The subject of Bible translations has been a tremendously interesting study for me. When I started the research, I was using the NIV. I was not prepared for the deception and misguiding information that I have found coming from Christian scholars. In the following pages, I will share with you what has been removed from and added to the Word of God in the modern Greek text that the NIV and most other modern translations have been translated from. You will see for yourself the seriousness of the problems in the NIV as well as most of the other modern Bible translations — The Contemporary English Version, The New American Standard Version, The American Standard Version, The Revised Standard Version, The Living Bible, The New Revised Standard Version, The New Jerusalem Bible, The New American Bible, and others.
You will find that those translations, which are translated from the same corrupt modern Greek text as the NIV, are missing many of the same words, phrases, and entire verses as the NIV.
The most significant subject facing the Church in the 21st Century is the Bible, what version is used and preached from, the Greek text it was translated from, and the way it is translated. Every Christian doctrine is based on the Bible. The way the Bible reads, the words that it has and the words that it does not have, the way the Greek words are translated or poorly translated, all affect the beliefs and teachings of the Church. At one point I thought that most translations of the Bible were basically the same except for the modernization of the old English in the KJV. As you will see for yourself, this is not the case. Most of the modern translations do not have everything that the KJV does, as a result of changes in the Greek texts from which they are translated.
Are you looking for something more than just the same old concepts, interpretations, explanations, and perspectives you have heard regurgitated over and over again? This website will give you some new insights and things to think about. You may not agree with everything you read, but Biblical Research Reports will stimulate your thinking. Our goal is to help you to formulate in your own mind what is Jesus’ truth as you look at the research we share on the various subjects facing the Church.
God tells us that the Bible is pure, is truth, and words are not to be added to or removed from it. However, when two translations of the Bible say two different things in the same verse, subconsciously people’s trust in the purity, and absolute truth of the Bible is eroded. When two translations say different things, which one is truth? Or are they both what God said? Christians then have to become judges of Scripture and pick which reading they like best. Therefore, you hear “I like the way it says it in this translation,” rather than “This is what God says.”
As Christians we need to know what is truth, and what translations of the Bible can be trusted as having all the Words of God. We need a firm foundation, not the shifting sand of Bible versions in which the words are continually changing. My desire is that in the pages of this book you will find which translations can be fully trusted as having all the Words of God, and which translations are based on a Greek text that is constantly changing and can not be trusted as having all the Words of God.
In the following pages, I will share with you what has been removed from and added to the Word of God in the modern Greek text, and alert you to the seriousness of the problems that result in the NIV as well as most of the other modern Bible translations — The Contemporary English Version, The New American Standard Version, The American Standard Version, The Revised Standard Version, The Living Bible, The New Revised Standard Version, The New Jerusalem Bible, The New American Bible, and others. You will find that these translations, which are translated from the same corrupt modern Greek text as the NIV, are missing many of the same words, phrases, and entire verses as the NIV.
The Greek texts:
The main problem with the NIV is in the New Testament with the Greek text that it was translated from. There are only two Greek texts used today for translating English Bibles: The Textus Receptus (The Traditional Text), and the UBS 3rd /Nestle-Aland text. This may some times be referred to as the NU text.
I discovered that there has never existed an ancient Greek manuscript that reads the same as the Nestle and United Bible Society’s Greek text which the NIV, NASV, and most other modern translations are translated from. These modern translations have not been translated from an ancient Greek manuscript, but from a modern man made Greek text that was compiled from a hand full of ancient manuscripts (primarily from 2 manuscripts) which have many variant readings and many omissions. The Nestle Aland and United Bible Society’s Greek text (NU Greek text) is actually a 20th century Greek “manuscript” (actually a text) since there has never been a Greek manuscript that reads the same as it does.
A significant subject is that the Greek manuscripts that we are being told are the best do not agree with each other. They do not read the same. They are not identical. I have not found any scholar that refutes the fact that among the Alexandrian manuscripts upon which the modern NU Greek text (Nestle Aland/ United Bible Society text) is based, that there are not two manuscripts that read the same. In fact they testify to the fact that their “best” manuscripts do not agree because they have had to compile an eclectic Greek test. They have selected from the variant readings what they think might be the best reading. The result is that not only do their ancient manuscripts not agree with each other, but the resulting Greek text from which the NIV is translated does not agree with any ancient Greek manuscript. It does not read the same as any ancient Greek manuscript.
