Is the NIV a corrupt version?

[Dave Slayer]

Is the NIV a corrupt version? I have heard that it was.

 

[Guest]

Is the NIV a corrupt version? I have heard that it was.

Do you really want to get me started on KJV Onlyism? ;)

 

[Dave Slayer]

Is the NIV a corrupt version? I have heard that it was.

Do you really want to get me started on KJV Onlyism? ;)

No. ;)

But there are some who teach that the KJV is corrupt. In fact, some will say all of the versions are corrupt, depending on who you talk to. However, I would like for this discussion to deal with the NIV only. Thanks and God Bless!

 

[JudaicChristian]

Is the NIV a corrupt version? I have heard that it was.

I have many different bibles and I have spent many thousands of hours of studying. I also have books to break down the languages to there basic roots. I have yet to find a bible were scholars did not insert their own words. The KJ is no better than the NIV.

 

[Guest]

But there are some who teach that the KJV is corrupt. In fact, some will say all of the versions are corrupt, depending on who you talk to. However, I would like for this discussion to deal with the NIV only. Thanks and God Bless!

Indeed, you are correct. However, this creates a problem. To prove the NIV is corrupt, one must be able to produce a "standard" to compare it to. So, what is our standard? The Greek and Hebrew manuscripts? Which ones? The KJV? If so, which edition? The Living Bible? Moby Dick? Will Smith?

 

[Dave Slayer]

This website shows that the NIV has parts of verses and whole verses missing in the NIV.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/nivdelet.htm

The following WHOLE verses have been removed in the NIV--whether in the text or footnotes...over 40 IN ALL!!!

Matthew 12:47 -- removed in the footnotes

Matthew 17:21 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."

Matthew 18:11 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."

Matthew 21:44 -- removed in the footnotes

Matthew 23:14 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."

Mark 7:16 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

Mark 9:44 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

Mark 9:46 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

Mark 11:26 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."

Mark 15:28 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."

Mark 16:9-20 (all 12 verses) -- There is a line separating the last 12 verses of Mark from the main text. Right under the line it says: [The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20] (NIV, 1978 ed.) The Jehovah's Witness "Bible" also places the last 12 verses of Mark as an appendix of sorts.

Luke 17:36 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

Luke 22:44 -- removed in the footnotes

Luke 22:43 -- removed in the footnotes

Luke 23:17 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.)"

John 5:4 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"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 7:53-8:11 -- removed in the footnotes

Acts 8:37 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. It's deletion makes one think that people can be baptized and saved without believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. Sounds Catholic. What are you NIV readers missing?
"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 15:34 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."

Acts 24:7 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"

Acts 28:29 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."

Romans 16:24 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."

I John 5:7 -- Vitally important phrase COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. In the NIV it says,

"For there are three that testify:"
Compare the NIV reading with the following Jehovah's Witness reading--

"For there are three witness bearers,"
What are you NIV readers missing? What does the real Bible say?

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

This is one of the GREATEST verses testifying of the trinity. That is why the Jehovah's Witnesses leave it out. They do not believe in the trinity and they do not believe that Jesus is God. Why does the NIV leave it out...? Whole books have been written on the manuscript evidence that supports inclusion of this verse in the Bible. Reader, do you believe in the triunity of God? If so, then this deletion should offend you. People are playing around with the Bible and it ain't funny.

 

[Lewis]

You just don't know how many times we have argued about the NIV vs KJV on this board, to many times to count. And yes the NIV is corrupt. To me and millions of others, yes it is corrupt.

 

[Guest]

This website shows that the NIV has parts of verses and whole verses missing in the NIV.

In order to know the NIV is "missing" verses, they must have something to compare it to. This particular website, if I recall from my discussions 5+ years ago, is a KJV Only website (or maybe "KJV Best," a slightly less strict perspective). Hence, I can only assume they are comparing it to the KJV, or perhaps the Hebrew/Greek texts underlying it.

 

[JudaicChristian]

This verse here is a known corruption of text. I forget who, but there is a record of a Pope having a scribe insert that verse. The oldest scripts do not have this reading. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

 

[Guest]

You just don't know how many times we have argued about the NIV vs KJV on this board, to many times to count. And yes the NIV is corrupt. To me and millions of others, yes it is corrupt.

Interesting that you immediately frame the question as NIV vs. KJV. I will avoid derailing the thread though. So, why is the NIV corrupt?

 

[Dave Slayer]

This website shows that the NIV has parts of verses and whole verses missing in the NIV.

