that day had been a veiled comment (and said in private) below the level of kosher symbolism.

Prior to the new covenant, Jesus did not invalidate the old (Mt.23:3). Prior to the new covenant, he did expose to eyes that could see, the underlying cleanness/kosherness in themselves of all human foods—none were intrinsically unkosher; the big problem was the human heart. His wider context then was exposing how the scribes and Pharisees exceeded Scripture (Mk.7:1-13). Seemingly such traditions had even demonised such as pork. Declaring all foods clean helped undermine merely human tradition, and once the kosher-laws were ended, it would help folk readjust their mindset.

BTW, I’d disagree with translating in the ideas that he made all foods kosher (HCSB), or even disagreed with Leviticus (CJB), but agree that he declared them to be kosher in themselves (NIV84/11). Ritual uncleanness regulations, limited to the old covenant, only ended with the cross.

 

[reddogs]

I don't know what verse you're speaking of.
I'd have to say that taking one verse out makes no difference.
UNLESS it changed a doctrine.
I can't think of any error, change, mistake, in the NT that would change a doctrine necessary for Christianity.

Which they do, and usually on the diety of Christ or such Gnostic influence..

 

[Free]

Which they do, and usually on the diety of Christ or such Gnostic influence..

Where is the evidence?

 

[reddogs]

Where is the evidence?

Do you really want to go through it or will you claim its too much to go through and I can't go through every thing as happens when the evidence is put forth. Its a lot and clearly shows its purpose..

 

[Josef]

Hey All,
I found this online awhile back and believe it to be relevant to this discussion. Since it is so large, I have to break it into two posts.

So this is 1 of 2:


Missing and Incorrectly Translated Verses in The NIV
By Dr. Rocco Badenhorst

Matthew 6:13
Here the NIV omits an important part of the “Lord’s Prayer, “For Thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory for ever, Amen.”

Matthew 17:21
Did some of the translators of the NIV not believe in prayer and fasting?

Matthew 19:17
This verse should be stated correctly as, as in the KJV “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God:”

Matthew 23:14
The NIV omitted this verse completely. Some of the translators of the NIV evidently did not like the word “damnation.”

Matthew 23:23
The word “faith” and the word “faithfulness” do not mean the same. The KJV of the Bible says, “By faith we are saved,” not by “faithfulness. I do not believe that “faith” and “faithfulness” have the same meaning.)

Mark 9:29.
The NIV omitted “fasting.” Our Lord Jesus fasted for 40 days and 40 nights.

Mark 13:33
The KJV says, “Watch and Pray.” It is not the same as “be on guard! Be alert!” as translated in the NIV. To be a watchful and praying Christian is paramount.

Mark 15:28
This verse was omitted from the NIV. It was a prophecy from the Old Testament proclaiming the Deity of Christ.) ,&/://;

Luke 4:4
Words omitted in this verse, “but by every Word of God.” All of existence was brought into being by the Word of God. Jesus IS The Word of God. (This is one of the most important verses in the Bible)

Luke 4:8
“Get thee behind me Satan,” in the KJV. Why did the NIV translators not put these words in?

Luke 6:40
“Perfect” is not the same as “fully trained,” as stated in the NIV. Jesus wants us to be perfect in Him, not “fully trained.”

Luke 5:20
Jesus did not call the sinner “friend,” as translated in the NIV. He called him, “man,” as translated in the KJV.

Luke 11:2-4
When we pray the Lord’s Prayer, we pray “Our Father which art in Heaven”. The NIV omitted the words “Our” and only mentions “Father.” Are they referring to another father? In addition, “deliver us from evil” was omitted in verse 4 by the NIV translators. Did they not see a need for deliverance?

Luke 12:31
Here again the NIV omits these important words. It should say “The kingdom of God.” The NIV says, “his kingdom.” To which kingdom are they referring?

Luke 21:19
“Patience” is a gift of the Holy Spirit — “Standing firm” is not the same.

John 4:42
The NIV omitted the “Christ” which means “Anointed One.”