Those who write in support of the NIV sound convincing. However, I encourage you to evaluate carefully what they are saying. I have discovered that there are major gaps in the logic for the modern eclectic Greek text. Often there are opinions that are stated as facts without ancient manuscript proof given to back up what they are confidently saying. An example of this is in explaining why a particular phrase is not in the NU Greek text, they state that a particular phrase is clearly an example of a later scribe adding a phrase to make it read like another passage. They do not give the manuscripts that contain the phrase and the ones that do not, and the dates of the manuscripts so that you can judge for yourself that it is clearly inserted by a later scribe. When I would look up the evidence on the phrase, I would find that it was not as they made it appear. Often I found evidence (ex. the writings of the early church fathers) that was at least the same age and sometimes older than the manuscript that did not have the phrase, that included the phrase.
They also write from the premise that the early Alexandrian/Egyptian manuscripts, especially Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, read closest to the originals. I raise this question: “Why would the Alexandrian/Egyptian manuscripts read closest to the originals when most of the original copies of the New Testament books were sent to Asia which was on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea?” None of the originals were sent to Egypt.
A Testimony that the NU Greek text is not reliable:
The NIV, NASV, and a number of other modern versions do not completely follow the NU Greek text in translating. Some places they use the Textus Receptus or other sources rather than strictly translating from the Greek of the NU Greek text. In researching what was changed in the Bible in the NIV, it was not a simple matter of comparing the Textus Receptus and the NU Greek texts and noting what was changed. There were many places where something was removed or changed in the Greek in the NU Greek text but it was not removed or changed in the NIV. I also found that if something was missing in the NIV it did not automatically mean it was also missing in the NASV and vice versa. Each translation has done its own picking and choosing on conflicting readings.
By not strictly translating from the NU Greek text, the translators of the NIV, NASV, and others testify that they do not totally believe that the NU Greek text is completely reliable.
Why the Textus Receptus can be trusted as having the Words of God:
The Textus Receptus and the NU Greek texts are identical Greek texts except for the places noted in the next chapter as well as some others where the NIV followed the Textus Receptus rather than the NU text. The Textus Receptus is an established, fixed Greek text that has been held by Christians for almost 500 years as having the very Words of God. Approximately 95% of all known Greek manuscripts have the same reading as the Textus Receptus. It is not an eclectic Greek text that has been pieced together from conflicting manuscripts like the NU Greek text.
Critics of the Textus Receptus throw a lot of mud at it. In evaluating what they say, the majority of it is merely opinion and personal biases. In checking out statements by critics about particular phrases or verses that they say were clearly added by a later scribe, without fail I have found that phrase or verse was quoted as Scripture in the writings of one of the early Church Fathers a hundred or more years before the date of the earliest manuscript that did not have it. The phrase or verse was not clearly added by a later scribe.
Manuscript Evidence Given by the UBS Greek Text
Here you can see for yourself the manuscript evidence that the other side gives as the reason why, for what they have removed and changed in the Greek text. It is one thing to read one of their books and hear them give the reasonings in general and ambiguous terms. It is another to see the actual manuscript evidence that is given for yourself. These are the only early Greek manuscripts that NU Greek text quotes that did not have the reading.
The following is the manuscript basis that the United Bible Society’s Greek text gives as the basis for why they did not include the words, phrases and verses in the NU Greek text. This information is taken from the foot notes in the UBS 3rd Edition Greek Text and the companion book, A Textual commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger. That book explains why something was removed, added or changed in the NU Greek text.
Each manuscript is identified by a letter, number or a combination of a letter and a number such as C, 085, or p35. The date of the manuscript is beside it so that for each passage you can tell at a glance the age that they give for each manuscript.
In this section I have stated what was removed, followed by all the Greek manuscripts through the eighth century that are listed in the two above mentioned books as the basis for why it was removed or changed in the NU Greek text.
There are a number of things for you to observe in this section:
- Notice that the two main manuscripts given as the basis for removing something from the Word of God are the manuscripts Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. But notice that they do not always have the same reading. The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not always have the same word, phrase, or verse removed. Notice that they are not identical manuscripts.
