Why the NIV cannot be the word of God, even thought it contains portions of God's word.

[tall73]

Dynamic equivalent? In the preface it was clearly stated that the purpose of the NIV was to remove things that separate religious sects. The word of God divides truth from lie, not removes truth to accommodate lies. It certainly is a conspiracy toward Ecumenicalism and this is clearly stated in the NIV preface. If you are approaching the NIV the way all modern versions are sold, believing their lies when they appeal to your intellectual aspirations, and ignoring the facts which when viewed objectively, a person will talk the way you are talking apparently not caring about the facts behind the NIV, elevating it to "dynamic equivalency" with the word of God when the facts prove it is the dynamic equivalent of Satan's aspiration to be dynamically equal with God. It seems to me that any Christian who fears God would have to destroy every NIV that they have.

You don't need the Bible at all to learn about Christ. You don't need the NIV or your favorite pet "dynamically weak attempt to equal" the word of God. The Devil can tell you all about Christ, and he will pick and choose bits and pieces to insert or remove exactly as the NIV does. The to say the NIV is a "dynamic equivalent" on par with the word of God, , assuming you mean it is equal in power to the word of God, is to elevate Satan as a "dynamic equivalent" with God. How in the world anybody can think the NIV is a "dynamic equivalent" to the word of God when it removes over 60,000 words, and entirely removes the "dynamic" dozens of doctrinally distinctive words listed in the posts above...amazing how anybody can say the NIV is a "dynamic equivalent", let alone actually believe that statement.


Please look at the facts of the NIV and you might want to reconsider your beliefs about God and His word. ........and the facts listed so far in this post are maybe half of the incriminations against the NIV as being a fraud, imposter, fake Bible and dynamically equal to nobody's word other than the Devil's.

Joe, the term dynamic equivalent is simply indicating the kind of translation it is supposed to be, thought for thought, not word for word. As I mentioned, I think it leans more in the direction of a paraphrase.

The rest of your comments seem to have little relation to what I said.

 

[tall73]

So you think the NIV is dynamically equal to God's word and there is nothing wrong with it. Fine.

Joe, you said before in the other thread you don't actually read what people say because you know what they will say already.That fact is quite clear in your comments here.

I did not say there was nothing wrong with it. I said I am not a fan, I think it leans too far to the paraphrase side of things, removes idioms, and I disagree with their choice of underlying text.

But of course, you already "know" what I think so you read it as something else altogether.

Joe, if your real goal is to spread good news, then realize you cannot do that effectively without some shade of credibility. When you don't even try to listen to what the other person is saying you lose that.

 

[tall73]

The preface makes clear that this is the intention of the NIV.

Quote the section you refer to in the preface so we can see what you are speaking about.

 

[tall73]

Again, to all posters, please keep the focus here on the NIV. While it is true that all modern versions have their roots in the corrupt Alexandrian family, I still want to keep the focus on exposing the NIV.

So you want to lie about the reasons why verses are not included in the NIV. They are not included in the NIV because those verses are not in the New Testament manuscripts that they thought most reliable.

Mikenold is actually addressing the real issue, the underlying manuscripts. You cannot determine whether the NIV is a good translation unless you consider what was translated--the Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts. You can't tell if a painting of a person is a good likeness of them without looking at the actual person to compare.

If the question is whether the NIV represents a good translation of God's word you first have to look at what it is translating.

 

[mikenold]

I'm still wondering what doctrines are missing from the NIV.

What is the agenda for leaving out these verses?

The NIV leaves out 16 entire verses!

1. Matthew 17:21: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."


2. Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."


3. Matthew 23:14: "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."


4. Mark 7:16: "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."


5. Mark 9:44: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


6. Mark 9:46: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


7. Mark 11:26: "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."


8. Mark 15:28: "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."


9. Luke 17:36: "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."


10. John 5:4: "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."


11. Acts 8:37: "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."


12. Acts 15:34: "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."


13. Acts 24:7: "But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"


14. Acts 28:29: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."


15. Romans 16:24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


16. I John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

 

[John Robie]

What is the agenda for leaving out these verses?

The NIV leaves out 16 entire verses!

1. Matthew 17:21: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."


2. Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."


3. Matthew 23:14: "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."


4. Mark 7:16: "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."


5. Mark 9:44: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


6. Mark 9:46: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


7. Mark 11:26: "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."


8. Mark 15:28: "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."


9. Luke 17:36: "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."


10. John 5:4: "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."


11. Acts 8:37: "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."


12. Acts 15:34: "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."


13. Acts 24:7: "But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"


14. Acts 28:29: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."


15. Romans 16:24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


16. I John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

You are avoiding the question. What doctrines are missing from the NIV?

 

[SaintJoeNow]

What is the agenda for leaving out these verses?

The NIV leaves out 16 entire verses!

1. Matthew 17:21: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."


2. Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."


