Another King James Bible Believer

What About The “New” NIV of 2011?


 

One of the first things you should realize about the UBS based critical text, ever changing NIVs is that it is just one more of the recent new Vatican Versions that is being used to create an "interconfessional" text for the Old and New Testaments.  This may seem like an outrageous claim to make, but you can see the Proof of this statement by seeing their own words taken directly from the Nestle -Aland critical Greek text and numerous concrete examples in this comparative study here. Be sure to read Part Two as well for many undeniable examples.

 Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET etc. are  the new "Catholic" bibles

http://brandplucked.webs.com/realcatholicbibles.htm 

 

The ever changing, gender neutered “new” 2011 NIV has changed about 10% of the verses from the way they read in the 1984 NIV, and they often change or add to the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts they previously followed. You can see for yourself the changes they have now made at this site here -

http://www.biblewebapp.com/niv2011-changes/#summary

At this site you will see that the new 2011 NIV has changed the wording of 40% of the verses from the way they were written in the 1984 NIV.  They have removed 32,863 words and added 34,469 different words.  They often change or add to the Hebrew text that they previously used and they have changed the underlying Greek text numerous times in their New Testament.  


In some very few places, they have made it right. BUT for the most part, the new NIV 2011 has gotten a lot worse than even their 1984 NIV edition was. I will show you several examples in this study.




Article about the soon to be released 2011 NIV from USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-09-01-bible-translation_N.htm

By Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY - The scholars and publishers behind the world's leading English language evangelical Bible announced Tuesday that they would publish a updated translation in 2011.
"And we'll make sure we get it right this time," says Keith Danby, president and chief executive officer of Biblica, once known as the International Bible Society.

Well, let’s see if they did indeed “Get it right this time”



Mark 1:41 “Jesus moved with compassion” or “Jesus was indignant”?

In Mark 1:40 - 41 we read: “And there came a leper to him, beseeching him, and kneeling down to him, and saying unto him, If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.  And Jesus, MOVED WITH COMPASSION, put forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou clean.”

“moved with compassion” is the reading found in the Majority of all Greek texts including Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, C, the  Greek Lectionaries, the Old Latin Italic aur, c, e, f, l and q, the Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta, Sinaitic, Harkelian, the Coptic Sahidic, Boharic, the Armenian, Ethiopian, Georgian and Slavonic ancient versions.  It is even the reading found in the UBS IV critical Greek text.

“moved with compassion” is the reading found in Wycliffe 1390, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Beza N.T. 1599, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Douay 1950, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac 1933, the RSV, NRSV 1989, ESV 2011, NASB 1963 - 1995, Dan Wallace's NET version 2006, Holman Standard 2009, the International Standard Version 2014 and the Jubilee Bible 2000-2010 to name but a few. 


The Ever Changing NIVs

The NIV 1973, 1978 and 1984 all read: “FILLED WITH COMPASSION, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!”

And even the Spanish version of the NIV reads the same.  Marcos 1:41 (Nueva Versión Internacional 1999) “Movido a compasión, Jesús extendió la mano y tocó al hombre, diciéndole: — Sí quiero. ¡Queda limpio! “

As does also the NIV Portuguese edition Nova Versão Internacional of 1999 - "Cheio de compaixão, Jesus estendeu a mão, tocou nele e disse: “Quero. Seja purificado!”

Well, the 2011 NIV finally did it!

Here it is -  Mark 1:41 (New International Version, ©2011)

41. "Jesus WAS INDIGNANT.[a] He reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!”

Footnotes: Mark 1:41 Many manuscripts Jesus was filled with compassion.

Well, this totally bogus reading comes basically from one very corrupt manuscript called manuscript D, which scholars have known about for centuries and rejected. But now the “late$t, greate$t and be$t $cholarly re$earch” has once again changed their minds and so we have this absurd reading in the latest NIV 2011.One other Critical text version complete with the Apocryphal books called the Common English Bible has also now adopted this absurd reading. It says - "
Incensed,[a] Jesus reached out his hand, touched him, and said, “I do want to. Be clean.” Then it Footnotes: Mark 1:41 Most critical editions of the Gk New Testament read filled with compassion.

Just to illustrate how corrupt manuscript D is, here are just a few examples taken from this same gospel of Mark.  In Mark 2:14 we read -"he saw LEVI the son of Alphaeus", yet D says "he saw JACOB the son of Alphaeus".  In Mark 2:22 we read "but new wine must be put into new bottles." but D omits the entire phrase.

In Mark 3:21 we read "and when his friends heard of it...", but D says "and when his friends THE SCRIBES AND THE OTHERS heard of it...".  In Mark 8:10 we read "and came into the parts of DALMANUTHA" but D first says "MELEGADA" and then was corrected to read "MAGADA".

In Mark 12:20 we read "devour widows' houses" but D says "devour widows' AND ORPHANS houses."  In Mark 14:39 D omits the words "AND SPAKE THE SAME WORDS." In Mark 14:41 we read "It is enough. the HOUR is come." but D reads "it is enough. the END is come."

In Mark 15:25 we read "they CRUCIFIED him", but D says "they KEPT him." and in Mark 15:34 we read "Why hast thou FORSAKEN me?" but D says "Why hast thou REVILED me?"

One should rightfully ask the NIV translators why they didn't follow these readings found in the same manuscript they chose to follow here in Mark 1:41.

The NIV is basically a Catholic bible with an “interconfessional” New Testament text that nobody believes or defends as being the complete and infallible words of God.

See Undeniable Proof the NIV, NASB, ESV are the new “Catholic” bible versions -

http://brandplucked.webs.com/realcatholicbibles.htm

See also The Lord’s Prayer - Is your bible a Catholic bible?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/matthew613.htm

 

Ever changing NIVs - More Examples

 

Acts 10:30  KJB - “And Cornelius said, FOUR days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing.”

 

NIV - 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions - “Cornelius answered: “FOUR days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me”

 

NIV 2011 edition - “Cornelius answered: “THREE days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me”

 

So, was it FOUR days ago, or THREE days ago?

 

The reading of FOUR days ago is that of virtually every manuscript and Bible translation in existence all through history.

 

FOUR days ago is that of the Majority of all Greek manuscripts including Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, the Old Latin copies, the Syriac Peshitta, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian and Georgian ancient versions.

 

FOUR days ago is the reading of the Latin Vulgate, the Geneva bible, KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NET and is the Greek text of even their own UBS/Nestle-Aland, ever changing Greek text put out under the supervision of the Vatican.

 

The NIV itself followed this reading - FOUR days ago - in their first 3 editions - 1973, 1978 and 1984.  The NIV Spanish version 1999 and the NIV Portuguese Version 2000 both read “FOUR days ago”. 

 

But in 2011 the NIV “scholars” decided to change their text and it now reads THREE days ago.

 

This reading was found in only ONE known Greek manuscript - manuscript D original.  But some scribe caught this erroneous reading in D original and corrected it to read FOUR days ago. So the only known manuscript in history that read THREE days ago, was one that itself was corrected to read FOUR days ago.

 

So, who else follows this reading of THREE days ago?  Can you take a wild guess?  The MODERN Roman Catholic versions.  

 

Even the previous Douay-Rheims bible of 1582 read “FOUR days ago”, but the 1950 Catholic Douay version, the 1970 St. Joseph New American bible and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible all unite to read “THREE days ago”.  Just a “coinkidink”, huh?

 

Every changing NIVs

 

 


Matthew 27:16-17 KJB - “And they had a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ.”


NIVs 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions - “At that time they had a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Barabbas, or Jesus who is called CHRIST?”


NIV 2011 edition - “At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was JESUS Barabbas.  So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: JESUS Barabbas, or Jesus who is called THE MESSIAH?”



There are two significant changes in the NIV 2011 edition. The Greek text reads “Christ” χριστον, not “the Messiah”.  There are Greek texts that read Messiah, but not this one.  See τον μεσσιαν in John 1:41 and John 4:25


The more important textual change is from the simple name Barabbas to JESUS BARABBAS. 

 


In Matthew 27:16-17 Instead of reading "...an notable prisoner, called Barabbas" The Nestle-Aland/UBS text actually has in brackets in the text (not the footnote) "called JESUS Barabbas" and the same thing in the next verse. "whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ." The Nestle-Aland/UBS text says "JESUS Barabbas or Jesus, which is called Christ." They actually put both "JESUS Barabbas" in their texts, but with brackets.