- Notice how only a few manuscripts support a word, phrase, or verse being removed.
- Notice how the same Greek manuscripts are not listed for each verse.
- It illustrates what John Burgon stated that the main manuscripts used to change God’s Word, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D do not read the same. He only found one place where they all five agreed together in respect to a “various” reading. A “various” reading being a reading that is different from the majority of manuscripts.
- It indicates a significant amount of subjectivity on the part of the compilers of the NIV’s Greek text (The NU Greek text) as to what would be removed. These manuscripts are not identical. They do not read the same as each of the others.
- Observe how most of the manuscript evidence is around 300 or more years after most of the original manuscripts of the New Testament were written. If you think back to what has happened since 1701, you soon realize that 300 years is not very close to the originals. The manuscript evidence used to change the words of the Bible is not as ancient as the NIV supporters make it sound.
- Note the frequency of no manuscript documentation for something being removed. Of the 60 passages listed here, 28 of them – that is almost half of the passages, do not have any documentation by the UBS 3rd edition Greek text for why it was removed from the Word of God! The UBS 3rd edition Greek text has considerable documentation for phrases with variant readings where it was decided to keep the traditional reading. It surprised me how often it left out documentation when it removed something significant.
- Notice for yourself that there has never been a single ancient Greek manuscript that reads the same as the NIV’s Greek text! You will not find a single manuscript that is listed for every verse!
To remove subjectivity on my part in the selection of verses to use as examples, I chose the first 30 verses in each of the two most important sections: the Deity of Jesus Christ and His Lordship, and Salvation and the Judgment. One would assume that verses in these sections would be the best documented with manuscript evidence because of the significance of what is being removed or changed.
* indicates an entire verse that was removed.
** indicates that they give no manuscript basis for why it was removed from their Greek text!
The Deity of Jesus Christ and His Lordship
Matt. 1:25 removed – “firstborn” (From “And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
071 5th/6th centuries
**Matt. 13:51 removed “Lord” (from “Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Matt. 19:16 removed – “Good” (From “And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
L 8th century
Matt. 19:17 removed – “God” (From “And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments”) Also, part of v.17 is changed because “good” was removed in v. 16.
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
Matt. 22:32 “God” is changed to “He” implying that Jesus did not consider Himself as
God.
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century
L 8th century
**Matt. 23:8 removed – “even Christ” (from “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ ; and all ye are brethren.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Matt. 24:36 adds “nor the Son” (To “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
Matt.27:24 removed – “just” (From “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.”)
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
Matt. 28:6 removed – “Lord” (from “He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
Mk. 9:24 removed – “and said with tears, Lord,” (From “And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed!
Lk. 2:33 “Joseph” is changed in the NIV’s Greek to “the child’s father” implying that Joseph was Jesus’ father. (“And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century
**Lk. 2:43 “Joseph and his mother” is changed in the NIV’s Greek to “his parents”, implying Joseph was Jesus’ father. (“And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!
**Lk.4:41 removed – “Christ” (from “And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.”) (Christ means Messiah)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Lk. 7:31 removed – ” And the Lord said” (from “And the Lord said, Whereunto then shall I liken the men of this generation? and to what are they like?”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Lk. 9:35 removed – “beloved” (from “And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.)
added – ” whom I have chosen”
p45 3rd century
p47 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
(over 2,200 Greek manuscripts have “beloved” and do not have “whom I have chosen”)
**Lk. 22:31 removed – “And the Lord said” (from “And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Jn. 1:27 removed – “is preferred before me” (from “He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Jn. 3:13 removed – ” which is in heaven” (from “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century
L 8th century
(over 2,000 Greek manuscripts have “which is in heaven”)
Jn. 6:69 “And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.” (KJV) is changed to “We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.” (NIV)
p75 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century
L 8th century
**Jn. 8:24 added – “the one I claim to be” (“I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.” NIV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was added to their Greek text!
**Jn. 8:28 added – “the one I claim to be” (“So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. NIV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was added to their Greek text!
**Jn. 8:35 “The Son abideth forever” is changed to “a son belongs to it forever” (“And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.” KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!
