Why do some Christians dislike the NIV Bible?

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Here is a discussion about Bibles for Catholics, with a clear preference for the ESVCE. And I agree, but hope for an even better common and traditional Bible some day.
I have a copy of the NAB and read it years ago. unfortunately, it is the edition where inclusive language was used in the Psalms. Perhaps the revised edition is better.

Bible Gateway also has the New Catholic Bible copyright © 2019 by Catholic Book Publishing Corp. I've been reading it regularly in conjunction with other translations and I like it. In the NT, I don't depend on any single translation.

Its English seems to flow better than RSV and ESV and it gives more weight to the LXX where the meaning in MT is not clear (rather than guessing the meaning). Have you tried this version?

Catholic Book Publishing - Catholic Book Publishing
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,168
16,008
Flyoverland
✟1,223,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I have a copy of the NAB and read it years ago. unfortunately, it is the edition where inclusive language was used in the Psalms. Perhaps the revised edition is better.
I think the original 1970 version didn't have that problem. I think that entered in the NABRE text. I don't know if any newer publications of the NABRE have fixed that.

The Grail version of the Psalms seems to be the way to go, or at least it's among the better ones. This is critical because the Liturgy of the Hours is so dependent on the Psalms.
Bible Gateway also has the New Catholic Bible copyright © 2019 by Catholic Book Publishing Corp. I've been reading it regularly in conjunction with other translations and I like it. In the NT, I don't depend on any single translation.
I have not tried that one. I thought, maybe mistakenly, that it was just the NRSV-CE.
Perhaps its English flows better than RSV and ESV and it gives more weight to the LXX when the meaning MT is not clear (rather than guessing the meaning). Have you tried this version?
I would like something that pays attention to the LXX, particularly when the MT is actually written later and we have to assume the vowels are understood, which they aren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

linux.poet

Electric Nightfall
Angels Team
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
Apr 25, 2022
2,046
1,005
Poway
✟196,584.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
To each his own, certainly, but I have a pretty high opinion of the NRSV Psalms. I was surprised by your comment.
I agree here. Frequently I actually refer to the Psalms in NRSV because those sections sound like actual poetry written in English. By contrast the NASB Psalms seem wooden and lifeless.

I think if you know the original Hebrew and the true beauty of the Psalms the NRSV translation may sound like a loss, but if your key exposure to the Bible is English translations NRSV sounds like a thing of beauty.

(I also dearly love the ESV edition of Psalm 46.)
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
1,600
718
Southeast
✟47,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have noticed in multiple Bible version discussions people who are not in the "KJV Only" group avoid the New International Version. Compared to other modern American English translations, what is wrong with it? I only know the NIV, it looks wrong when I read the same verses in other versions, but there must be something to like better in the ESV, RSV, NASB, NKJV, and CSB for people to read them instead.

I knew a minister who used the NIV and joked it was the "Nearly Inspired Version." But what I dislike about the NIV is that how it deletes text without explanation. The NASB notes that the same text wasn't found in all manuscripts, but retained it in their translations. That's the route I think the NIV should have went.

FWIW, the NASB is my preferred translation, but that's just personal choice.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I knew a minister who used the NIV and joked it was the "Nearly Inspired Version." But what I dislike about the NIV is that how it deletes text without explanation. The NASB notes that the same text wasn't found in all manuscripts, but retained it in their translations. That's the route I think the NIV should have went.

FWIW, the NASB is my preferred translation, but that's just personal choice.

Hmmm. Something I have seen in the NIV is a note that the following text is not in the original version, so some verses were added to it. I assume this is because more manuscripts were found later.

What are some of the deleted verses? Just a guess, but maybe somebody was able to confirm those were not inspired by God.
 
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
1,600
718
Southeast
✟47,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hmmm. Something I have seen in the NIV is a note that the following text is not in the original version, so some verses were added to it. I assume this is because more manuscripts were found later.

What are some of the deleted verses? Just a guess, but maybe somebody was able to confirm those were not inspired by God.

It was long ago, and it surfaces when a Sunday School teacher had a student with an NIV that didn't have a verse. Here is a list of some:

16 Verses left out of the NIV – shapedbytruth

I think it was another passage. When I went to check the one I thought it was, the NIV noted it wasn't in some manuscripts but included the verses. Was this the passage I remember? Don't know. I do remember thinking at that time that the NIV bracketed the verse and noted it wasn't in some manuscripts, but included it.
 
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,623.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I think it depends on who is reading. If it's a new person in the faith the NIV is enjoyable reading the gospels. Peaching from pulputs it's best to stay with the KJB or the NKJ as people generally can relate to it's language. I am not a Only KJV person but the language of the KJV or the NKJ is very much accepted.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I think it depends on who is reading. If it's a new person in the faith the NIV is enjoyable reading the gospels. Peaching from pulputs it's best to stay with the KJB or the NKJ as people generally can relate to it's language. I am not a Only KJV person but the language of the KJV or the NKJ is very much accepted.

I think people are quick to accept the KJV because it used to be the only Bible used in American churches and go to church every week. The problem is Old British English grammar is never used for anything else, so unless you grew up in the church and have been a Christian most of your life, it looks weird. I was not a Christian until March 16, 1997. I was 20 years old at the time. So reading a word for word Bible did not make any sense to me because everything else I read is written the way we are taught in English classes.

Just to be clear, is Textux Receptus the word for word style or modern translation?
 
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,623.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I think people are quick to accept the KJV because it used to be the only Bible used in American churches and go to church every week. The problem is Old British English grammar is never used for anything else, so unless you grew up in the church and have been a Christian most of your life, it looks weird. I was not a Christian until March 16, 1997. I was 20 years old at the time. So reading a word for word Bible did not make any sense to me because everything else I read is written the way we are taught in English classes.

Just to be clear, is Textux Receptus the word for word style or modern translation?
You make a good point. I think it depends on who is doing the reading.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
The article you linked to is either a hilarious satire of anti-Catholic conspiracy theories or else is completely bonkers.

I didn't click the link, but having been around the block more than once I feel confident that the latter is likely.

Jesuit-related conspiracy theories abound.

One of the funniest things I've encountered was a Chick Track that claimed the Vatican, led by Satan, invented Islam. Claiming that Vatican agents went to Mecca to effectively find someone to create a new religion, and they found Muhammad to be the new prophet of that religion.

In the track the Vatican agents are depicted in traditional 17th century Jesuit garb, including the fancy Jesuit hats.

I've always taken that to mean that there were time-traveling Jesuits.

Great Scott, Martinus
!

It would be way funnier if people didn't actually believe such cow-pies.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0