3. Matthew 23:14: "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."


4. Mark 7:16: "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."


5. Mark 9:44: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


6. Mark 9:46: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


7. Mark 11:26: "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."


8. Mark 15:28: "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."


9. Luke 17:36: "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."


10. John 5:4: "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."


11. Acts 8:37: "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."


12. Acts 15:34: "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."


13. Acts 24:7: "But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"


14. Acts 28:29: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."


15. Romans 16:24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


16. I John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

And detractors who try to say there are no significant doctrinal changes in the deletions don't seem to care about things like the triune nature of God being removed in 1 John 5:7, and they don't seem to care that the critically important word, Godhead, is entirely removed, and they don't seem to care that "sodomite" "fornication" "effeminate" are completely removed, and they don't seem to care that "propitiation" is completely removed....and of course they don't care about the known lesbian who guided much of these perversions of God's word.

 

[mikenold]

You are avoiding the question. What doctrines are missing from the NIV?

Do you know what a Doctrine is?

Full Definition of DOCTRINE
1
archaic : teaching, instruction
2
a : something that is taught

b : a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

c : a principle of law established through past decisions

d : a statement of fundamental government policy especially in international relations

e : a military principle or set of strategies
We are speaking of definitions 1 and 2b, correct?

Here are the doctrines in those verses:

Prayer and fasting
Salvation
Eternal damnation
Forgiveness
Fulfillment of Scripture
Rapture
God's power
Grace
Trinity

If you don't believe that these are doctrinal issues, perhaps you should study biblical doctrine.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

The NIV also removes God's warning against "science falsely so called" from Timothy 6:20 and there is in the NIV no warning against avoiding fables. This is an accommodation for evolutionary science which is not true science at all but rather is attempts to build an unprovable theory based on a hypothesis. Evolution cannot be more than a hypothesis because it cannot be observed. The roots of the NIV are full of the rottenness of people who believed in evolution among other anti-Bible beliefs.

The Preface of the NIV clearly states the book was made to remove barriers between sects and belief systems so they could practice an inclusive form of religion rather than what Jesus promised would cause divisions even among immediate family members. Follow the NIV if you want to go with the flow of the world and try to get along with everybody. Follow Jesus Christ and you must carry your cross and deny yourself and the world will hate you as it hated Him....and leave the NIV where it belongs in the corruption which permeates it...it belongs in the rubbish heap.

 

[John Robie]

And detractors who try to say there are no significant doctrinal changes in the deletions don't seem to care about things like the triune nature of God being removed in 1 John 5:7, and they don't seem to care that the critically important word, Godhead, is entirely removed, and they don't seem to care that "sodomite" "fornication" "effeminate" are completely removed, and they don't seem to care that "propitiation" is completely removed....and of course they don't care about the known lesbian who guided much of these perversions of God's word.

What doctrines are missing?

 

[John Robie]

Do you know what a Doctrine is?

Full Definition of DOCTRINE
1
archaic : teaching, instruction
2
a : something that is taught

b : a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

c : a principle of law established through past decisions

d : a statement of fundamental government policy especially in international relations

e : a military principle or set of strategies
We are speaking of definitions 1 and 2b, correct?

Here are the doctrines in those verses:

Prayer and fasting
Salvation
Eternal damnation
Forgiveness
Fulfillment of Scripture
Rapture
God's power
Grace
Trinity

If you don't believe that these are doctrinal issues, perhaps you should study biblical doctrine.

So are you saying that those doctrines are completely missing from the NIV?

 

[Boidae]

I have come to the conclusion that it really doesn't matter what the KJVO people have to say, what matters is the best Bible version is the one you are going to consistently read.

These KJVO people are just people like us doing their best to work out their own salvation. If, just like in all things in life, you find their advice helpful take it, if not leave it. For me, it's not helpful, so I am leaving it.

I have my chosen translations/versions and they point towards Christ and our redemption. That is good enough for me.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Peter's warning against people who do not understand doctrine abusing the Bible trying to show their skills or talents or gifts or whatever.....

"...our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you...in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness." —2nd Peter 3:15-17

There were people corrupting the word of God back then the same as they are today. No matter how educated they were, they were referred to as unlearned due to their lack of understanding of Bible doctrine. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. No matter how much education a person has, if they do not fear God they do not have the beginning of knowledge, wisdom, or understanding and when they mess with God's word, they will be among the "unlearned" referred to in 2 Peter 3:15-17.

I don't think I need to quote the verses in Proverbs which state the beginning of wisdom, knowledge, and understanding being the fear of the Lord and NOT education. We know the Bible speaks of people who are "ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth", right?

 

[High Fidelity]

I have come to the conclusion that it really doesn't matter what the KJVO people have to say, what matters is the best Bible version is the one you are going to consistently read.

These KJVO people are just people like us doing their best to work out their own salvation. If, just like in all things in life, you find their advice helpful take it, if not leave it. For me, it's not helpful, so I am leaving it.

I have my chosen translations/versions and they point towards Christ and our redemption. That is good enough for me.

I think that's slightly idealistic.

How can we prove all things and test all things with a version less accurate than newer versions?

If people want the general jist of things then it doesn't really matter if it's word-for-word that's less accurate or thought-for-thought like the NIV.

 

[John Robie]

Peter's warning against people who do not understand doctrine abusing the Bible trying to show their skills or talents or gifts or whatever.....