This reading comes from Theta, one Old Latin copy f1, the Syriac Synaitic and Palestinian, the Armenian and Georgian ancient versions and Origen so quotes it.


But the two extra "Jesus"s are not found in the majority text or Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, D, K, L, W, Delta, Pi or any of the Textus Receptus manuscripts.  Not even the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, Holman, New Living Translation, ISV 2014, The Voice 2011, Names of God Bible 2011 or the Message reads the way the NIV 2011 edition does.  

 

Neither do the NIV Spanish Bible 1999 nor the NIV Portuguese edition of 2000 reads this way.


The reading is not in the Vulgate, nor in the Syriac Peshitta nor any Catholic bible version, nor any Reformation Bible I looked at, nor in any modern version either - except the NIV 2011 edition and now also Dan Wallace's NET version (We can always count on "Doctor Dan", can't we ;-) and the 2012 Lexham English bible.  

 

It is kind of interesting that, though the Catholic versions still read like the KJB and the traditional text, the Roman Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 has this footnote after Matthew 27:16 - "Here and in v. 17, variant JESUS Barabbas, which would give peculiar point to Pilate's question BUT APPEARS TO HAVE ITS ORIGIN IN AN APOCRYPHAL TRADITION."  But now Dan "the Man" Wallace, who seems to like ANY weird reading out there, and the new NIV 2011 have put it in the text of their fake (apocrypha = of doubtful authenticity) "bible" versions.  

 

Want to learn more about this Dan Wallace character?  See "Dan Wallace is Messing with The Book - Big Time!" - 

 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/danwallacenut.htm 


 

Luke 10:42 How many things are needed? "ONE THING" or "A FEW THINGS"?  Bible Babble Buffet at its Best.

 

King James Bible -  Luke 10:42 - But ONE THING IS NEEDFUL: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

 

NASB 1963-1977 editions - “But ONLY A FEW THINGS ARE NECESSARY, REALLY ONLY ONE, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

 

NASB 1995 edition - “But ONLY ONE THING IS NECESSARY, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

 

NIV 1973, 1978 and 1982 editions - "BUT ONLY ONE THING IS NEEDED. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken from her."  

 

NIV 2011 edition - "BUT FEW THINGS ARE NEEDED - OR INDEED ONLY ONE. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken from her."  

 

Did you notice that both the NASB and the NIV changed THE TEXT from one edition to another, AND that they REVERSED THEIR CHOICES?  What is going on here in Bible Babble Buffet Land?

 

 

 

Philippians 1:14 How the so called "science" of Textual Criticism REALLY works

 

Philippians 1:14 - "And many of the BRETHREN in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak THE WORD without fear."

 

 

The "new" NIV of 2011 has now changed their underlying Greek texts as well (as they have done numerous times) and their English translation too. The NIV 2011 now reads: "to proclaim THE GOSPEL without fear." This is a total paraphrase, since there IS a word for "gospel", but it is not found here. The Greek word is logos which simply means "word" and not "gospel".

 

The Holman Standard of 2009 has likewise dropped the extra words "of God" but paraphrases it as "to speak THE MESSAGE fearlessly."

 

The editors of the "new" NIV 2011 have adopted a different textual reading than the old NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984, and they have changed something else as well. Let's contrast the NIV 1984 with the NIV 2011. 

 

NIV 1984 edition - "Because of my chains, most of the BROTHERS IN THE LORD have BEEN ENCOURAGED TO SPEAK the WORD OF GOD MORE COURAGEOUSLY AND FEARLESSLY."

 

The NIV 2011 now says: "AND because of my chains, most of the BROTHERS AND SISTERS, have BECOME CONFIDENT IN THE LORD AND DARE ALL THE MORE TO PROCLAIM THE GOSPEL WITHOUT FEAR." 

 

Did you notice that the "new" NIV has dropped the extra words OF GOD, but they have added AND SISTERS, which is not found in any text; they completely re-worded the whole verse, and they changed THE WORD (ton logon) to THE GOSPEL?

 

 

 

"to speak the word" (τὸν λόγον λαλεῖν) is the reading of the Majority and P46 which is the oldest remaining Greek manuscript we have. It is about 150 years older than Vaticanus or Sinaiticus.

 

Other Bibles that simply say "TO PREACH THE WORD" are Tyndale 1525-"speake the worde with out feare.", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley's translation 1755, Worsley 1770, Webster's 1833, Living Oracles 1835, Youngs 1898, the NKJV 1982, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Dan Wallace's NET version 2006, the NRSV, ESV 2011, NIV 2011 edition, 2011 Common English Bible, Holman 2009, and the Jubilee Bible 2010.

 

However Westcott and Hort adopted the reading found in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus which says "to speak the word OF GOD". "The word OF GOD" is found in the RV 1881, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, RSV, and NIV 1984 edition, but the latest UBS, Nestle-Aland critical text editions have now removed the words OF GOD from their text.

 

The older Nestle-Aland critical text (4th edition 1934, 21st edition 1975) had "to speak the word of GOD" (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ λαλεῖν.) with no brackets, but the newer ones (Nestle 28th edition and the UBS 3rd and 4th edition) now have "scientifically" omitted the extra words "of God" (τὸν λόγον λαλεῖν).

 

So too has the 2010 SBL Greek New Testament. This textual change is not due to some "newly discovered early Greek reading" at all. They have always had the same information in front of them. They just decided to change the text...again.

 

Apparently the brand new ISV 2014 hasn't gotten the memo yet about this textual change, or they don't care, because they still have "to speak GOD'S word".  

 

Even the highly imaginative textual critic Dan Wallace of NET version fame has adopted the reading of "to preach the word", which has always been in the King James Bible, and concludes saying - "the Byzantine text and a few other witnesses here have the superior reading, and it should be accepted as the original."

 

Now this is interesting. The reading that Dan Wallace and the latest UBS/Nestle-Aland/Vatican "scholars" now reject is the very one that is found in what these men usually accept as the "the best mss." such as Sinaiticus, Vaticanus along with a few ancient versions. Under most circumstances these modern version proponents would scream to high heaven that "to speak the word OF GOD" is most assuredly the correct reading.

 

 Yet now they tell us that these words should be omitted from the text, even though their predecessors put them in.  And all of this is done with NO new readings of ancient manuscript discoveries that have brought "new light and understanding" to the text.  

 

No, folks, they just arbitrarily changed their collective minds and they do all this in what they like to call "the science" of textual criticism.

 

Notice that the RSV 1971 said "to speak the word OF GOD", but then the NRSV 1989 and the ESV now read "to speak the word"

 

The NRSV 1989, ESV 2001-2011, Common English Bible 2011 and NET now read: "to speak the word without fear", thus omitting the words "of God" and go back to the reading that has always been in the KJB.  Perhaps their present deciding factor to now omit these extra words is P46, in spite of what Sinaiticus/Vaticanus read; but do they always follow P46?  Of course not. They don't follow the readings found in P46 in 1:8, 16-17, 2:3, 15, 22, 3:3, 7, 8, 12, 18 or 4:7, 18 and 23.

 

 Modern textual criticism has more in common with throwing darts at a dart board or perhaps the Ouija Board than it does with anything that can rightly be called "science".  Manuscript D says: "to speak of God", adding "of God" but omitting "the word", and uncials F and G say "the word of THE LORD" but nobody seems to follow these.  

 

The Catholic Connection

 

The Catholic versions present us with the usual confusion and irregularities, much like the modern Bible Babble Buffet versions.  The 1582 Douay-Rheims and 1950 Douay read "to speak the word OF GOD". Then the 1968 Jerusalem bible changed their text and went with "to speak the word" (thus omitting "of God").

 

But then the 1970 St. Joseph NAB added it back again saying "to speak the word OF GOD".  Then the 1985 New Jerusalem came along and once again says "to preach the message" (omitting "of God").

 

But wait.  There's more.  Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has now put the words back in the text once again, saying:  "are now much bolder in speaking the Word of God without fear." 

 

 

If you do not tremble at word of God (Isaiah 66:2) then these changes will seem of no importance to you. If the Holy Bible is no more than a collection of religious writings, whose content is sometimes inspiring (though not inspired), and is by no means a perfect revelation of the mind of God, then there is little reason for you not to accept the conflicting and ever changing Bible of the Month Club versions, that NOBODY seriously believes are God's infallible words.

 

"My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change." Proverbs 24:21

 

 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/luke1042onethingneedfl.htm


John 7:8-10 Did Jesus Lie?


