Take the NIV Challenge

[JagSayon]

Friends, until recently, I have been using the NIV version since I remember and I thought it was a good translation. But I have stumbled across a NIV challenge test to test the NIV against the KJV. And I made a startling discovery - the NIV has made ommisions to the Word of God. Take the test to find out. It would be better if you had a KJV to counter check. Here are sample questions:

[line]Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies,__________ them that curse you, ______________ to them that hate you, and pray for them that __________ and persecute you."

My NIV says, "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you that you may be sons of your Father in heaven". But my KJV says, "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;"

[line]Another question taken from my source website: Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A______________ and O___________, the _________ and the _______:"

The NIV would say, "which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.". But my KJV says, "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, what thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum (I am uncertain of this spelling), and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.".

[line]Here is my source Click Here. A related site which says Why You Should Use the KJV - Click Here. Dear friends, are you using a 'watered down' version of the Bible? Because if every new translation omits a few words here and there, it wouldn't be long before the Bible is totally corrupted. Its part of Satan's ploy. Don't fall for it!

Jag

 

[Ioustinos]

1) The KJV is not the standard to which we judge modern translations. Rather we judge them by the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts.

2) The NIV is not a "word-for-word" translation such as the RSV, NASB, NKJV, but rather it was translated to convey the thoughts of each passage.


So if it is a good devotional bible or bible to use for scripture memorization, then the NIV is a good bible to use. But for deep study I suggest RSV, NASB, or NKJV.



Jesaiah

 

[JagSayon]

2) The NIV is not a "word-for-word" translation such as the RSV, NASB, NKJV, but rather it was translated to convey the thoughts of each passage.

The NIV was definitely not a word-for-word translation simply because it has ommited certain words. When you translate text, you normally include ALL the points from the original script, but as you can see from the test, these words were non-existent. In no way has there been reference to the ommited words. Look at my 2 sample questions based on the NIV and compare to the KJV, surely there is a difference and if it was translated to convey the thoughts of each passage, then they must have left out quite a few parts.

Here are some explanations to my claims Click Here As a note, The King James Bible translators used a superior method in translating called formal equivalency. Formal Equivalence, sometimes called Verbal Equivalence is a method of translation, which takes the Greek, and Hebrew words and renders them as closely as possible into English. This is the method used by the King James translators and is certainly a superior method, seeing that our Lord is concerned about every word, even the jots and tittles (Matthew 5:18; 24:35).

The modern versions of the Bible use dynamic equivalency, also called concept inspiration in their translations. Dynamic Equivalence is not following a word for word translation but changing, adding, or subtracting from the original to make it flow as the translator sees fit. We are warned against this in the Bible (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:5-6; Revelation 22:19). The New International Version is this type of a version.

Peace

Jag

 

[Ioustinos]

The NIV was definitely not a word-for-word translation simply because it has ommited certain words. When you translate text, you normally include ALL the points from the original script, but as you can see from the test, these words were non-existent. In no way has there been reference to the ommited words.

Actually most NIV bibles have notes that explain the supposed "missing" words.

As a note, The King James Bible translators used a superior method in translating called formal equivalency

Actually such translations as the RSV, NASB, and NKJV use the same method. An arcticle on this is found in the book "Rediscovering Expository Preaching" by John MacArthur Jr. and the Master's Seminary faculty, to which I will quote a small passage:

"Side-by-side with the newer emphasis in translation, the traditional philosophy of literal translation, labeled "formal equivalence" and then "formal correspondence" by the theorists of the American Bible Society, continues to present its candidates: the Revised Standard Version, the Modern Language Bible, the New American Standard Bible, the New American Bible, and the New King James Version.

Anther book you may want to read concerning translations is "Toward a Science of Translating" by E. Nida.


But the NIV is a dynamic-equivalence Bible. Others include the Good News Bible, the New English Bible, and the Jerusalem Bible. Then there are the bibles that are "paraphrased" such as the Phillips Modern Bible and the Living Bible.