"...our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you...in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness." —2nd Peter 3:15-17

There were people corrupting the word of God back then the same as they are today. No matter how educated they were, they were referred to as unlearned due to their lack of understanding of Bible doctrine. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. No matter how much education a person has, if they do not fear God they do not have the beginning of knowledge, wisdom, or understanding and when they mess with God's word, they will be among the "unlearned" referred to in 2 Peter 3:15-17.

I don't think I need to quote the verses in Proverbs which state the beginning of wisdom, knowledge, and understanding being the fear of the Lord and NOT education. We know the Bible speaks of people who are "ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth", right?

You still have not proven that there are doctrines missing from the NIV.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

I think that's slightly idealistic.

How can we prove all things and test all things with a version less accurate than newer versions?

If people want the general jist of things then it doesn't really matter if it's word-for-word that's less accurate or thought-for-thought like the NIV.

So the word of God is supposed to be less than ideal? Does that mean that God's word is whatever less-than-ideal interpretation suits your personal preference, and is not idealistic?
The word of God is supposed to be a "general jist of things" and not idealistic?

It sounds like you are still trying to move the discussion away from the NIV. We will get to your pet version in a future thread and show by the facts of it's history and changes that it is equally wicked as the NIV. Apparently you do not have enough appreciation for the NIV to defend it as being God's word, and I certainly can understand that.

Every modern version always claims to be a more accurate portrayal of God. Ultimately, they are all like the Devil who wants to portray himself as being a more accurate portrayal of what he thinks God should be. This is also the aspiration of atheists who make themselves God for themselves and think they have the right to exist outside of Hell because they are the god for themselves and they declare their own version of truth. This is the same basic philosophy of all modern versions, but this thread is for exposing only the NIV. Others will be exposed later. If you cannot defend the NIV here, you certainly will not be able to defend your pet version when a later thread focuses on it.

 

[Boidae]

I think that's slightly idealistic.

How can we prove all things and test all things with a version less accurate than newer versions?

If people want the general jist of things then it doesn't really matter if it's word-for-word that's less accurate or thought-for-thought like the NIV.

You are probably right, it probably is idealistic, but it is how I choose to approach KJVO people now.

I have read from the KJV, the NKJV, the NIV and ESV and they all point to our redeemer and God's plan for our salvation. Maybe what I am saying is simplistic, but in a nutshell that is what the Bible is. A compass that points to our redeemer and how we can get there.

As our marriage counselor pointed out in our last session, I am a very matter-of-fact person.

 

[High Fidelity]

Notice that in verse 17 above, the Bible calls Bible-corrupters WICKED! The word "stedfastness" in verse 17 means to be doctrinally sound in the Christian faith. The wicked people who put the NIV together were not doctrinally sound. In fact, they readily admit this in the preface to the NIV. Look for yourself. They state that they wanted to publish a new Bible that was free of any sectarian bias (i.e., that wouldn't offend any particular religious group).

So they got everybody together, compromised the Word of God, and published a perverted Bible that satisfied each group. Of course, there were no blood-washed, born-again, Christ-honoring, Hell-fire and damnation, Sin-hating, soulwinning believers invited. Their STATED MAIN PURPOSE was not to preserve THE TRUTH; but rather, to publish a translation that was non-offensive to the participating religious denominations (i.e., WIDELY MARKETABLE). The NIV is as ecumenical as you can get (i.e., they all set aside their doctrinal differences in sinful compromise to further one-world religious unity). Biblically, God commands us to be divided by truth, rather than be united by error (2nd Corinthians 6:14-17). The Word of God magnifies TRUTH; whereas, the devil's crowd magnifies UNITY.
So the word of God is supposed to be less than ideal? Does that mean that God's word is whatever less-than-ideal interpretation suits your personal preference, and is not idealistic?

Idealistic in the sense that 'just reading the bible' isn't OK. It depends what interpretation. If people want to choose inferior translations like the KJV/NIV/NRSV etc.

We should strive to have the most accurate, literal word-for-word translation available because the wrong word in the wrong place is no different to thought-for-thought versions like NIV.

 

[tall73]

What is the agenda for leaving out these verses?

The NIV leaves out 16 entire verses!

1. Matthew 17:21: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."


2. Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."


3. Matthew 23:14: "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."


4. Mark 7:16: "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."


5. Mark 9:44: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


6. Mark 9:46: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


7. Mark 11:26: "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."


8. Mark 15:28: "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."


9. Luke 17:36: "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."


10. John 5:4: "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."


11. Acts 8:37: "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."


12. Acts 15:34: "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."


13. Acts 24:7: "But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"


14. Acts 28:29: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."


15. Romans 16:24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


16. I John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

You know full well what the "agenda" is. Those verses are not found in the manuscripts they are convinced are the best. And you alluded to it earlier in this thread when you mentioned they follow the minority text.

 

[tall73]

The Preface of the NIV clearly states the book was made to remove barriers between sects and belief systems so they could practice an inclusive form of religion rather than what Jesus promised would cause divisions even among immediate family members.

This is the third time you referenced this with no quotation given. Please post the quotation.