 The three previous NIV editions of 1973, 1978 and 1984 read: "I am NOT YET going up to this Feast…However, after his brothers had left for the Feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret.”  

 

However now the 2011 has once again changed its underlying Greek texts and now has Jesus lying to His disciples by saying: "You go to this festival. I AM NOT GOING up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come…However, after his brothers had left for the festival, HE WENT ALSO, not publicly, but in secret.”

 

For more detail on this verse See -

http://brandplucked.webs.com/john78didjesuslie.htm

 

Hebrews 11:11 Was it Sarah or Abraham?


Hebrews 11:11 KJB - "Through faith also SARAH HERSELF received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child, when SHE was past age, because SHE judged him faithful who had promised."  

(Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops' bible, Geneva, Darby, Youngs, RV, ASV, NASB 1995, RSV, ESV 2011, NKJV, Holman Standard 2009, Message, The Voice 2012, Common English Bible 2012)

NIV 1973, 1978 and 1982 editions - "By faith ABRAHAM, even though HE was past age - AND SARAH HERSELF WAS BARREN - was enabled to become A FATHER because HE considered him faithful who had made the promise."  

(Dan Wallace's NET version 2006, NRSV 1989, New Century Version 2005, Names of God bible 2011, Lexham English bible 2012)

NIV 2011 edition - "And by faith even SARAH, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because SHE considered him faithful who had made the promise."

 

You may find this hard to believe, but one has to wonder about the mindset (Satanic, perhaps?) of the NIV translators when one sees what subtle spelling changes they have made in their bogus bible version. This is not a case of an accidental printing error. I have three hard copies of the various NIVs that have come out over the years, and this spelling change is found in all three of them - 1973 edition of the N.T., the 1984 complete NIV and in the revised 2011 "new" NIV.  When we compare the King James Bible reading found in Matthew 2:1-3 we see two "kings" contrasted. One is king Herod and the other is He who was born King of the Jews. I believe in the perfection of the King James Bible. God's words were purified 7 times and the final masterpiece in English is the King James Bible.

Notice the capital lettered King when referring to the Lord Jesus Christ, and then the small "k" in the two references to king Herod. The King James Bible reads: "Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king (small k), behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, Saying, Where is he that is born King (Capital K) of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.  When Herod the king (small k) had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him."  So here we see the King Jesus, and Herod the king. Also agreeing with the way the King James Bible distinguishes between these two kings, one a "king" and the other "the King" are the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, the NASB and the NKJV.

However in all three NIVs we read the following: " After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod (notice the capital K), Magi from the east came to Jerusalem and asked,"Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? (Notice the small k when it refers to Jesus). We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him."  When King Herod (again, capital K) heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him."  If this doesn't bother you, then your conscience has already been seared beyond recovery.  Also agreeing with the way the NIV has Herod as King and Jesus as king, are the Catholic versions like Douay 1950, the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985, along with the liberal NRSV and Daniel Wallace's NET version.  Some like the RSV, ESV have all three "kings" with a small "k", and some like the Holman have all three "King"s with a capital K.

 Another one of the significant changes the new NIV 2011 has made is that it has eliminated the word “saints” from its pages. The word “saints” refers to every believing Christian, whether man, woman or child.  God calls us “saints”.  But of course the Catholic church does not use the word saints in this way. For the Catholic church, a “saint” is a very special type of super Catholic who may have performed miracles and to whom the devout pray and give reverence.

The word “saints” is found in the King James Bible and in most other Bible translations still out there some 106 times; 61 of these in the New Testament. The usual Greek word for saints is hagiois.  The “old” NIV of 1984 contained the word “saints” 68 times with 45 of these in the N.T.  But even the old NIV translated the word “hagiois” as “God’s people” some ten times in the N.T. (See the 1984 NIV Romans 12:13; 1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 9:12; Eph. 2:19; 3:8; 4:12; 5:3; Heb. 13:24; and Rev. 20:9; 22:21)

But now in 2011 the new NIV has completely eliminated the word “saints” from both their Old and New Testaments.  Why might this be?  I believe it is so their new NIV will be more widely accepted among professing Catholics.  The recent Catholic bible versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible and even more so the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 translate the word “saints” (hagiois) just like the NIV does.

Here are just a few examples of the old NIV 1984 compared to the new NIV of 2011 and how the Catholic New Jerusalem translates this same Greek word.

Romans 1:7 “To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.” 2011 NIV “his holy people” = Jerusalem bible “his holy people”

Romans 8:27 “And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God’s will.” 2011 NIV “God’s people” = Jerusalem bible “God’s holy people”

Romans 15:25 “Now, however, I am on my way to Jerusalem in the service of the saints there.”  2011 NIV “the Lord’s people” = Jerusalem bible “holy people of God”

Romans 15:26 “For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem.” 2011 NIV “the Lord’s people” = Jerusalem bible “God’s holy people”

Romans 15:31 “Pray that I may be rescued from the unbelievers in Judea and that my service in Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints there”  2011 NIV “the Lord’s people” = Jerusalem bible “God’s holy people”

Romans 16:2 “I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me.”
2011 NIV “his people” = Jerusalem bible “God’s holy people”

Romans 16:15 “Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.” 2011 NIV “the Lord’s people” = Jerusalem bible “God’s holy people”

The NIV 2011 keeps on changing its underlying Greek texts -  more examples.

 In Matthew 15:6 the KJB reads: “And honour not his father OR HIS MOTHER, he shall be free...”  This is the Majority reading and that of C, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit the words “or his mother” and so did the 1973 NIV and the 1984 NIV.  But now in 2011 the new New International Version has now changed their Greek text once again and have now put these words back into their latest New version.

Matthew 15:6 NIV 1984 - “HE is not to ‘honor HIS father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.”

Matthew 15:6 NIV 2011 - “THEY are not to ‘honor THEIR father OR MOTHER’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.”

Omitting the words “or his mother” are the ASV, RV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, ISV and the Holman Standard.  Modern versions that include the words “or his mother” are the NASB, NET, NIV 2011 and the NKJV.  So, why has the “new” NIV now changed their underlying Greek texts and decided to put the words “or his mother” back into their version?  Maybe its due to the fact that the other Catholic bibles like the Douay, the St. Joseph New American bible and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible also contain these words omitted by the Vatican manuscript.

As an additional note, the rest of the verse reads: “Thus have ye made THE COMMANDMENT of God of none effect by your tradition.” The word “commandment” is entoleen in the Greek and is found in the Majority of all texts, but Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ from both the Majority and from each other. The 2011 NIV reads “Thus you nullify THE WORD of God for the sake of your tradition.”  following the Vatican mss.  Vaticanus reads “the word’ (ho logos) while Sinaiticus original read “the LAW of God” (ho nomon), then it was changed to “word” and then someone changed it once again to read “the law” of God.

So, what do the other modern Catholic versions do?  You got it. The older Douay version read “commandment of God” like the KJB and majority of texts have it, but the more recent Catholic versions like the St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem read just like the NIV with “the WORD of God”, thus here following the Vatican mss. to read “the word” but not following the Vatican mss. in the same verse by including “or his mother”, which the Vatican manuscript omits.  And they call this a “science”!

Matthew 18:15 - “Moreover if thy brother shall trespass AGAINST THEE (eis se - Greek), go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.”

The reading of  “trespass AGAINST THEE” makes a big difference in the meaning and application of the passage. I go to the brother who has sinned against me; not against any one who may happened to have sinned against someone else.  The reading of “against thee” is once again that found in the Majority of all Greek texts and ancient versions. Even the earlier NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984 included the words “brother sins AGAINST YOU” but with a footnote telling us “Some manuscripts do not have ‘against you’”  The manuscripts that omit these words are the usual suspects - Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

Matthew 18:15 NIV 1973, 1978, 1984 editions - “If your brother sins AGAINST YOU, go and show HIM HIS fault, just between the two of you. If HE listens to you, you have won YOUR BROTHER over.”

Matthew 18:15 NIV 2011 - “If your brother OR SISTER sins, go and point out THEIR fault, just between the two of you. If THEY listen to you, you have won THEM over.

Those Bible translations that still include the words “against thee” are the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman and NKJV.  The NASB omits them and the latest UBS critical text puts them in brackets, indicating doubt.

So why does the new NIV now omit these words that were in the previous three editions of the NIVs?  Well, the older Catholic bible versions like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay and even the St. Joseph NAB of 1970 had them in their text - “if thy brother sin against thee” (Douay version 1950) - , but now the 1985 Catholic New Jerusalem bible omits these two Greek words and so does the late$t NIV of 2011. 