Jn. 8:38 “My Father” is changed to “the Father” (“I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.” KJV)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century
L 8th century
Jn. 9:35 “Son of God” is changed to “Son of man” (“Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” KJV)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century
**Jn. .16:16 removed – “Because I go to the Father” (From “A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Acts 2:30 removed – “according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ” (From “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne”)
p74 7th century (It gives apparent support for this to be removed)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
**Acts 3:26 “his Son Jesus” is changed to “his servant” (“Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!
Rom. 6:11 removed – “our Lord” (from “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.”)
p46 2nd/3rd centuries
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries
Rom. 14:10-12 “Judgment seat of Christ” is changed to ” judgment seat of God” (“But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.” KJV)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries
Salvation and the Judgment
**Matt. 9:13 removed – “to repentance” (from “But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
*Matt. 18:11 removed the entire verse – “For the son of man is come to save that which was lost.”
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
Matt. 20:16 removed – “for many be called, but few chosen” (From “So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
085 6th century
**Matt. 22:13 removed – “and take him away” (from “Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Matt. 24:42 “hour” is changed to “day” (in “ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.” KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Matt. 25:13 removed – “wherein the Son of man cometh” (from “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.”)
p35 ? no date given
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries
L 8th century
W 5th century
047 8th century
Mk. 1:14 removed – “of the kingdom” (From “Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came in to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
**Mk. 2:17 removed – “to repentance” (From “When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Mk. 4:12 removed – “sins”; also “converted” is changed to “turn” (From “That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Mk. 6:11 removed – “verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” (From “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Mk. 9:44 removed the entire verse – “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” v.45 removed – “into the fire that never shall be quenched:” (From “And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:”) v.46 the entire verse is removed – “where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched.”
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century
L 8th century
W 5th century
Mk. 10:24 removed – “for them that trust in riches” (From “And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
*Mk. 11:26 removed the entire verse – “But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century
Lk. 9:55,56 removed – “and said, ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” (From ” But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village”)
p45 3rd century
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
W 5th century
L 8th century
*Lk. 17:36 the entire verse is removed – “Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left”
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
W 5th century
L 8th century
**Jn. 3:15 removed – “should not perish” (From “That whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have eternal life.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**Jn. 4:42 removed – “the Christ” ((From “And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Jn. 6:47 removed – “on me” (From “He that believeth on me hath everlasting life”)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century
**Acts 2:41 removed – “gladly” (From “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
*Acts 8:37 removed the entire verse – “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”
p45 3rd century
p74 7th century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
**Acts 19:10 removed – “Jesus” From “And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Acts 24:15 removed – “of the dead” (From “And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.”)
p74 7th century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
**Rom. 1:16 removed – “of Christ” (from “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Rom. 9:28 removed – “For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness” (From “For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.”)
p46 2nd/3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
**Rom. 10:15 removed – “that preach the gospel of peace” and “of good things” (Is. 52:7) (From “And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! “)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Rom. 11:6 removed – “but if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” (From “And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.”)
p45 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries
**I Cor. 5:7 removed – “for us” (From “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
**I Cor. 9:18 removed – “of Christ” (From “What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.”)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
A deceptive argument that no essential doctrine has been removed
One of the key arguments in books supporting the NIV translation is that no essential doctrine has been removed, and that a particular phrase in question can be found elsewhere in the Bible. This is an argument that I have heard and read many times. This reasoning is used to make it appear insignificant what the NIV has removed from God’s Words. The reason this argument is probably stressed is because some of the other earlier translations that were based on earlier editions of the modern eclectic Greek text totally omitted the virgin birth and the blood of Jesus. The NIV to the best of my knowledge does not totally remove any essential doctrine from Scripture. However; that is part of Satan’s deception. Satan learned from his mistake and was more subtle in the NIV. The argument that it is okay to remove something as long as all reference to a particular doctrine is not removed is a poor argument when applied to Scripture. God’s Word is truth and is pure. “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.” Prov. 30:5,6 “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.” Deut. 12:32 God has commanded us over and over not to add to, or to take away from His Words.
