A few quesitons about NIV

[amixedupmom]

I would like very much to know the exact orgins of the NIV. If I believe the preface of my NIV Bible. It seems it was created from Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Which in fact the KJV 1611 Bible is too. I own one of these too. What bothers me is this. I have heard that the NIV beginnings were less than let's say Godly. Could someone please shead some light for me here?

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Lea:
I have heard that the NIV beginnings were less than let's say Godly. Could someone please shead some light for me here?

What specifically have you heard? It's easier to address the issue if we can provide a specific answer to a specific question.

Although I'll venture a guess.

The only common objection I encounter to the NIV's beginnings are about consultant (NOT translator) Virginia Mollenkott, who has since admitted to being a lesbian.

She was consulted over a period of about 6 months for her knowledge of English style and grammar. She gave the impression she was a "typical" evangelical Christian, and those of the NIV committee had no reason to doubt this. She did not "come out of the closet" until after the NIV was published. She had no input on any passages that dealt with sexuality.

The Executive Director of the NIV, Dr. Kenneth Barker, was publically asked about this and responded:

"It has come to my attention that false rumors are circulating, in both oral and written form, that the NIV is soft on sodomy (that is, homosexual sins). The alleged reason for this is that some NIV translators and editors were homosexuals or lesbians. These charges have no basis in fact. Thus they are simply untrue. And those who make such false charges could be legitimately sued for libel, slander, and defamation of character.

Here are the facts. It is true that in the earliest stages of translation work on the NIV (in the late 1960's), Virginia Mollenkott was consulted briefly and only in a minor way on matters of English style. At that time she had the reputation of being a committed evangelical Christian with expertise in contemporary English idiom and usage. Nothing was known of her lesbian views. Those did not begin to surface until years later in some of her writings. If we had known in the sixties what became public knowledge only years later, we would not have consulted her at all. But it must be stressed that she did not influence the NIV translators and editors in any of their final decisions."

What that what you were asking about?

 

[Dr. Bob]

COMPARISON:
KING JAMES (AV1611)</font>

• The goal of the AV1611 was to NOT make a "new" translation, but to update the Tyndale . . which is exactly what they did.</font>
• They continued to try to use "formally equivalent" (exactly the same type words) from the Greek into the modern English of 1611.</font>
• They used an eclectic text compiled by Catholic Erasmus from a small sample of Greek documents.</font>
• It was translated by 50 baby-baptizing Anglicans</font>

NIV</font>

• The goal of the NIV was TO make a "new" translation.</font>
• They used "dynamically equivalent" (using similar words and phrases) from the Greek into modern English of 1970.</font>
• They used an eclectic text compiled by hundreds of scholars and used 5000 Greek documents.</font>
• It was translated by a unique blend of scholars from all parts of Christianity.</font>

Hope this helps see the differences

 

[amixedupmom]

I think so. It's just hard to know which is right and which is wrong. As a christian i'm told to be careful . But, I often wonder what scandals arose out of the translation in the year 1611. I can't help to think that some people didn't like the fact the Bible was translated so everyone could read it. I think no matter what we do we will find err. Me, I just want to be able to trust the Bible I have in my hands is what God himself intended me to read. So I have a NKJV, KJV 1611, NIV, and i'll buy another version if I think it can help me understand more. My point in my Bible is to listen to God. Thanks for your help!

 

[Askjo]

Lea,

You have 2 hands holding Bibles: An accurate Bible version on your right hand and a corrupted bible version on your left hand. Question for you is: Which Bible version is the real The Word of God?

Did God give us one Bible in our mother tongue -- English?

Did God give us MANY bible versions in English-speaking language? Which best?

Did God give German people one Bible in their mother tongue?

Did God give them MANY bibles in German-speaking language? So are other foregin Bibles.

Are you ????

 

[dianetavegia]

Lea, you went from KJVO to the NIV. I wonder why you didn't go from the KJV to NKJV. That would have been much less of a shock to you.

Diane

 

[Forever settled in heaven]

Originally posted by Askjo:
Question for you is: Which Bible version is the real The Word of God?

Did God give us one Bible in our mother tongue -- English?

Did God give us MANY bible versions in English-speaking language? Which best?

Did God give German people one Bible in their mother tongue?

Did God give them MANY bibles in German-speaking language? So are other foregin Bibles.

Are you ????

thus saith the KJBO, "Yea, hath God said .... ?"

beware, Lea.

 

[Ransom]

Lea said:

I have heard that the NIV beginnings were less than let's say Godly. Could someone please shead some light for me here?

With such vague insinuations, it's difficult to know where to aim the spotlight.

(Of course, specific accusations from KJV-onlyists don't stand up to scrutiny.)

 

[Ransom]

Lea said:

But, I often wonder what scandals arose out of the translation in the year 1611. I can't help to think that some people didn't like the fact the Bible was translated so everyone could read it.

You're right. In fact, many of the accusations that are still levelled against modern translations of God's Word today were levelled against the KJV when it was new. People complained that the footnotes created confusion. They wondered what was wrong with the old translations. They said that continuous revision of the text was "changing" God's word.

Those accusations didn't hold water then, any more than they do now.

There was one prominent scholar, a man named Hugh Broughton, who was probably the day's most prominent expert on Hebrew. For some reason he was left off the translation committee, and subsequently he held a grudge against the translation. When the KJV was published, he fired off a rant excoriating the translation, complaining of the multiple places where an alternative translation was given in the margin that deserved to be in the text, and vice versa. He said that "I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches," and, "I require it to be burnt."

John Lightfoot, the Westminster divine, objected to the inclusion of the Apocrypha.