This is not at all a case of “new findings” or “advanced textual evidence” but is simply another case of just changing their minds once again and being tossed to and fro by every wind that happens to pass by at the moment.

Matthew 19:29 “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, OR WIFE (he gunaika -Greek) or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive AN HUNDREDFOLD [hekaton - Greek = Majority, Sinaiticus, C while Vatican mss. has MANY fold = polla - Greek - NASB “manyfold”], and shall inherit everlasting life.”

The previous NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984 omitted the words “or WIFE” because not in Vaticanus or Sinaiticus (even though these same two “oldest and best mss.” differ from each other in the same verse with Sinaiticus reading “an hundredfold” while Vaticanus reads “manyfold”.  Yet now in 2011 the new NIV has now “added” the words they once omitted - “or father or mother OR WIFE or children”...will receive A HUNDRED TIMES as much...”
Matthew 19:29 NIV 1984 - “And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

Matthew 19:29 NIV 2011 - “And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother OR WIFE or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

Versions that still omit the words “or wife” are the NASB, ESV, RSV, NRSV and Holman Standard, however all these versions contain the reading of “a hundred fold” taken from Sinaiticus while the NASB virtually all by itself follows Vaticanus by omitting both “or wife” and by reading “MANY fold”.  The Catholic versions like Douay-Rheims included “or wife”, the Jerusalem bible of 1968 omitted it, but the St. Joseph NAB now goes back to including the words once again.

The “scholarly” NASB has two completely bogus and misleading footnotes regarding both readings.  The NASB footnotes tell us “One early mss. adds ‘or wife’, and “one early mss. reads ‘hundredfold’”, whereas the truth of the matter is that both “or wife” and “hundredfold” are the readings found in the vast majority of all Greek texts and ancient versions. The Nestle-Aland ever changing Greek critical texts used to read “manyfold” (polla) but now read “a hundred fold” (ekaton).  Such are the twisted ways of the “science” of textual criticism.

In Matthew 23:4 the NIV 2011 has again changed their Greek texts.  In the KJB we read: “For they bind heavy burdens AND GRIEVOUS TO BE BORNE, and lay them on men’s shoulders...”

 The words “grievous to be borne” are found in the Majority of all texts including Vaticanus and D and was is also found in the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV.  However Sinaiticus omits these words and so do the NASB, Revised English Bible 1989 and the previous 1984 NIV. The UBS text puts these words in brackets.  But now the new 2011 NIV has come out and it adds this text to their new version.  

Matthew 23:4 NIV 1984 -  “They tie up heavy loads and put them on MEN’S shoulders”

Matthew 23:4 NIV 2011 -  “They tie up heavy CUMBERSOME loads and put them on OTHER PEOPLE’S shoulders.”  

It also looks like the word “men” was too masculine a word, so they gender neutered it to “other people”.

The Catholic versions are the usual conflicting mess.  The reading “grievous to be borne” is found in the Douay, removed in the 1968 Jerusalem bible, added again in the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible, and then taken out once again in the New Jerusalem of 1985 and now put back in their 2009 Catholic Public Domain Bible.

Philosophy of the modern versionists = No reading is sure; all are subject to change at any moment.  Buy the late$t Ver$ion so you will be “in the know” and “up to date”.

Luke 7:47 KJB, NASB, ESV and the NIVs 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions - "Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; FOR SHE LOVED MUCH: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little."

 

The NIV 2011 - "I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—AS HER GREAT LOVE HAS SHOWN." is a total paraphrase.  The literal Greek says “for she loved much” 

 

The NIV 2011 changed the verb loved into a noun, the adverb much into an adjective (great), there is no word for “her” in the text and there is no verb at all for “has shown” - other than that, it is a fine translation;-)


 The older NIVs had it right  They USED to say “Therefore I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven - for she loved much. But he loves little who has been forgiven little.”  So read the NIV 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions.

 

 

"Luke 10:41-42 - KJB “And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: BUT ONE THING IS NEEDFUL: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

Luke 10:42 NIV 1973, 1978, 1984 editions - “BUT ONLY ONE THING IS NEEDED. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”

Luke 10:42 NIV 2011 - “BUT FEW THINGS ARE NEEDED - OR INDEED ONLY ONE. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”

This is one of the goofiest textual changes found in the new NIV.  The Majority of all remaining Greek texts read as does the KJB and the 1984 NIV edition.  However the Vatican mss. and Sinaiticus (though with different wording) say “but few things are needful OR ONE (n henos = Greek added by the Vatican mss.).

The NASBs of 1963, 1972, 1977 used to read this way too.  The NASB used to read: “but only a few things are necessary, REALLY ONLY ONE.”  BUT in 1995 the NASB once again changed its text and it now reads: “but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part...”


The older Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims and Douay and even the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 read like the KJB “only one thing is needful” (Douay-Rheims version) but the 1985 Catholic New Jerusalem bible version reads: “fret about so many things, and yet few are needed, INDEED ONLY ONE.”

The older Nestle-Aland critical text USED to include this silly reading from the Vatican mss. but the latest ones have now gone back to read as the KJB and Majority of Greek texts have had it all along.  But for some strange reason the 2011 NIV has decided to go back to a reading that is not even in the more recent UBS, Nestle-Aland critical texts, nor in the NASB. Not even the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, Holman Standard nor Daniel Wallace’s NET version read the way the new NIV 2011 does.  The ESV reads as does the KJB but has this footnote - “Some manuscripts “few things are necessary, or only one” and it is this goofy reading that the NIV and the New Jerusalem bible have now followed.


Luke 17:3  KJB - “Take heed to yourselves; if thy brother trespass AGAINST THEE, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.”

The words “against thee” (Greek - eis se) are found in the Majority of all Greek texts as well as D, the Old Latin, the Clementine Vulgate (but not in most Catholic bibles like the Douay, St. Joseph New American Bible and New Jerusalem though it was in the older Douay-Rheims version) the Coptic, Ethiopian and Georgian ancient versions.

The words “if any brother trespass AGAINST THEE” are found in Wycliffe 1395 - “Take ye hede you silf; if thi brothir hath synned ayens thee, blame hym”, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “Yf thy brother trespasse agaynst the, rebuke hym, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the KJB, NKJV 1982.

Vaticanus and Sinaiticus unite in omitting these two Greek words and change the meaning of the text.  Versions that omitted these words “trespass AGAINST THEE” and not the way more general “if any brother trespass” are the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, the RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman Standard, ISV, the Jehovah Witness version and the NIV 1984 edition.

However now once again the NIV translators have changed their underlying Greek and English text.  

Luke 17:3 NIV 1984 -  “If your brother sins, rebuke HIM, and if HE repents, forgive HIM.”

Luke 17:3 NIV 2011 -  “If your brother OR SISTER sins AGAINST YOU, rebuke THEM; and if THEY repent, forgive THEM.”  

So, the “new” NIV has  correctly re-instated the Greek words “against you” but have also added words to their new English translation not found in ANY Greek text - “sister”, “them”, “they” and “them” again. Looks like the words “he” and “him” were too politically incorrect, huh?

Luke 20:17 KJB - "And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become THE HEAD OF THE CORNER."  (κεφαλὴν γωνίας) = literally "head of corner

NIV 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions - "The stone the builders rejected has become THE CAPSTONE."  

NIV 2011 edition - "The stone the builders rejected has become THE CORNERSTONE."

It should be pointed out that these are opposite meanings.  The "capstone" is "the crowning point, the acme, the top stone.", whereas the "corner stone" is "a stone forming a part of a corner or angle in a wall; the most basic element, the foundation."  

The NIV has done the same thing in Psalms 118:22.  

Psalm 118:22 KJB - "The stone which the builders refused is become THE HEAD STONE OF THE CORNER."

Psalm 118:22 NIV 1978, 1984 editions - "The stone the builders rejected has become THE CAPSTONE."  

NIV 2011 edition - "The stone the builders rejected has become THE CORNERSTONE." 

 

Luke 24:47 “And that repentance AND (kai) remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”

There is a minor but very definite textual difference in this verse with the word “and” (kai) or “for” (eis).  The majority of all Greek manuscripts along with A, C, D, the Old Latin a, aur, b, c, d, e, f, ff, l, q, r, the Syriac Sahidic, Harkelian and Palestinian, the Armenian, Ethiopian and Georgian ancient versions reading “repentance AND forgiveness of sins”, while the Vatican and Sinaitic mss. along with P75 read “repentance FOR forgiveness of sins.”