So you are wrong to say that only the KJV translators used the formal equivalence method, but you are correct in labeling the NIV as a dynamic equivelent. Yet there are some good bibles that are still translated using the formal equivalence method, which have been mentioned earlier.


Jesaiah


PS. If you are looking for good, scholarly documents concerning the KJV vs Modern Translations debate then Jack Chick is not your man. There are certainly more detailed documents (and more scholarly) that what you will find on than what is on Chick's website. This is just for future reference for most people will quickly disregard anything written by Jack Chick.

 

[JagSayon]

Actually most NIV bibles have notes that explain the supposed "missing" words.

Very interesting, mine doesn't seem to have it. It must be absent from the 'most' cohort. 

PS. If you are looking for good, scholarly documents concerning the KJV vs Modern Translations debate then Jack Chick is not your man. There are certainly more detailed documents (and more scholarly) that what you will find on than what is on Chick's website. This is just for future reference for most people will quickly disregard anything written by Jack Chick.

I realised that. The information that I take is from Here. But the test questions are from Jack Chick's site. I've compared the verses and they are true. As for the part where notes are written about the missing verses, I don't have it in my NIV. Hmm, maybe its time to go for some Bible shopping

Jag

 

[Ioustinos]

Most NIV study bibles have footnotes that help with this issue.



Jesaiah


PS. I personally use the NIV only because it is required in one of my bible classes but I prefer either the NKJV or NASB.

 

[\o/]

The omissions are not necessarily restricted the the NIV. Most modern translations also come from the same Greek texts which omit some wording that are in the Greek textus receptus, from which the KJV comes.

The KJV has numerous errors.

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired . Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, is imbued with thoughts. But the words receive the impress of the individual mind. The divine mind is diffused. The divine mind and will is combined with the human mind and will; thus the utterances of the man are the word of God.

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen.

 

[\o/]

KJV fanatics, look here. Read and weep.
http://bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm

 

[JagSayon]

Yes I am a KJV fanatic. I'll read that up. Thanks.

Jag

 

[seebs]

Jag: What if the reason a word is absent in a newer translation is that it was *ADDED* by the translators of the KJV?

The KJV has its fair share of errors, too. It's what happens when we try to transcribe things that human language can't quite handle.

 

[CoreIssue]

Well, having taken part in many KJV Only debates there are some issues not reflected here.

The KJV used the Majority Manuscripts. They are called majority because they are the largest in number. But they are the largest because they were controlled by the Roman Catholic Church and were the only allowed manuscripts to be used.

Nor are they the most accurate. The most accurate are the smallest body of the Minority Manuscripts. The Neutral Texts.

And they do not agree with the Majority Text. They are older and purer because they were hidden dormant in an isolated region for centuries avoiding the tamperings of the RCC.

They are more in agreement with the NIV and NASB.

Sorry KJV Only people.

So, many of the so-called omissions were actually additions by the RCC scribes. And many others were dynamic translation adds by the KJV scholars.

But, God is great! He promised to preserve every law and teaching. Not preserve everything word for word.

And not one teaching is absent or in disagreement between any of the translations.

If you every have a chance to see a study of the original 1611 KJV you should. I know where one is going on right now but do not want to be accused of spamming.

But it is an eye opener. Especially for those of the KJV Only belief.

This is a big subject. And one that should not divide the Body of Christ.

 

[Jesusong]

Having also taken part in many KJV only debates, and also being a former KJV onlyist, I'll add my 2¢

The KJV used the Majority Manuscripts

That statement is not correct.

Of all the 5300+ Greek manuscripts we have of the New Testament, they are broken down into 3 textual bases (a manuscript can contain all or part of the NT, or even one page or fragment of a page). All of our English translations are based on one of these textual bases.

1. Textus Receptus: (also called TR, Recieved Text, & erronously the Traditional Text) This text has its origins in 1516. It is a compilation of seven manuscripts (mss) the earliest being from the 11th century. It has gone through several revisions by different scholars. This is the text of the King James Version, and the New King James Version. No other English translations are based on this text.