The argument that something can still be found elsewhere in Scripture is also a poor argument because one could remove several entire books from the New Testament and you could still find every essential doctrine. Because it can still be found does not justify it being removed in a number of other passages. God repeats things over and over for emphasis. There are also some Christians who think that they should be able to find something more than once in Scripture before they consider it important and obey it.
The term “doctrine” has been almost totally removed in the NIV
It is amazing, with the argument that no essential doctrine has been removed, that the term doctrine itself has been almost totally removed in NIV. The KJV has the word doctrine 50 times. The NIV only has the word doctrine 5 times! The NIV usually uses the words teaching or instruction. These terms convey a somewhat different thought than doctrine. Teaching and instruction is what one does. Doctrine is what one believes. Today the Church focuses on issues, and often uses the term issues rather than doctrine. Issues are controversial, each person has their own opinion. God says doctrine is either sound doctrine or false doctrine.
The NIV is affecting the Church’s doctrine and the understanding of God’s will on the major doctrines facing us today.
Version: A different perspective, a different reading, a different understanding, it says something different, a different application can be applied.
Most churches & individuals who use the KJV, from what I have observed, still believe and practice much the same way as they did 20 or 30 years ago.
Many persons and churches who have made great changes in what they believe and practice from 20 or 30 years ago have done so after changing Bible versions. The NIV is more than just another way of saying what the KJV says. Subconsciously, it undermines the authority of God’s commands (thus says the Lord) and it subconsciously encourages one to interpret God’s commands in whatever way they would like. The New International Version has added words, removed words, retranslated words, and mistranslated words to create it’s own version of what God said. People then feel free to create their own version of interpretation of what God says -everyone does what is right in their own eyes.
When there are several different versions of the same thing, which one is correct? Rather than create a better understanding of what God has said, different versions of what God has said undermines the authority of God’s Word. Where there are two different versions of the same thing, what is truth? Which one is right? Or is truth open for personal interpretation? Using different versions of the Bible undermines the authority of the Bible; it has undermined the authority of preaching; it has undermined the authority of preachers and teachers of the Word. Change in beliefs and practice are a result, because there are question marks put on what God has said- “Is that really what God meant?” Instead of hearing, “This is what God has commanded us,” you hear, “I like the way it says it in ___________ version.”
Thus the NIV and many of the other modern translations are undermining the Church’s doctrine and the understanding of God’s will on the major issues facing us today.
What does “I Believe what the Bible says” mean?
When a person says that they believe what the Bible says: what Bible are they talking about? Which version of the Bible are they basing their beliefs on? The NIV and KJV in many places do not say the same thing. Two totally different interpretations and applications result from reading and following the two different versions of the Bible. In addition to the NIV and KJV, there are over 100 different English versions of the Bible. With such a large number of versions and many saying things different, especially the thought for thought (dynamic equivalent) versions, what is the final authority?
The standard response has been that the Bible is the final authority. However with such a large number of versions of the Bible and many saying things different, that response has become ambiguous. Each person can pick and chose from the smorgasbord of Bible versions the readings what he or she likes best and then do what is right in their own eyes. Subconsciously each person becomes the final authority rather than the Bible.
It is in the subconscious that the authority of the Bible has been destroyed the most. Most Christians would still verbally say that the Bible is still the final authority for faith and practice. However, that is only lip service. When it comes to specific doctrines (they are often incorrectly called issues- a term that allows them to be viewed as controversial issues rather than as sound doctrine or false doctrine), we soon see that each person is setting themselves up as the final authority rather than the Bible.
The Church needs one standard, one foundation, one version of the Bible to stand upon as the final authority. Not that we hold that English translation as an inspired English translation, in which the translators were inspired in the same way the original writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Church needs one translation which we can hold as the infallible Word of God which we can confidently trust in as having the very Words of God. We need one translation upon which to stand as the final authority rather than many in which to swim.
Of all the English versions, the KJV is still the best translation for the Church to stand on. For many, many years the KJV has been the foundation upon which the Church has stood. In more recent years scholars have lead us to doubt its authority and to question it. However, we see the scholars have led us in error with corrupt Greek manuscripts, misguiding facts, and a man made NU Greek text. When we strip away all that error and the translations made from the man made NU Greek text, we see that of the translations based on the Textus Receptus, the KJV is still the translation that the Church trusts the most.
