Can the NIV version be trusted?

[ValleyGal]

If you read the preamble of the original 1611 KJV, the translator outright stated he was translating under duress, and that there are passages that are inaccurately translated, based on duress. That in itself popped up a huge red flag. I'm not saying the KJV is bad - the translator did the best he could under the circumstances. In fact, I do not believe there is one translation out there which deliberately alters the Word. After all, this is God's word and those who translated were biblical scholars.

There is no English translation that will be 100% accurate. It is impossible, and it would take dozens of huge volumes to explain in English all the nuances of the original (oldest) manuscripts. I believe God chose authors of the original languages because of the nature of the languages. Where English has one word such as "love" to describe feelings, thoughts, and biochemical reactions (think of loving God, a friend, spouse, parent, child, pie or smarties, pet, house, etc), another language might have more than a dozen words that more accurately describe the nature and intensity of the "love" that we have only one word for. This same problem comes up with thousands of words in every translation.

Choose a translation you're actually going to read and possibly study, and when you do read and study, recognize that the language will not capture all the nuances intended in the original.

 

[WilliamBo]

I started with the NLT and studied that for like my first two years of being a Christian and did just fine with it. I also dabbled in the NIV a little. Then I started reading the ESV and the KJV and the nkjv. Now, 6 years after finding Christ, I I like to compare all the versions. I was reading the KJV last week and this week I'm reading the ESV. I like to see how other translations put certain verses. On the Bible app there's a function where you can compare any chapter or verse with like 6 other translations with one click.

 

[WilliamBo]

But about the NIV in particular, I have notice there are some verses that are really "watered down" and less harsh sounding compared to the KJV. The KJV is pretty blunt and brutal sounding at times...

 

[JoeP222w]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

Recommended reading:

Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books
by Michael J. Kruger

 

[Stringfellow_Hawke]

All translations have their own quirks, and in some places, they all embrace certain theological stances - albeit very subtle, and not in a way that should compromise the Gospel. NIV is a good translation in that it has a natural flow that makes it easy to follow. What it lacks, however, is sometimes a precise technical language, which may not make it ideal for study. Here the ESV, for example, may be a better alternative; which is a more word-for-word translation. Though again, the downside with this approach is that some of the meanings may become a little more obscure and challenging to follow.

As for the "missing verses" - most modern Bibles, at least study Bibles, do include them in footnotes or brackets. They are preferred not to be included in the main body as the origin of these verses are historically uncertain, likely later additions.

Going a bit on a tangent for a second, I just want to add that when it comes to study Bibles, you'll probably find that they are very tied to their respective tradition. The Scofield NIV Study Bible, for example, which is very common among Protestants, comes with a distinct Dispensationalist theological view, which shapes the understanding of the Scripture and may suggest doctrines that are not Eastern Orthodox (nor Roman Catholic or Lutheran for that matter)

I think the best approach is to use whatever (commonly accepted) Bible you prefer for devotional use, and a combination of different translations for exegetical use. Using apps like YouVersion, Blue Letter Bible or BibleGateway makes it very quick and easy to compare translations.

Can't go wrong with YouVersion

 

[Serving Zion]

But about the NIV in particular, I have notice there are some verses that are really "watered down" and less harsh sounding compared to the KJV. The KJV is pretty blunt and brutal sounding at times...

"Watered down" is perfect. It's quite misleading in that way because it doesn't emphasise conviction that is necessary to teach righteousness. It places detrimental emphasis on flattering the reader and avoiding potentially divisive or offensive views. OTOH, there are some translations of the opposite description, but lacking grace as maybe WilliamBO noticed of parts of the KJV - (eg, the translator might have been having a bad day). NIV has too much potential to create weak faith, so I never can recommend it.

 

[JackRT]

I don't know about whether or not he was bisexual,

I don't know either but he certainly was homosexual. George Villiers was his principal paramour.

 

[ChristaLife]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

What is the alternative? Not to read the bible. King James was not the write he just binded the already written word of God. In fact it was not King James binding the books It was God using him to bind the books.
I think you are on to something in your life and Satan can see it and he is trying his uttermost best to dissuade you or frighten you from taking that next step closer to God. Don't let him.
God wrote the bible and God bound the bibles and he used anyone and anything, sinners saints young old believers and non believers. Many unbelievers have set out to disprove God but have ended being used by God to spread the Gospel.

I think all you need to do Pray and ask the Holy Spirit to lead you and guide you and also to give you the interpretation. When you come across a portion that had been altered the Spirit of God will GINGER YOU TO LOOK ELSE WHERE FOR THE REAL TEXT.

 

[dqhall]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

The Dead Sea Scrolls added new textual material for Bible scholars to consider after the KJV was published 400 years ago. The oldest Christian Bibles are from the 4th century. The oldest Hebrew Bible before the Dead Sea Scrolls were found is the Moscow Codex from the 9th century. The NIV scholars considered the Dead Sea Scrolls texts when preparing Old Testament sections of the NIV.