Agreeing with the KJB reading of “repentance AND forgiveness” are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1325, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1549, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “and that repentaunce and remissyon of synnes shoulde be preached in his name amonge all nacions. And must begynne at Ierusalem.”, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, the earlier Catholic Douay-Rheims, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, the RSV, NRSV, the 2001 ESV and the up and  coming ISV (International Standard Version).

Even the NIVs of 1973, 1977, and 1984 all read “repentance AND forgiveness of sins”, as well as the 1999 NIV Spanish edition.  However now in 2011 the NIV editors have once again arbitrarily changed their minds (it has NOTHING to do with alleged “recent discoveries in the science of textual criticism”) and now have adopted the other textual reading of “repentance FOR (eis) forgiveness of sins” agreeing with the NASB, NET and Holman Standard.

Luke 24:47 NIV 1984 - “and repentance AND forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”

Luke 24:47 NIV 2011 - “and repentance FOR the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

So what we see by this one example are two basic principles operating in today’s never ending assembly line of the Bible Babble Buffet versions coming down the pike. They have no settled text and they don’t even agree among themselves.

The older Catholic bible versions like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay read like the KJB and the majority of all Greek texts and Reformation Bibles.  However the “new” Catholics and Evangelicals United Bible Society reads “repentance FOR (eis) forgiveness of sins” and so too do the Catholic St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1885.

The NIV continues to omit the words “of Jerusalem” from verse 49, “and carried up into heaven” from verse 51 and the final word “Amen” in verse 53 as well.

John 1:14 NIV 1984 - “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

John 1:14 NIV 2011 - “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and  only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” [There is no known text on this earth that reads this way]

John 1:18 NIV 1984 - “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.”

John 1:18 NIV 2011 - “No one has ever seen God, but the  one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father has made him known.” [Again, there is no Greek text on this earth that reads this way.]

John 1:34 - KJB - “And I saw, and bare record that this is the SON OF GOD.”

John 1:34 NIV 1984 - “I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”

John 1:34 NIV 2011 - “I have seen and I testify that this is GODS’S CHOSEN ONE.”

This is another textual change. The majority of all Greek mss. read “the Son of God” (ho uios tou theou) including P66, P75, Vaticanus, A, C, K,L, P, and Sinaiticus third correction.  So also read the UBS Greek texts as well as the RV, ASV, NASB,  NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984, the RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV and Holman Standard.

However Sinaiticus original read “the elect” (ho eklektos). There is no known Greek manuscript that reads like the 2011 NIV’s “God’s Chosen One”. Sinaiticus original did not contain the word “God” in it.  So why does the new NIV 2011 decide after 35 some years to change their underlying Greek text?  Well, it might have something to do with the newer Catholic versions.  The older Catholic Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950 read “this is the SON OF GOD”, but the newer Catholic bible versions like the St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 both read like the new NIV does - “the Chosen One of God”.  By the way, Daniel Wallace and company’s NET version does too.


John 4:1-3 and the ever changing NIVs and UBS Greek texts -

A rather peculiar case of senseless and arbitrary textual changes is found in John 4:1-3. In the King James Bible, as well as the Majority of all texts including Vaticanus, P66, P75, A  and C we read: 1. “When therefore THE LORD (ho kurios) knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2. (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) 3. He left Judea, and departed again into Galilee.”


The reading of “the Lord” was even in the Westcott-Hort Greek text and in the earlier critical text Nestle-Aland editions. I have a 4th edition Nestle text from 1934 and it reads “the Lord”.  However Sinaiticus and D read “Jesus” instead of “the LORD” and later on the Nestle-Aland, USB critical texts changed their reading to “JESUS knew how the Pharisees had heard...” That is how the Nestle-Aland 27th edition and the UBS 4th edition now read.

This is an example of modern scholarship rejecting even their “oldest” manuscripts and following instead a very minority reading.  But wait. There is much more going on here when we compare the various NIV editions to come down the pike lately and how the Catholic bible versions are exerting their influence by producing an “interconfessional” New Testament text through the United Bible Society.


Those Bible translations that read “the LORD knew...” are Tyndale 1525, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV of 1901, the RSV, NASB, NKJV, Darby, Youngs, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible and the NIV editions of 1973, 1977 and 1984, although quite curiously they put this whole reading in verse 3 instead of verse 1.

 The NIVs from 1973, 77 and 84 read: 1. “The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, 2. although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. 3. WHEN THE LORD LEARNED OF THIS [all taken from verse 1 in ALL Greek manuscripts; not one of them reads like the NIV has it] he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee.”

However the “new” NIV of 2011 now has changed their underlying Greek text once again. Instead of having the words “When the LORD learned of this” in verse 3 as all previous NIVs read, they have now put these words back into verse one and changed “the LORD” to “JESUS”.  It now reads: 1. “Now JESUS learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John -”

Those versions that read “JESUS knew that...” (instead of “the LORD knew that...”) are the NRSV, ESV, NET, NIV 2011 and the Catholic versions like the Douay, the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985.

Once again we see the fickle and ever changing nature of the so called “science” of textual criticism at work and these Bible Babble Buffet versions don’t even agree among themselves.

John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?

In the King James Bible we read: "Go ye up unto this feast: I  go not YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.  When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.  But when his brethren were gone up, THEN went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret."

The reading of "not yet" (oupw) is that found in the vast Majority of all Greek texts including P66, P75, Vaticanus, L,T, W, Delta and in some Old Latin copies and in the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Palestinian and the Coptic Sahidic and Boharic ancient versions.  The old NIV of 1984 also read this way saying: "I am NOT YET going up to this Feast".  However now the 2011 has once again changed its underlying Greek texts and now has Jesus lying to His disciples by saying: "You go to this festival. I AM NOT GOING up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come."  The reading of "NOT going" is ouk as opposed to oupw, and is the reading found in the Sinaitic manuscript and D.  The previous Nestle Aland critical text (4th edition 1934) used to follow the Greek reading found in the King James Bible an in all Reformation bibles - "not YET going", but later on the Nestle Aland, (21st and 27th  editions) UBS texts changed their minds and have now gone with the other reading that is not even the oldest reading, and the result is that Jesus lied. 

Also agreeing with the new NIV 2011 and having Jesus say that He is NOT going to the feast and then He goes to the feast, are the Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims of 1610, the Douay 1950, the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version. Among the new Vatican / Evangelical Versions  that also have Jesus saying He is NOT going and then He does are the NASB, ASV, NET, RSV, NRSV and ESV.

Notice the silly reasoning behind this textual change and obvious blunder found in many modern versions and ALL Catholic versions.  The Lexham Bible (another UBS critical text edition) reads: "You go up to the feast. I am NOT going up to this feast, because my time is not yet completed."  It then footnotes - "John 7:8 Most manuscripts read “not yet” here, but this is obviously an easier reading intended to reconcile the statement with Jesus’ later actions." 

In other words, even though the vast Majority of all texts and even the oldest manuscripts record the Lord Jesus as saying that He is NOT YET going to the feast and then He later does go and thus there is NO contradiction, this goofy reading  adopted by most modern versions that makes Jesus a liar and creates a contradiction is to be preferred by today's "scholars" because the reading that makes sense, is easier to understand and doesn't create a contradiction "must have been an attempt to reconcile an obvious contradiction"!  This is the twisted thinking behind these modern perversions of God's pure words. "God gave them over to a reprobate mind" - Romans 1:28.  "If you mess with the Book, God will mess with your mind."

 

Bible translations that agree with the KJB reading that Jesus said He was NOT YET going, and then LATER ON He DID go, are Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops's Bible, the Geneva Bible, the NKJV, Youngs,  the Revised Version of 1885, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the Holman Standard of 2003 and the brand new ISV (International Standard Version) as welll as the Spanish Reina Valera, the Portuguese Almeida, the French Martin and Ostervald and the German Luther Bibles to name but a few.

 NIV 1984 - "You go up to the Feast. I am NOT YET going up to this Feast, because for me the right time has not yet come." Having said this, he stayed in Galilee.  However, after his brothers had left for the Feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret."

NIV 2011 - "You go to the festival. I AM NOT GOING up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come."  After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret."

 

John 21:1 NIV 1984 - “Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of TIBERIAS. ”

John 21:1 NIV 2011 - “Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of GALILEE.”