John 9:35
In this particular verse, It should be “Son of God” and not, “son of man,” as the NIV translates it.

Matthew 8:29
NIV translators omitted the name, “Jesus,” thou Son of God.

John 6:47
NIV says, “he who believes.” Should be, “He who believes on Me has everlasting life.” Believing is not enough.

Acts 8:18
NIV says, “spirit – should be “Holy Spirit.” Man has a spirit also.) Which spirit are the translators of the NIV referring to ?

Acts 10:30
(NIV omitted “fasting.” Fasting is powerful for seeing answers to our needs.

Acts 8:37
NIV omitted this entire verse – it is vital to Salvation (Did the translators of the NIV feel ashamed of the Name of Jesus?

Acts 10:30
NIV omitted the word “fasting” – fasting is powerful for seeing needs being met.

Acts 22:16
NIV says “Calling on his name.” KJV says “The Name of the Lord.”

Romans 11:6
The NIV is not very clear on this verse and the KJV explains “Grace and Works.” The NIV omits, ”But if it be of works, then it is no more grace.” This is an important part of the Gospel.

1 Corinthians 14:2
Two errors are in this verse. Firstly, it should read, “unknown tongue” and secondly it is by “the Spirit” (Holy Spirit) and not the spirit of man as in the NIV. Speaking in tongues is not by man’s understanding of the “unknown tongue.” The spirit of man has nothing to do with the “unknown tongue.” It is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

11 Corinthians 7:4
KJV says, “boldness of speech.” NIV says, “I have great confidence in you.”

11 Corinthians 10:5
KJV “Casting down imaginations” is correct. NIV says, “demolish arguments.” See Isaiah 2:11-12 for the importance of casting down imaginations.

Galatians 4:7
KJV says “servant,” and not “slave,” as translated in the NIV. A servant has the choice of leaving his master and a slave does not have a choice. The importance of this translation is that we have a choice of serving Christ or of deserting Him, whereas, a slave does not have that choice.

Galatians 5:22
The NIV translators used the word “faithfulness” in place of the word ”faith.” We are saved by faith and not by being faithful.

Galatians 6:15
NIV omits “for in Christ Jesus” in this verse.

Ephesians 3:9
NIV omitted “created all things by Jesus Christ.” Revelation 22:19 warns us about taking away from the Word of God.

Ephesians 3:14
KJV says, “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” NIV says, “I kneel before the Father.” (Which father are they talking about?)

Philippians 3:21
KJV says, “Vile bodies.” NIV says, “lowly bodies.” These words have different meanings. Vile means sinful and lowly means humble.

Ephesians 5:9
KJV says “Fruit of the Spirit.” NIV says, “Fruit of the light.”

Philippians 4:13
KJV says, “I can do all things through Christ which strengthens me.” NIV says, “I can do everything through him.”(Who are they talking about here?)

Colossians 1:2
The NIV omitted, “and from the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Colossians 2: 18
The NIV says, “What he has seen.” The KJV says, “Things he hath not seen.” A careless translation.

1 Timothy 2: 7
KJV says, “Truth in Christ.” NIV says, “Truth.” (There is only truth in Christ)

1 Timothy 3:16
NIV says “He appeared in a body.” What type of body? The KJV says, “God was manifest in the flesh.”

2 Timothy 3:17
KJV says, “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” NIV says, “So that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (A soldier can be equipped for warfare, but not perfect. Only Christ brings perfection.)

Hebrews 3:6
We are “rejoicing” and not “boasting” as translated in the NIV.

Hebrews 3:18
KJV says, “To them that believed not.” NIV says, “ Not to those who disobeyed.”

Hebrews 4:12
KJV says, “The Word is quick and powerful,” not as in the NIV “quick and active.” One can be active without being powerful. It is the “Power of God,” that sets us free, not “activity.”

Hebrews 13:21
Should be “make you perfect” (KJV) not “equip” you as in the NIV. There is a vast difference. (See comments on 2 Tim 3:17)

I Peter 1:22
Should be “with a pure heart” as in KJV not just heart. NIV everyone has a heart, but only Gods children have pure hearts.