The Puritans perceived the KJV as a politically motivated version intended to undermine the popularity of the Geneva Bible of 1560 and solidify the episcopal system of church government. James I didn't like the negative tone of the Geneva notes concerning kings.

 

[Taufgesinnter]

Originally posted by Lea:
I think so. It's just hard to know which is right and which is wrong. As a christian i'm told to be careful . But, I often wonder what scandals arose out of the translation in the year 1611. I can't help to think that some people didn't like the fact the Bible was translated so everyone could read it. I think no matter what we do we will find err. Me, I just want to be able to trust the Bible I have in my hands is what God himself intended me to read. So I have a NKJV, KJV 1611, NIV, and i'll buy another version if I think it can help me understand more. My point in my Bible is to listen to God. Thanks for your help!

Keep in mind the Bible had been translated so that everyone could read it since 1525.

 

[Taufgesinnter]

Originally posted by Askjo:
Lea,

You have 2 hands holding Bibles: An accurate Bible version on your right hand and a corrupted bible version on your left hand. Question for you is: Which Bible version is the real The Word of God?

The situation begins with false assumptions about the Bibles in hand. Truth be told, though, both.

Did God give us one Bible in our mother tongue -- English?

No. I also find it interesting that your mother tongue is 1611 English, while the rest of us speak today's English.

Did God give us MANY bible versions in English-speaking language? Which best?

Yes. As for the second question, it makes invalid assumptions about the process of translation.

Did God give German people one Bible in their mother tongue?

No.

Did God give them MANY bibles in German-speaking language?

Yes. In fact, Anabaptists preferred the Froschauer Bible, and switched to Luther's only when theirs was unavailable after arriving in America.

So are other foregin Bibles.

That was some kind of non sequitur, but I'm unsure what.

Are you ????

A little. I find it very hard to see how any rational person armed with all the facts could be a KJVO. I was a TRO for many years, but I had read only materials from the TRO side at the time.

My answers are in italics. I'm not quire sure what "German-speaking language" is as opposed to just plain German, though.

Lea: Please read the excellent book Is My Bible the Inspired Word of God by Edward W. Goodrick. You should be able to get it through inter-library loan. It should answer all your questions!

 

[Jesus is Lord]

Originally posted by Askjo:

Did God give German people one Bible in their mother tongue?

Oh yes, he gave us Germans a wonderful Bible. It is the Schlachter Version 2000!!!

 

[RaptureReady]

Lea, I believe that the King James Bible is and will always be God's infallible, inerrant, pure word of God. You however must decide this for yourself. I would say pray and fast to seek God's will for your life. Here is a site that lists the differences between the King James Bible and the NIV. http://www.fbcsayville.com/dif.html

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
You however must decide this for yourself. I would say pray and fast to seek God's will for your life.

Good advice.

Here is a site that lists the differences between the King James Bible and the NIV.

As far as I can see, that site does not even mention, let alone discuss, the *reasons* for those differences. Lea, if you have any questions about the reasons, just let me know. Yes, decide for yourself, but make an *informed* decision.

 

[Taufgesinnter]

EXACTLY!! The linked site uses loaded language like "omitted verses" based on unspoken assumptions with no evidence provided.

[ September 08, 2003, 06:04 PM: Message edited by: Taufgesinnter ]

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

To quote the fbcsayville web site:
There are 31,101 verses in the King James Bible. The middle verse is Psalm 118:8. That verse is "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man." There are 14 words. Due to the even number of words the center word must actually be 2 words. Those words just happen to be the name of the author of the book "The Lord". No other "bible" can claim this due to their distortion of God's words.

On the surface, this sounds strangely like numerology.
I am curious as to how one can logically deduce that "the center word must actually be 2 words." Moreover, how does this prove that all other Bibles are a "distortion of God's Words?"
Once again, this does not support the total rejection of every other English Translation of God's Holy Word.

 

[gb93433]

I wonder what they would say when presented with a Bible that contains the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts? Of course we would have to have a Bible where it was certain of the text and it was impossible to have textual variants.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by HomeBound:

Here is a site that lists the differences between the King James Bible and the NIV. http://www.fbcsayville.com/dif.html

I note that the site has an "NIV Bible Quiz." I have a similar "KJV Bible Quiz" --

KJV QUIZ

INSTRUCTIONS:

Using the King James Version of the Bible, answer the following questions.

(1) John 14:14 contains important proof of Christ's divinity, since prayer is to be offered to God alone. According to this verse, who is it we are to ask for anything in Jesus' name?

(2) Fill in the blanks from Acts 4:25 -- "You spoke by __________ through the mouth of your servant, our __________ David."

(3) In Acts 16:7, Paul and his companions were not allowed to enter Bythinia. According to the verse, the Spirit of __________ prevented them?

(4) In Romans 1:4, who was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead?

(5) An important verse which teaches that the Holy Spirit is a person (and not a "thing" or an impersonal "it" ) is found in Romans 8:26. Find the personal reference to the Holy Spirit.

(6) Fill in the blanks from Romans 8:34 -- "...who is the one who condemns? __________ __________ is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us."

(7) Titus 2:13 is one of the clearest statements of Christ's divinity in the New Testament. According to this verse, for whose glorious appearing do we wait?

(8) Another important verse demonstrating Christ's divinity is found in 2 Peter 1:1. According to this verse, through whose righteousness have we received our precious faith?

(9) Complete the following phrase from the first part of 1 John 3:1 -- "How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is __________!"

(10) Fill in the missing words from Jude 25 -- "...to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through __________ __________ __________ __________ , before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen."

 

[Taufgesinnter]