[Note: There is not a Greek text in all the world that reads “Galilee” here. They all read Tiberias.]

Romans 8:2 KJB - “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus that made ME free from the law of sin and death.”

Romans 8:2 NIV 1984 - “because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set ME free from the law of sin and death.”

Romans 8:2 NIV 2011 - “because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of who gives life has set YOU free from the law of sin and death.”

This again is a textual change. Even the NIV footnotes here: “The Greek is singular; some manuscripts ME”.  The Majority, including A, C and D have ME while the Vatican mss. and Sinaiticus read YOU. Reading ME, like the KJB, are the Revised Version, ASV, Douay, the former NIVs, the RSV and the brand new ISV.  Those that read YOU are the NRSV, ESV, NASB, Holman, NET and the new NIV.

Among the Catholic versions, the former Douay-Rheims and Douay of 1950 read ME, but the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 read YOU, just like the new NIV does.

Romans 15:19 - Bible Babble Buffet Versions in Action 

In the King James Bible we read: "Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit OF GOD; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Chirst."  The NIVs of 1973, 1978 and the 1984 editions all omitted the words "of God" and read: "by the power of signs and miracles, through the power of the Spirit."  However once again in 2011 the new NIV has changed its underlying Greek text and now reads: "by the power of signs and wonders, through the power of the Spirit OF GOD."

Textually speaking, this is a very interesting verse in that it reveals a great deal about the mindset of the men behind the multitude of conflicting modern versions. The reading of "the Spirit OF GOD" is that of the Majority of all texts, including Sinaiticus, D correction and P46, which is about 200 years older than Vaticanus. "Spirit of GOD" (pneumatos theou) is found in Tyndale, 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the King James Bible 1611, the NKJV 1982 and Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta. The modern versions of the NRSV, ESV, ISV, Holman Standard  all read "Spirit of GOD", just as the King James Bible.

When Westcott and Hort first came out with their totally revised Greek text in the 1881 Revised Version, their text read: "power of the HOLY SPIRIT" (pneumatos hagiou) and so read the Revised Version of 1881, the ASV 1901, the RSV of 1952 and the 1989 Revised English Bible.  "HOLY Spirit" is the reading found in codex Alexandrinus and D original.

 

I have in my possession three different Nestle-Aland Greek texts, which is basically the Westcott-Hort text that underlies most modern versions since 1881. All three of these are different here in Romans 15:19. The one from 1934 (4th edition) says: HOLY Spirit. The one dated 1962 changed this to simply "the SPIRIT", thus omitting "Holy" and "God". This reading , the one found in the NASB, comes from only one manuscript and that is Vaticanus. The NASB and the NIV 1984 both follow only one Greek manuscript here and read: "through the power of the SPIRIT".

Then sometime between the 1962 edition and the 1993 edition, the Nestle-Aland text changed for the third time and now reads: "the Spirit OF GOD", as has the King James Bible for almost 400 years now. We can clearly see here the constantly changing opinions of the noted scholars behind the modern versions.

Here is a brief chart showing the conflicting readings of just this one phrase. The Catholic versions are very much like the "new" Vatican Versions (NIV, ESV, NASB, Holman, ISV, NET) in that they are constantly changing their underlying Greek texts and in the main follow the Vatican manuscript. The 1582 Douay-Rheims and the 1950 Douay  and the 1968 Jerusalem bible went with "the Holy Ghost" (1582) and "the Holy Spirit" (1950, 1968). Then in 1970 the St. Joseph New American Bible and the 1985 New Jerusalem read "the Spirit OF GOD", BUT the latest Catholic Public Domain Version of 2009 has now gone back to "the HOLY Spirit".

 "power of the SPIRIT OF GOD" -Tyndale, Geneva,  KJB, NKJV, NRSV, ESV, ISV, Holman and now the NIV 2011 edition.

"power of the HOLY SPIRIT" - RV, ASV, RSV, Jerusalem Bible 1968, 2009 The Sacred Bible Catholic Public Domain Version

"power of the SPIRIT" - NASB 1963-1995 editions, NIV 1973, 78 and 1984 editions.

 

1 Corinthians 10:9

10:9 "Neither let us tempt CHRIST, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of the destroyer."

This verse strongly attests to the full deity of Christ. It tells us that the children of Israel who in the Old Testament tempted God were actually tempting Christ. Christ = God.

CHRIST is the reading of the majority, Syriac, Coptic, D and P 46, which predates Sinaiticus and Vaticanus by 150 years. Yet Siniaticus and Vaticanus read THE LORD, which could refer to God the Father and not the Son, and so the  Revised Version, ASV 1901, NASB 1963-1995, the RSV, Amplified 1987, and the NIVs  of 1973, 1977 and 1984 editions say: "we should not test the LORD, as some of them did", and so do the Catholic  St. Joseph NAB 1970, the Jerusalem bible of 1968 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985. The older Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims of 1582 and the Douay of 1950 had "not tempt CHRIST."  However the NIV 2011 has changed their underlying Greek texts once again here and now read "should not test CHRIST". The Nestle Aland critical text continues to change every few years and this is another example. The Nestle Aland text USED TO read Kurion, or LORD, but then later on they changed it and now it has Xriston or Christ. Other critical text versions that now have gone back to the reading of CHRIST (instead of Lord) are the ESV, Holman, Common English Bible and the NET, but the brand new ISV (International Standard Version) and the 1995 NASB still have LORD here instead of Christ. Modern versions are consistently inconsistent.

 

1 Corinthians 10:9 NIV 1984 - “We should not test THE LORD, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.”

1 Corinthians 10:9 NIV 2011 - “We should not test CHRIST, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.”

1  Corinthians 11:29 KJB -  "For he that eateth and drinketh UNWORTHILY, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the LORD'S body."

In this verse Vaticanus omits UNWORTHILY, and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 though it is found in the majority of all Greek texts and in the correction of Sinaiticus and in D and many other uncials as well as ancient versions. The word "Lord's" in "not discerning the LORD'S body" is omitted by the NASB, ESV and Catholic New Jerusalem because not in Vaticanus, but it is found in the NIV 1984 edition because in the majority, Sinaiticus correction, D and many ancient versions. However now that the "New" New International Version has come out in 2011, they have once again changed their text to read: "without discerning the body OF CHRIST".  The 2011 NIV now adds "of Christ" yet these words are NOT found in any Greek text at all.

1 Corinthians 11:29 NIV 1984 - “For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of THE LORD eats and drinks judgment on himself.”

1 Corinthians 11:29 NIV 2011 - “For those who eat and drink without  discerning the body of  CHRIST eat and  drink judgment on themselves.”

1 Corinthians 13:3 KJB - “And though I bestow all my good to feed the poor, and though I give my body TO BE BURNED, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.”

1 Corinthians 13:3 NIV 1984 - “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body TO THE FLAMES, but have not love, I gain nothing.”

1 Corinthians 13:3 NIV 2011 - “If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to HARDSHIP THAT I MAY BOAST, but do not have love, I gain nothing.”

This is another textual change and the 2011 NIV basically made up their own textual reading here. The Majority of all Greek texts including C, D, F, G, L read “to be burned”. However the Vatican mss. and Sinaiticus and A read “that I may boast”.  The older Nestle-Aland Greek critical text used to read just as the KJB has it - “to be burned” (kauthnnsomai - Greek), but the more recent Nestle-Aland, UBS critical text have once again changed their reading to “that I may boast” (kauxnnswmai - Greek)

Those versions that have “to be burned” are Wycliffe, Tyndale, the Geneva Bible (all Reformation bibles in all languages), the Revised Version, ASV, NASB, RSV, ESV, NIVs 1973, 1978, 1984, and the NKJV.   

Those that have adopted the reading of “that I may boast” are the NRSV, Daniel “If it’s weird and flaky I’m goin’ with it” Wallace’s NET version, the ISV and the new NIV of 2011.  Notice that the RSV went with “to be burned”, then the NRSV had “that I may boast” and then the ESV went back to reading “to be burned”.

The 2011 NIV has once again changed their underlying Greek text and added the words “to hardship” that are not found in any manuscript at all.  The ESV reads as does the KJB but footnotes: “Some manuscripts - deliver up my body [to death] that I may boast”

This time not even the Catholic versions go along with the “new” NIV 2011. The Douay-Rheims, Douay, St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem bible all read: “If I give my body to be burned” just as the KJB has it.