Divorce and Remarriage
I used to think that the KJV and the NIV said the same thing on divorce and remarriage, but they don’t. In Matt 19:9, the NIV removed the last third of the verse and mistranslated fornication as marital unfaithfulness. Divorce is the ultimate act of marital unfaithfulness. Therefore the NIV gives license for remarrying after every divorce because in divorcing they are unfaithful to the marriage. Also the phrase the the NIV removed is very significant: “And whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” Jesus in saying that tells us that in God’s eyes divorce does not end the first marriage. Adultery can only occur if one of the partners is still married to someone else. (See more on this the Divorce and Remarriage article.)
I Corinthians 11 footnote
Also the suggested translation of the I Cor. 11 passage on the head covering in the footnote of the NIV is not based on any Greek manuscript. It is twisting the Scriptures by the translators to give people what their itching ears want to hear.
Fornication
The sin of fornication—sexual intercourse before marriage—has been totally removed from the NIV. While this may not appear to be a significant item, I know of three different single persons for whom it has become a significant point. Two have used the NIV to justify sex before marriage. The third has rejected the NIV in part because they said if they can’t have sex, they want a Bible that says it.
D.A. Carsons’s book: The King James Version Debate, A Plea for Realism
I do not recommend this book. This book illustrates how those who write in support of the NIV sound convincing but that we need to evaluate carefully what they are saying. It is often deceptive. On page 64 he has a chart in which he has carefully picked the verses to get one to believe that the NIV is better on the deity of Christ than the KJV. In my book I have documented 48 passages where the deity of Christ or His Lordship has been significantly weakened or removed. The NIV is removed a significant amount on the deity and Lordship of Christ!!
Carson has other misguiding information such as his discussion of text types and a lack of manuscript evidence to back up the opinions he gives as facts. I do not recommend this book because it is not accurate or trustworthy.
Every book that I have read supporting the NU Greek text has this type of deceptive, misguiding information. Many things are confidently stated as fact without evidence or proof to back it up. In researching further, I have found over and over that what they state as fact is error. We must be like the Bereans and search to see if what we are being told is true. We cannot believe them just because they have a Ph.D.
I John 5:7,8
The NIV removed the entire verse 7 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one ” also v 8 “in earth.”
This is the clearest verse on the Trinity. Although it is claimed by the supporters of the NIV that there are no early manuscripts before the 16th century to support verse seven there is a mystery here:
- It is also claimed in A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, the companion book for the UBS 3rd edition of the Greek Text, that this passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers. However, I found that Cyprian quoted it in 251 AD.
- Cyprian writing in AD 251 (100 years before the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts) quotes from this verse: “And again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, ‘And these three are one'”.
- This verse did not just originate in the 16th century as some like to imply!!
- In the footnotes of the UBS 3rd edition Greek text, the oldest manuscripts that they state do not have this verse are Sinaiticus and Vaticanus – 350 AD. Most of the manuscripts listed as not having it are late – 9th to 14th centuries!
- Both the NIV and the NASV treat the elimination of this verse in different ways. Other places they eliminate verses without any attempt to reorder the verse numbers. Here the NIV splits up verse eight to give the appearance that there is a verse seven. The NASV divides verse six to create a verse seven. I would appreciate seeing any research you have on this verse.
Conclusion
Has the NIV been translated from the best ancient Greek manuscripts? NO! It has been translated from a modern Greek text that reads differently than any Greek manuscript that is in existence. It was translated from the NU Greek text which is a modern eclectic Greek text that was pulled together from a handful of ancient manuscripts, of which not one of them reads the same as any other manuscript, while the majority (around 95%) of the existing manuscripts are in agreement. The result is that the NU Greek text has removed, added, and changed many words in the Bible. Any translation, the NIV included, based upon the NU Greek text is therefore unreliable and guilty of breaking God’s command not to add to, or remove His Words.
If you would like to see this information in greater detail, I have an extensive report that lists over 400 passages where something significant was removed or added in the NU text and also removed or added in the NIV. Plus there is more detailed information about the NU Greek text and the corrupt manuscripts that it is based on. To read the full report, visit The NIV Report.