In order to know the NIV is "missing" verses, they must have something to compare it to. This particular website, if I recall from my discussions 5+ years ago, is a KJV Only website (or maybe "KJV Best," a slightly less strict perspective). Hence, I can only assume they are comparing it to the KJV, or perhaps the Hebrew/Greek texts underlying it.

So it's possible the KJV translators added things to the scriptures? Or, are these verses contained in the original textus receptus manuscripts in which the KJV is translated from?

Also, if you compare the NIV to the ESV, NLT, or NASB, are there verses missing?

 

[Lewis]

All I use is the King James and the Amplified I have had many translations but I gave most of them away. You should see all the translations that people use in my church. NIV is taken from corrupt manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt

 

[Guest]

This verse here is a known corruption of text. I forget who, but there is a record of a Pope having a scribe insert that verse. The oldest scripts do not have this reading. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

I am not sure it would be a "corruption." It reflects an idea taught within Scripture, but many scholars do not believe it is "authentic" to the biblical text of 1 John. (The passage in question is 1 John 5:7. And the specific portion of the text is commonly called the Comma Johanneum.)

The individual you are referencing is Desiderius Erasmus. He wanted to exclude the portion of the verse because he was not convinced of its authenticity, but under pressure he included it. Or, so the story goes. I am sure those who promote the KJV have a different version of history to superimpose on it, but it has been years since I have studied these issues and do have my notes on it anymore.

 

[Guest]

[quote="Dave Slayer":85btdnd3]This website shows that the NIV has parts of verses and whole verses missing in the NIV.

In order to know the NIV is "missing" verses, they must have something to compare it to. This particular website, if I recall from my discussions 5+ years ago, is a KJV Only website (or maybe "KJV Best," a slightly less strict perspective). Hence, I can only assume they are comparing it to the KJV, or perhaps the Hebrew/Greek texts underlying it.

So it's possible the KJV translators added things to the scriptures? Or, are these verses contained in the original textus receptus manuscripts in which the KJV is translated from?[/quote:85btdnd3]
These are good and valid questions.

Also, if you compare the NIV to the ESV, NLT, or NASB, are there verses missing?

Most "modern" translations (i.e., post-Wescott and Hort compilations of the biblical manuscripts) do not include many of the passages claimed to be "removed" from the Bible. That would include each of these mentioned.

 

[JudaicChristian]

All I use is the King James and the Amplified I have had many translations but I gave most of them away. You should see all the translations that people use in my church. NIV is taken from corrupt manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt

I find the best way to study is to read them side by side. If an issue comes up, then I have something to investagate.

 

[Lewis]

All I use is the King James and the Amplified I have had many translations but I gave most of them away. You should see all the translations that people use in my church. NIV is taken from corrupt manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt

I find the best way to study is to read them side by side. If an issue comes up, then I have something to investagate.

You are right :yes :D

 

[Guest]

All I use is the King James and the Amplified I have had many translations but I gave most of them away. You should see all the translations that people use in my church. NIV is taken from corrupt manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt.

Ah, so you're from the "KJV Best" crowd, or more specifically, "textus receptus is best" crowd. I suppose you're a fan of David Cloud? I can often hold a degree of respect for him. He is respectful and reasonable. Though, most of the "best" crowd tend to be more respectful and reasonable than the died in the wool, hard core KJV Only crowd.

However, I am digressing, so I'll stop.

 

[JudaicChristian]

The KJ bible is also know as the Masonic Bible because it was written for the Masons. That should tell you something there.

 

[Lewis]

Read this

THE KING JAMES BIBLE

The King James Version is the most popular translation of the
Bible in existence. We shall discuss the history of this book and
examine its construction and sequencing.

When Queen Elizabeth of England died in 1603, King James VI of
Scotland took the throne as King James I. There were at least
three popular versions of the Bible at that time: The Geneva
Bible, the Great Bible and the Bishop's Bible. In January, 1604
the Puritans asked King James I for a new translation. Work on
the new Bible began in 1607 with 47 translators who met twice each
day. The translators worked in 6 groups at 3 major universities.
2 groups worked at Oxford, 2 groups worked at Cambridge and the
last 2 groups did their work at Westminster. In 1611, the first
version was ready for publication. As with any other publication,
revisions were made. The Apocrypha, writings apparently of
Christian nature, were at first included in the King James
Version. Because of their dubious authenticity, they were
eventually eliminated in subsequent revisions. Today's version is
quite close to a revision published in 1769. However, there is
now available a Revised King James Version which is even more
contemporary.

 

[Guest]

I might note, OP wanted to stick to the NIV. So, I would recommend focusing on the NIV, but we do need to establish a standard.