1 Corinthians 15:45

Look at this one in the NIV -
God’s word describes Adam as being “made a living soul.” The NIV, however, follows the evolutionary philosophy of the world and changes God’s word to say that Adam “became a living being.” In the NIV man was not created,but instead just “became.” This evolutionary slant fits in nicely with the Roman Catholic teachings.

KJB
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul. (1 Corinthians 15:45)

NIV
So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being.” (1 Corinthians 15:45)

Besides promoting or opening the door for Evolution, the NIV translation is just plain ridiculous. It directly implies that the first man Adam was not a "living being" when he first appeared. It omits the idea of Adam being MADE, and doesn't tell us how he got here. But when he was first here, he was not yet a "living being"; He had to "become" a living being. And the word is NOT "being" it is SOUL.
Atheism and evolutionary philosophy teach  that man has no soul. Having a soul implies there is a higher eternal Creator that gave us this soul that will live forever. To say, like the NIV does, that Adam "became a living being"  merely puts Adam on the same level as other living beings (trees,, plants, crops, fish and all other animals on the earth that have no soul. 'Being' means only the state or fact of existing. 'A living soul' implies that man was created in the image of God. There is a big difference.

Satan is indeed subtil, but since he has already gotten away with so much in all these fake bible versions that NOBODY believes are the infallible words of God anyway, now he is getting even more bold in his perversions.

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8
2 Corinthians 1:12 and the silliness that they call the “science” of textual criticism.

In the King James Bible we read: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that IN SIMPLICITY and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward.”

However in the NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions we read: “Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially with you, IN THE HOLINESS (ἁγιότητι) and sincerity that are from God. We have done so not according to worldly wisdom but according to God’s grace.”

But the NIV 2011 now reads: “Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, WITH INTEGRITY and godly sincerity. We have have done so, relying not on worldly wisdom but on God’s grace.”  

As you can see they have changed quite a few phrases from the one to the other, but the main point of our focus will be the actual TEXTUAL change from “HOLINESS” in the 1973, 78 and 84 editions to the “WITH INTEGRITY” reading in 2011.  For 38 years the NIVs followed the Greek reading of “holiness” (ἁγιότητι) but then changed to another Greek word meaning “simplicity/integrity”. (ἁπλότητι)

We see the same TEXTUAL changes in the Nestle’s critical Greek text editions.  Westcott and Hort introduced a whole new Greek text in the 1881 Revised Version and they went with the reading of "holiness" (ἁγιότητι) rather than the Traditional reading of "simplicity".  I have a hard copy of the Nestle critical Greek text 4th edition of 1934 and a Nestle text 21st edition of 1975.  Both read "holiness".  However later on, with NO additional manuscript witnesses or discoveries, they suddenly changed their minds and decided to go back to the Traditional reading of "simplicity" (ἁπλότητι) and so read the present day UBS,  Nestle-Aland 27th and the 28th editions.

The NASBs from 1963, 1977 and even in 1995 continue to follow the Westcott-Hort reading of "HOLINESS" even though the UBS, Nestle Aland critical texts have been reading "simplicity" for years now.  The NASB 1995 edition still reads: "For our proud  confidence is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in HOLINESS and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward you."

We see the same textual changes in the RSV, NRSV and ESV. The RSV 1952 said "HOLINESS and godly sincerity". Then the 1989 NRSV went with "FRANKNESS and godly sincerity" and finally the ESV 2001-2011 now has "with SIMPLICITY and godly sincerity" thus going all the way back to the original King James Bible reading.

Other Bible translations that followed the Traditional Greek text reading of hoplotees or "simplicity" are Wycliffe 1395 "symolenesse", Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535 "singleness", the Bishops' Bible 1568 and the Geneva Bible 1587 "simplicity and godly sincerity" and the Douay-Rheims 1610 "simplicity".  Even Dan Wallace and company's NET version has gone back to the KJB reading though he gives a paraphrase of "pure motives", but at least he has rejected the previous Nestle reading of "holiness".

Other modern versions that are still behind the times and the alleged "latest scholarly findings" of the more recent revisions to the Nestle-Aland, UBS texts are the Holman Standard 2003 which still has the older reading of "purity" and the Lexham bible of 2012 which goes with "holiness".

Among the Catholic versions we see the usual inconsistency as well.  The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay both read "SIMPLICITY", but then the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985 went with "HOLINESS". But now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it goes back to "in SIMPLICITY of heart and in sincerity toward God."

This example from 2 Corinthians 1:12 is given not so much to show a great theological difference but to reveal the totally unsettled and fickle nature of what they call the "science" of textual criticism.  The modern versionist has no settled text and no final written authority and fewer and fewer Christians today believe in the existence of any complete, inspired and 100% true Bible in any language.

 

Philippians 1:14 "And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word *** without fear."


So read Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops' bible, the Geneva Bible, Wesley, Young's, the NKJV 1982, the NRSV 1989, ESV 2001, Holman Standard 2003, NET version, the 2005 TNIV and the 2012 critical text Common English Bible. The Spanish Reina-Valera 1909-1995 as well as the modern Greek Bible also agree with the KJB reading - "to speak the word without fear."

The fickleness of the "art and science" of textual criticism is once again displayed in the handling of this verse. Both Vaticanus and Sinaiticus add extra words here, which are not found in the Majority of all texts, nor in the earlier P46. Vaticanus says "speak the word OF GOD", and so read the RSV, NASB and the NIV 1984 edition. Westcott and Hort originally added the extra words "of God" to their text. Later on the Nestle texts still included the extra words "of God", but put them in brackets, and now the latest Nestle-Aland Greek critical texts have removed them from their text, and so have the more recent Bible of the Month Club versions like the 2001 ESV, the 2003 Holman Standard, the NET version of Daniel Wallace, the Common English Bible 2012 and now the NIV 2011 edition. I guess the old NIV is once again out of date "according to the latest findings of $cholar$hip".

The 1984 NIV reads: "Because of my chains, most of the brothers in the Lord have been encouraged to speak THE WORD OF GOD more courageously and fearlessly." 

However the NIV 2011 edition now says: "And because of my chains, most of the brothers AND SISTERS have become confident in the Lord and dare all the more to proclaim THE GOSPEL without fear."

You will notice that both NIVs read quite differently from each other when comparing the 1984 edition to the 2011 NIV edition, and they follow different Greek readings. The 2011 NIV is also more of a paraphrase than was the 1984 NIV. There is NO word for "sisters" in any Greek text and the Greek word logos means "word" not "gospel". Likewise the Catholic versions follow the pattern of the NIV. The older Douay Version read "to speak the word of God", but the more modern 1970 St. Joseph NAB and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible read: "announcing the Message".

Philippians 2:16  Joy or Boasting?

The NIV 1984 edition read: "So that through my being with you again YOUR JOY in Christ Jesus will overflow on account of me." 

But the NIV 2011 now reads: "So that through my being with you again YOUR BOASTING in Christ Jesus will abound on account of me."

See much more on how the modern versions teach Pride as a Virtue here-

http://brandplucked.webs.com/mvsprideasvirtue.htm 



1 Thessalonians 2:7-  “Gentle among you” or “Babies among you”?

One of the silliest readings in the New Testament is found primarily in the Vaticanus manuscript in 1 Thessalonians 2:7.  This reading was even rejected by the Critical Text editors that came after Westcott and Hort until very recently, when things are now just getting goofier and goofier.  

The Majority of all Greek texts as well as Alexandrinus and the corrections to Sinaiticus, C and D all have the apostle Paul telling the saints:  "But we were GENTLE among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children".

This is the reading found in Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535,  Cranmer 1539, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Wesley’s translation 1755,  the Revised Version 1885, the ASV of 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, Darby, Young’s,  the Bible in Basic English 1960, the New English Bible 1979,  the NASBs 1963 through 1995, the NIVs of 1973, 78 and 84, the NKJVs, the RSV, NRSV 1989, the ESV 2001,  the Revised English Bible 1989,  the Message of 2002 and the Holman Standard of 2003, the Modern Greek version used all over the world in the Greek Orthodox churches, ISV of 2010 and the Common English Bible (another critical text version) of 2011.