1 Peter 2:2
“Milk of the Word” is correct and easy to understand even for a child, but what does the NIV mean by spiritual milk? The emphasis should be on the Word of God, and not on milk.

2 Peter 1:21
Should be “holy men,” that is men touched by the Holy Spirit, and not “men” as translated in the NIV.

1 John 5:13
The NIV left out the last part of this verse which is important and reads, “and that ye may believe on the Name of the Son of God.”

Jude 1
The NIV left out the word “sanctified.” We are sinners who are sanctified (cleansed by the blood of Jesus, when He paid for our sins with his precious blood).

Revelation 1:11
The NIV omitted the very important Name of Jesus which reads “I AM THE ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE FIRST AND THE LAST.” This is in the original manuscripts.

Revelation 21:24
The nations “which are saved” in the KJV, and not just “the nations” as the NIV says. We need to be saved, born again of the Spirit of God.

Look at post #2 for the differences in the Old Testament.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz

 

[Josef]

Hey All,
This is #2 of 2; and we will now look at the Old Testament changes between the KJV and the NIV Bibles.

Missing and Incorrectly Translated Verses in The NIV
By Dr. Rocco Badenhorst
(Part 2)

There are many more verses in both the New Testament as well as the Old Testament, which are in error in the NIV. Added words, deleted words, changed the meaning or completely left out whole verses, The Lord warns against this practice in the book of Revelation 22:18-19.

Now lets look at some verses in the Old Testament, keeping in mind that not all the books in the NIV are in error. Many translators worked on the NIV; some were sincere, others were used by the devil to corrupt the Word of God. (I don't agree with Dr. Badenhorst here. There may have been simple human error at work here as well. )

Isaiah 14:12-15
Here the NIV drops the name, ”Lucifer,” which is another name for the Devil and replaces it with “Morning Star” in place of “son of the morning” as in the KJV. Jesus is referred to as “Morning Star” as in the book of Revelation 22:16. The translators make it sound like our Lord Jesus fell from grace, and not Satan, the devil. The devil was cast out of heaven because of pride.

Exodus 6:3
The word “Jehovah” was replaced with the word ”Lord” in the NIV, this is incorrect because of the following reason, the Name “Jehovah” also known as “Yahweh” is a Name by which God is worshipped as the ”Self-Existent One;” One who reveals himself through his creation. In this instance the name ” Lord” would not have done justice to the greatness of God. There are also people who are called Lord. The title ”Lord” in this instance does not speak of the greatness of God.

Psalm 8:5
The NIV replace the word angel with a heavenly being, never heard of a heavenly being, why not stick to what the original manuscripts said.

Proverbs 8:18
“Righteousness” is correct as in the KJV. Not “prosperity” as translated in the NIV. One can be prosperous without being righteous, the world can make you prosperous but it can never make you righteous (in right standing with God) which only comes from God.

Jeremiah 29:11
Here the NIV replaces the word “Peace” with “prosperity.” We can be prosperous without having peace, God is not against His children prospering, but we need to keep the verses in context.

Daniel 3:25
The NIV misses the mark completely here by saying, “the fourth looks like the son of the gods.” “The Son of God,” as translated in the KJV, and not “the gods,” as translated in the NIV. Some of the translators of the NIV have tried to make the Word of God acceptable to all religions. The Word of God cannot be changed to accommodate man, man needs to conform to the Word of God.


by Dr. Rocco Badenhorst

What are you looking for?
©2007-2023 by Bible Senders


So as you can see, the changes are extensive and impactful. The one just above in Daniel 3:25 changes the, KJV from "God," to NIV "gods."
KJV
Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
NIV
Daniel 3:25 He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”

This is disturbing; because where have we seen this before?
The Jehovah's Witnesses bible in John 1: 1.

Now I will grant that I have a bias toward KJV. But the NIV just reads too different for me.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz