Missing from the NIV

And logic be damned!!! My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts!!!

 

This is what Strong's has to say about the Hebrew word... the definition of which is what is really important.

Strong's Number: 0457 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
lyla apparently from (0408)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
'eliyl TWOT - 99a
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
el-eel' Adjective Masculine

Definition
1-of nought, good for nothing, worthless
a- of physicians, a shepherd, a divination
b- of false gods


King James Word Usage - Total: 20
idol 17, image 1, no value 1, things of nought 1

Since the context of the passage is a bad shepherd. The MV translation makes much more sense than "idol." The passage has nothing to do with idolatry.

 

Again I feel compelled to point out that Vs. 7 of your Ps 12:6-7 is referring to God keeping his PROMISE to keep the Godly man from ceasing. It is not referring back to vs. 6. That is another problem with the "verse system". It helps mutilate English and what the actual subject is...is this of God, or is IT an attempt by Satan, KJVers?

AJL

 

Would you please point out to me where he said, "Please take out your King James Version" of the Bible? I'd like to see it in black and white please.
Get a grip folks, even the translators admitted that it was just a TRANSLATION of the Bible, and an IMPERFECT one at that! Can't you who use the KJV exclusively grasp that fact? If not, you have fallen into a cult-like grip of KJV onlyism, and that is a shame!

AJL

 

Can I again point out that the KJV and the NIV aren't based on the SAME UNDERLYING TEXTS? So, the NIV actually is a CORRECT TRANSLATION of it's own underlying texts...which by the way, do not change ANY of the doctrines of the Bible, therefore allowing one to keep their faith in the truth of God's Word in tact!

AJL

 

1- Romans 14:23 has nothing to do with having faith that the KJV is the perfect Word of God.

2- 2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. This is the essence of scholarship. The dogged pursuit of truth.

3- 2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; This is the opposite of scholarship. The denial of truth.

4- The originals are not out of reach. They are preserved in the manuscript evidence. The KJV came from part of that evidence. It was not inspired.

5- "FAITH" does not contradict truth, else it becomes superstition.

6- Where did God say He would perfectly preserve His Word only in the KJV?

 

Well, I don't have a scholarship and I still believe the KJV is and will always be the best!

I have read many versions and they all come up short.
I believe some people don't read the KJV because it is harder for them to understand.

Before I got saved I tried to read it and always put it down after a few minutes because I couldn't understand it. So I went out and bought other, easier versions. Remember "The Book". Oh, it was an easy read. But even as a sinner I knew it was missing something.
Also had the NIV. Doesn't even begin to stack up with the beautiful Word that is translated in the KJV.

The KJV has stood the test of time.

What is the main reason some of you don't like it?

Susan

 

Japheth said:

It was the Gnostics and Philosophers of Alexandria,Egypt

I doubt that Japeth has a single scrap of evidence that "Gnostics" had anything to do with the current form of the critical New Testament text.

 

Been reading these threads for months Susan and dont recall anyone ever saying they dont like the KJV. What many have done is spend a lot of time defending the Word of God, whether it be in the NASB, NIV, or any other Bible we love against those who classify them as "manifestations of satan" On the whole, I find those with a much better grasp of the facts than I profess nothing but admiration and love for the KJV. They (and I), just have a hard time with listening to the Word of God being run down. Thanks.

 

Scott J said:

Since the context of the passage is a bad shepherd. The MV translation makes much more sense than "idol."

Oddly enough, if it had said an idle shepherd instead of an idol one, it would make perfect sense.

That's an interesting coincidence. I wonder how often a homonym in Hebrew turns out to be homophonic in English as well?

 

susanpet asked:

What is the main reason some of you don't like it?

The KJV is just fine as it is. What we "don't like" is not the KJV, but those misguided souls who feel the need to cast doubt on other faithful translations and thereby lead believers astray.

 

This verse does not apply to adding or detracting from one translation to another. It only applies to adding or subtracting text to/from the original text. Of course, since the original text is sometimes at issue, this can sometimes prove difficult.

The NIV is a faithful translation from the riginal Greek and Hebrew. Whether it contains more or less single words than other translations is irrelevant.

 

\o/ Glory to the Lord \o/

\o/ Praise be to Jesus \o/

Pioneer: //The word "hell" does not appear in the Old Testament
text of the NIV.//

However, the concept for which the word "hell" stands
is very present there. You have something against
using a dictionary?

HELL4 -- the abode of the dead; Sheol or Hades.

"Sheol" is the transliteration of a Hebrew
term meaing the abode of the dead.
"Hades" is the transliteration of a Greek
term meaning the abode of the dead.
"Hell" has numerous meanings.
The Translators of the NIV contrued it better
to use in the Old Testament (a very Hebrew
book collection) the very decidedly Hebrew
term "sheol" instead of the confusing t
Gothic term "hell". I believe the translators
of the NIV did well in this matter.

Study the etymology of the term "hell" and you
will see it is a very poor term that has been
relagated to the level of slang.
The use of the term has degenerated the concept
as taught in the Holy Scriptures and distorted
those teaching. It is good that the inerrant
Holy NIV has dropped that term from the O.T.

Example: It is generally construed in this
world that Satan is the warden of eternal hell.
Satan is NOT the warden of eternal hell, in fact
eternal hell was created by God especially
for the eternal punishment of Satan. Satan
is to be the chief prisioner of hell.

Pioneer: "The name of Jesus is removed 36 times.
The name of Christ is removed 44 times.
The name of Lord is removed 35 times.
The name of God is removed 31 times."

Unable to tell what you mean here. So i'll guess
The name of the Christ is Jesus.
The name of my Lord is Jesus.
The name of God is Jesus.
Why didn't you use the term in quotation
marks like you did with "hell"?
Here is what i think you ment:

The term "Jesus" is removed 36 times.
The term "Christ" is removed 44 times.
The term "Lord" is removed 35 times.
The term "God" is removed 31 times.

But, i allow i may be guessing.
Anyway, methinks you may have a "removed" problem.
Define what "removed" means in these statements.
For example, were the Greek/Hebrew terms in
the source that was translated into NIV?
Or are these terms seen in the KJB but
not in the NIV? Did you know that in the KJB
there are multiple insertions of words
that are not justified by the source from which
the KJB was translated? No, i'm not going to
go count them, i have a secular job, i have
a family, i have a ministry.

Pioneer: //The resource material used for the above information
is the booklet entitled "Modern Bibles - the Dark
Secret" by Jack Moorman. //

I don't have this source handy.
I remember the first condemnation of the NIV
booklet i studied in 1963 was passed out by
a KJB salesman. Of course they wanted me to
buy a KJB, that is what they were selling.

Recommendation:
Make the following assumption:

God, by His Divine Providence, has preserved
His infallible written word for this generation
in the NIV.

Go buy a NIV. Study it. It is the infallible
written word of God. If you already have some
other English version of the Bible,
study them side by side. Study with prayer.
The Holy Spirit will guide you to MORE knowledge
than just one version alone. Anybody who
has told you otherwise is being deceptive.
Remember, if this is true:

God, by His Divine Providence, has preserved
His infallible written word for this generation
in the NIV.

Than anybody who speaks against the NIV is
really speaking against the infallible written
word of God. In the old days we called them
"Bible bashers". Don't be a Bible basher,
be a Bible student. Thank you.

Pioneer: "(all modern
versions are based upon the Westcott and Hort Text)"

Your statement is incorrect. KJBO propagandists
would have you believe it. KJBO pamplet makers
are unreliable sources of information.
In fact, the KJBO objection boils down to one
and only one argument:
Versions not the KJV are not no good at all.

 

\o/ Glory to the Lord \o/

\o/ Praise be to Jesus \o/

Tri Hard: "By the way, which KJV are you talking about? "

[defamatory remarks deleted]
You should know by now if the KJV itself doesn't
tell which KJB version it is, how can they ever find
space to put in their propaganda packages

Tri Hard: "Nevermind. I looked at your website and it says that
you stand solely upon the 1611 King James Bible
as the final authority."

Ah. We all know what that means
He used the AUTHORIZED VERSION (AV), you know, the
only version authorized by God Himself.
Yep, the KJB was good enough to get
Paul & Silas singin' in jail -- and it is GOOD ENOUGH
FOR ME! TEEHEE.

Quote by Pioneer ---------------
Proverbs 30:6 - "Add thou not unto his words, lest
he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
--------------------------------

Please, for my sake cite your source.
I have over a dozen different English translations,
each one of which contains the plenary
infallible written word of God. I would like to
check out your scripture references. Thank you.

Oh yes, i might mention that two of those
"over a dozen" Bibles i have say KJV on them
but they are different from each other. Have fun
finding out from the KJB in your office or house.
Most KJVs deceptively withhold from their
readers which edition they
are. I wonder why that deception is necessary?

BrianT: " ... the name "Jesus" occurs *300* more times
in the NIV than the KJV."

Thank you, Brother BrianT -- i didn't know that.
I really like the name "Jesus" -- it is cool.
I note in my REAL KJV1611 that His name keeps
comming up "Iesus the sonne of God"

Japheth: "Bottom line;
I believe(unlike many) that we have a perfect
infalable word OF GOD!!!!!"

Amen, Brother Japheth -- Preach it!
God, by His Divine Providence, has preserved
His infallible written word for this generation
in the NIV.

[Moderator: Sarcasm is fine until it becomes personal.]

[ September 13, 2002, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Bob 63 ]

 

The word "hell" does not appear in the Old Testament text of the NIV.

And that's great. That Norse concept should not be there to replace the grave and the depths.

If you're "Pioneer," go back to making biscuit mix. That has more substance than what you're putting on here.

 

Well said Ransom! Thank you

AJL

 

Pioneer, I anticipate your answer to my previous response

 

But the problem when most people say "the verse is not there" is that IT IS THERE...it's got a letter or number and then is down in a footnote with an explanation. Some "missing" aren't in the underlying texts for their version, so they are still a correct interpretation. And still no one has proven that they change the doctrine. The verse numbering system (to me at least) seems irrelevant. It wasn't implemented until long after the texts were written.

AJL