This article says modern Bibles differed from the Dead Sea Scrolls about 2% of the time indicating some corruption of the texts during copying and recopying happened. It also indicates preservation of passages over 2000 years is proven.
https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/what-are-the-dead-sea-scrolls/

The NIV is fine. I used uncopyrighted versions such as the KJV, ASV, or WEB when quoting scriptures in online discussion threads to avoid copyright infringement issues.

 

[LoricaLady]

"Watered down" is perfect. It's quite misleading in that way because it doesn't emphasise conviction that is necessary to teach righteousness. It places detrimental emphasis on flattering the reader and avoiding potentially divisive or offensive views. OTOH, there are some translations of the opposite description, but lacking grace as maybe WilliamBO noticed of parts of the KJV - (eg, the translator might have been having a bad day). NIV has too much potential to create weak faith, so I never can recommend it.

I agree. Further, if you ever listen to recordings of just the words of the Savior - available on You Tube - it is almost shocking how hard hitting and down right threatening He is. I mean, like most of the time!

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

I’d read both. The NIV is worse than the Jehovas Witness bible in changing and editing out verses but the KJV is sometimes difficult English.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

....
Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

A LOT is changed unbeknownst even today by multitudes, but that's okay for those you trust Yahweh and not men.

 

[Doulos 7]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

Now I am confused on what I should read or if I can even trust what I read if the words have been changed by man.

My friend, you will find that almost every one of the translations that we have in the 21st century have been distorted. This occurs when human beings take their own notions and twist what the scriptures have to say instead of applying the truth to their lives! Therefore I would not recommend the NIV because it holds the bar high for the false teaching known as Calvinism, and holds strongly to Luther's false notion of faith alone salvation. But I would strongly recommend to you the NASB because I have found that it holds to the original language the best! Paul said "study to show yourselves approved" for a good reason! If we don't do so we will not be in heaven! Therefore whatever translation you use, be sure that you are searching to see wether your translators distorted the meaning of the text or took the truth of God's word as it should taken!

 

[Monk Brendan]

The KJV and NIV have been the only books I started out with. It has came to my attention that the NIV has missing verses. And from online I am hearing the NIV and modern versions are Vatican versions.

There is NO truth in that rumor! While some may call the NIV the Non Inspired Version, that comes from Protestants, and not from the Vatican.

Then I hear that some of the text of the KJV has been altered because King James was a bisexual and found some things offensive. Now this is just what I heard.

King Jimmy (James I) was not just bisexual, he was straight out gay. He married and had children because that is what Royals do. But he was as queer as a football bat.

 

[All4Christ]

I don't know sketcher, thats why I asked here. This is one website I found, https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NIV/why.htm

While I don’t prefer the NIV version for various reasons, the website Jesus-Is-Savior tends to be sketchy - biased at best - and is not an authoritative site. I’d look elsewhere for evidence. Just my two cents

 

[Stringfellow_Hawke]

I use the King James Version as my main go-to and study translation. I do occasionally refer to the NLT or NIV (84 edition) for clarification and sometimes quick reading.

 

[Serving Zion]

I agree. Further, if you ever listen to recordings of just the words of the Savior - available on You Tube - it is almost shocking how hard hitting and down right threatening He is. I mean, like most of the time!

Could you post a link to that? It didn't appear for me in a search of YouTube.

Seeing as it is the spirit expressing through the words, much of the translator's heart and beliefs influence the spirit's potential through that vessel, and even more so with the breadth of vocal expression compared to written Word.

Thank you

 

[DW1980]

I’d read both. The NIV is worse than the Jehovas Witness bible in changing and editing out verses but the KJV is sometimes difficult English.

How can you say that?

The JWs New World Translation edits out Jesus deity, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, etc. You can study the NIV and you'd come away with normal Christian beliefs - something that can't be said for the NWT. I have a copy of it and can reference this!

 

[Neostarwcc]

I use both the KJV and NIV. Both translations have been tested rigorously for accuracy and are accurate. So it's good to pick up both a kid and a Nov bible.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

How can you say that?

The JWs New World Translation edits out Jesus deity, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, etc. You can study the NIV and you'd come away with normal Christian beliefs - something that can't be said for the NWT. I have a copy of it and can reference this!

Look up all the changes the NIV did comparing that to the JW Bible and you will find that the NIV does the same and worse. We could discuss the particulars but that is exactly what it does, removes the deity of Christ, a little bit here and a little bit there.

This is not noticed as much because most Christians do not get what they believe from the Bible. They get it from pastors or teachers or various other men who talk about what they believe and pick out the individual verses that support that. This is easily proven by showing Christians the verses that speak totally against the theology they hold to. The response is not the Berean one to study the Word to see if these things be so but to defend their position. Those who actually get their beliefs from the Bible are rare.