2. Majority Text: This text has, as the name implies, the majority mss. Scholars count the number of mss which contain a certain passage and the highest number wins. No English translation to date is based on the Majority Text, although the text is referenced in the footnotes of the NKJV.

3. Eclectic Text: Each passage of the NT is weighed against all evidences both internal & external as to its originality. The text is based on the theory that the date and quality of the manuscripts is more important than the number of manuscripts. What this means is that sometimes because of the early date and perceived superiority of the text, the readings chosen for the Eclectic Text are based on only a few manuscripts. All modern English translations are based on this text.

This is pretty much a summary in a nutshell. 

 

[Jephunneh]

Instructions: Using the New International Version Bible, answer the following questions. Do not rely on your memory. As the Bible is the final authority, you must take the answer from the Bible verse (not from footnotes but from the text).

 

1. Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies, _____ them that curse you, _____ to them that hate you, and pray for them that _____ and persecute you."

According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of demon?

According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth?
 
According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name?
 
In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted His garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV.
 
In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out demons and to _____.

According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear?
 
According to Luke 7:28, what was John (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc)? What is his title or last name?

In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know?
 
In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do?
 
In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus?

According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written?

In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with His fish?

John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man?

What happened each year as told in John 5:4?

In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus?

In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism?

What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6?

Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34.
 
Study Acts 24:6-8. What would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command?
 
Copy Romans 16:24 word for word from the NIV.

First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh?

In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do?

Who are the three Persons of the Trinity in First John 5:7?

Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A_____ and O_____, the _____ and the _____:"
BONUS: According to Second Samuel 21:19, who did Elhanan kill?


Conclusion: Although little space is provided for your answers, it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you failed the test.

So now what do you think of your "accurate, easy-to-understand, up-to-date Bible?"

If you would like a perfect score, take this test using the Authorized King James Bible.

 

Test your NIV,By Rex L. Cobb,The Battle Cry, January/February, 1999

 

[CoreIssue]

Jesusong,

Sorry.

The Received Text is a false and misleading title. They were not received from God as the title intends. And it is just another name for the Majority Text.

This is a pretty good breakdown of the issues of manuscripts. Pretty neutral and scholastic in approach:

http://members.aol.com/rbiblech/MiscDoctrine/TextualCriticismOfTheBible.htm

 

[CoreIssue]

Jephunneh,

That test is nonsense. It is based on the premise the KJV is the only true Bible.

Try proving it with history. You cannot.

And it is not a word for word translation. It is Dynamic.

Check it out. Go the Interlinear and compare the texts of those supposed deletions against the Greek text below the English.

Oh, my! Many of the words used in the KJV are NOT in the Greek text!

There is a study on this issue going on at my home page as regards the original 1611 KJV. Not the one you are using.

Very enlightening. The facts are not what the KJV Only "experts" are pushing.

 

[Jesusong]

CoreIssue,

I went to your website & thought it was very good.

The Received Text is a false and misleading title

I agree, the term "Received Text" is the English translation of "Textus Receptus" which is Latin. The term came from an advertisment of the Elzivir Bros. edition of Erasmus' Greek Text.

And it is just another name for the Majority Text.

I'm not going to quibble over this except to say that the "Majority Text" proponents would argue this issue in saying that there is a difference between the "Textus Receptus" & "Majority Text" and that the two are not the same. Similar? Yes. The same? No.

But that's not for me to figure out.

 

[cthoma11]

Originally posted by CoreIssue
Jephunneh,

That test is nonsense. It is based on the premise the KJV is the only true Bible.

Good point.

To restate the painfully obvious, lets instead assume the NIV is the only correct version. Then the test is showing that the KJV has added all the listed verses and words to what God originally said.  In this case the KJV would be doing the same as the cults, adding to the word of God. Again, this conclusion  would be nonsense.

Showing the NIV is different in its translation (from its manuscripts) than the KJV is in its translation (from its manuscripts) in no way proves nor denies the accuracy of either translation, nor the reliability of each set of manuscripts.

 

Note: Edit to correct a gramatical error

 

[Hishandmaiden]

I believe that while the NIV do contain some errors in it, please remenber that it is a sentence for sentence translation, and not a word for word translation. Be glad that you have a bible, even when it does contains some errors in it.
Be glad that you have the NIV, which is much cheaper to buy in my country than KJV or NKJV.
Don't forget that it is a privileage for the English-speaking people that you have many versions of Bible.
In some tribes, they only have one version of bible, and it is more full of error than the NIV, since it is translated by laymen?
Do they complain?
No, they rejoice!!!!

Rejoice that you have a bible.
In some tribes, the only bible they have is the words of mouth that are passed on from their pastors to them?
So, are they slaves of Satan, then since they occasionally misinterpret the
words of God, due to poor memories?
No! They rejoice in their salvation.

So, rejoice in your salvation!!!
Rejoice that you have a bible!!!!
Rejoice that the NIV version has helped many, too, find salvation in God!!!
Rejoice that God works in different ways!!!
Rejoice that the NIV is also the words of God!!!

Rejoice and never forgets this.
A bible with mistakes is better than no bible at all.
After all, what is not perfect in NIV, God can make perfect through his teaching by his Holy Spirit.

God is the one who teaches, and not a book!

That is just my opinion.

 

[Julie]

NIV---The World's Fastest Bible Memory Plan ---NIV

Guaranteed 100% success
Memorize 17 Bible verses in less than ten minutes


This amazing Bible memory program is by far and away the most amazing system ever developed. Even if you are a poor reader, or think you are too old to commit Bible verses to memory this plan will work for you.

First, you must have a New International Version bible. This memory plan is designed to work only with the NIV. As you follow this plan you will be amazed at how simple, easy to understand, and perfect for memory work the NIV will prove to be.

Second, turn in your NIV and see that you too can learn every word of these seventeen verses in less than ten minutes.
Matthew 17:21
Matthew 18:11
Matthew 23:14
Mark 7:16
Mark 9:44
Mark 9:46
Mark 11:26
Mark 15:28
Luke 17:36
Luke 23:17
John 5:4
Acts 8:37
Acts 15:34
Acts 24:7
Acts 28:29
Romans 16:24
1 John 5:7

Wasn't that easy?(sure, cause they are ALL gone from the NIV)
Now memorize the following verses from the Authorized King James Bible and never forget them.

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar (Proverbs 30:5-6).

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book (Revelation 22:18, 19).

 

[Jephunneh]

Originally posted by Julie
NIV---The World's Fastest Bible Memory Plan ---NIV

Guaranteed 100% success
Memorize 17 Bible verses in less than ten minutes


This amazing Bible memory program is by far and away the most amazing system ever developed. Even if you are a poor reader, or think you are too old to commit Bible verses to memory this plan will work for you.

First, you must have a New International Version bible. This memory plan is designed to work only with the NIV. As you follow this plan you will be amazed at how simple, easy to understand, and perfect for memory work the NIV will prove to be.

Second, turn in your NIV and see that you too can learn every word of these seventeen verses in less than ten minutes.
Matthew 17:21
Matthew 18:11
Matthew 23:14
Mark 7:16
Mark 9:44
Mark 9:46
Mark 11:26
Mark 15:28
Luke 17:36
Luke 23:17
John 5:4
Acts 8:37
Acts 15:34
Acts 24:7
Acts 28:29
Romans 16:24
1 John 5:7

Wasn't that easy?(sure, cause they are ALL gone from the NIV)
Now memorize the following verses from the Authorized King James Bible and never forget them.

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar (Proverbs 30:5-6).

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book (Revelation 22:18, 19).

LOL , that's a good one Julie!