Among foreign language Bibles, the reading found in the Traditional Greek Texts and the King James Bible of  “GENTLE among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children” are the Spanish Reina Valera of 1602, 1909, 1960 and 1995, - “nos portamos con ternura”,  the 1997 Biblia de las Américas put out by the Lockman Foundation - “benignos entre vosotros” as well as the Traducciôn en Lenguage Actual of 2000 put out by the United Bible Society- “los tratamos con mucho cariño”, and the Reina Valera Gomez Bible of 2004.  Also agreeing with “were gentle among you” are the Italian Diodati 1649 and 1991 New Diodati, the Riveduta of 2006, the Italian  La Parola é Vita  of 1997- “gentili con voi”,   the French Martin 1744 - “French Louis Segond 1910, the Ostervald  1996 and the 1999 La Bible du Semeur - “tendresse”, and the 2000 Portuguese O Livro.


 However Vaticanus actually says: "But we were BABIES among you, as a nursing mother cares for her own children."   Westcott and Hort first adopted this absurd reading, but very soon the critical text editors deleted this reading and replaced it with the correct reading of “gentle among you”.  This reading lasted through at least 21 separate editions of their ever changing Greek Critical text. I have my own copies of the Nestle 4th edition of 1934 and the Nestle 21st edition of 1975 and both of them clearly read “gentle among you”.  However the 27th edition of the Nestle - Aland text 1993 as well as the UBS 1 through 4 editions texts have now removed the previous reading of “GENTLE” and replaced it with the Vaticanus, Westcott-Hort reading of “we were BABES among you”.

Even though the more recent Nestle - Aland, UBS Greek texts have adopted this strange reading, still most modern versions that usually follow the critical text readings have not gone along with them on this.

But there are a few notable exceptions like Daniel Wallace’s NET version.  Daniel Wallace’s NET version has actually followed this strange reading.  His NET version reads: “although we could have imposed our weight as apostles of Christ; instead we became LITTLE CHILDREN among you. Like a nursing mother caring for her own children..." But there is more!  The new NIV 2011 has come out and they have changed the underlying Greek text they followed in their first three editions (1973, 78 and 1984 - "but we were GENTLE among you") and now the late$e$t in Scholar$hip edition now reads: "Instead we were LIKE YOUNG CHILDREN among you."

1 Thessalonians 2:7 NIV 1984 - “BUT we were GENTLE among you, LIKE a mother CARING for her little children.”

1 Thessalonians 2:7 NIV 2011 - “INSTEAD, we were LIKE YOUNG CHILDREN among you.. JUST AS a nursing mother CARES for her children.”

This is similar to the Catholic Douay-Rheims version of 1582 which reads - “but WE BECAME LITTLE ONES IN THE MIDST OF YOU, as if a nurse should cherish her children”, but this reading is obviously absurd since it defies all reason and logic and turns the apostles into little children and the new believers into their care givers.

The Catholic version of 1970 called the Saint Joseph New American Bible went back to the reading of “we were GENTLE among you”, but then in 2009 the latest Catholic version, the Catholic Public Domain Version,  has once again changed their underlying texts and have gone back to the reading of - “we became LIKE LITTLE ONES in your midst, like a nurse cherishing her children.”

The New Living Translation of 1998 has “we were as GENTLE among you as a mother feeding and caring for her own children.”  But the 2004 New Living Translation has again changed their text to now read - “we were LIKE CHILDREN among you.”



2 Thessalonians 2:13 KJB - "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath FROM THE BEGINNING chosen you to salvation..."

"From the beginning" is the reading found in the majority of all texts, as well as Sinaiticus, the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Coptic Sahidic, Armenian, and Ethiopic ancient versions. It also was the reading of the previous Nestle-Aland Greek editions, and is still found in the NIV 1973, 1984 editions, NASB, RV, ASV, NKJV, RSV, NET version and the 2003 Holman Christian Standard.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 NIV 1984 - “But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because FROM THE BEGINNING God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.”

2 Thessalonians 2:13 NIV 2011 - “But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers AND SISTERS loved by the Lord, because God chose you AS FIRSTFRUITS to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.”

However, the latest Nestle-Aland texts have once again changed their reading, based on Vaticanus, and now reads: "God has chosen you AS THE FIRST FRUITS to be saved" and this is how the NRSV, ESV  and the NIV 2011 edition now read! So again, it looks like those old NASB, NIV's 1973, 1984  and 2003 Holman Standards are once again out of date and follow the wrong texts according to the late$t $cholarly finding$.

Philemon 6

KJB - "That the communcation of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus." 

NIV 1984 - ‟I pray that you may be active in sharing your faith, so that you will have a full understanding of every good thing we have in Christ.

NIV 2011 -  ‟I pray that your partnership with us in the faith may be effective in deepening your understanding of every good thing we share for the sake of Christ.



Hebrews 11:11 “Who did what?!?” Which NIV “got it right”?

Hebrews 11:11 KJB - “Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.”

Hebrews 11:11 NIV 1984 - “By faith ABRAHAM, EVEN THOUGH HE WAS PAST AGE - AND SARAH HERSELF WAS BARREN—was enabled to BECOME A FATHER because HE considered him faithful who had made the promise.”

Hebrews 11:11 NIV 2011 - “ And by faith  EVEN SARAH, WHO WAS PAST CHILDBEARING AGE, was enabled TO BEAR CHILDREN because  SHE considered him faithful who had made the promise.”

1 John 2:16 KJB -"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

NIV 1984 -  For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and theboasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.”

NIV 2011 - ‟For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and thepride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.”



Revelation 9:13 KJB- “...and I heard a voice from THE FOUR horns of the golden altar which is  before God”

Revelatin 9:13 NIV 1984 - “and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God.”

Revelation 9:13 NIV 2011 - “and I heard a voice coming from THE FOUR horns of the golden altar that is before God.”

Again, this is a textual change. The words “the four” are found in the majority of all Greek texts. Sinaiticus original said “ONE of the FOUR horns”, but Sinaiticus correction and A omit the word FOUR.  The NIV 1984 followed the reading of A and omitted the word “four” but now follows the TR and majority texts and includes the number.

Including the number FOUR are the NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman, NKJV, Douay-Rheims, the New Jerusalem bible and now the NIV 2011. Omitting the number FOUR are the Revised Version, the ASV of 1901, the Message, the NIVs of 1973, 1977 and 1984, St. Joseph NAB and the NET version. Several have footnotes telling us “other ancient authorities lack “four”.


Revelation 15:3 "thou King of saints"

This is the reading found in the Greek manuscripts of 296, 2049 and 2066. It is also the reading of the Greek texts of Stephanus, Beza, Elziever, and the Trinity Bible Society Scrivener text. "King of saints" is also quoted by various church fathers like Victorinus, Tyconius, Apringius, and Cassiodorus.

Not even the modern versions agree among themselves. Westcott and Hort originally went with “king of AGES” (twn aiwniwn) but later UBS texts changed it to read "king of NATIONS" (twn ethnwn) and so read the NASB, NRSV, ESV, Jerusalem bible, and Holman Standard. However, versions like the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, RSV, Douay, and the NIV 1984 all read: "king of THE AGES". There is no Vaticanus mss. for Revelation, but the other so called "oldest and best mss." - Sinaiticus - originally read "ages" then it was changed to "nations" and then somebody changed it once again to "ages".

Notice that the RV, and ASV read "king of the ages", but then the revision NASB changed this to "king of nations". The RSV read "ages" but the revisions of the RSV now read "nations". The Douay read "ages" but the other Catholic revision now says "nations". The NIV 1984 edition says "ages" too, but wait! Now the revision of the NIV has come out in 2010 along with the TNIV of 2005 and they both say: "king of the NATIONS". NONE of the revisions agree with the previous versions.

Revelation 15:3 NIV 1984 - “and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: “Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the AGES.”

Revelation 15:3 NIV 2011 - “and sang the song of God’s servant Moses  and of the Lamb: “Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the NATIONS.”

Revelation 18:2 - KJB - "And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful BIRD." (orneou)

So read the Majority of all texts, the TR AND Sinaiticus. "every unclean and hateful BIRD" is also the reading of the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, RSV, The Message, and the NIV 1973 and 1984 editions.

However manuscript A (Alexandrinus) reads "the cage of every unclean and hateful BEAST."  and omits the part about "cage of every unclean bird" (theerion)

The previous Westcott-Hort, Nestle's Greek texts read as do the King James Bible and even the NASB, NIV 1984, but later on, the UBS Greek "scholars" decided to change it, and it now includes both readings in full.

So now the 2003 Holman Standard and the 2001 ESV have come out and they add this extra reading of five Greek words which follows neither the Majority text, Sinaiticus nor Alexandrinus. These two latest versions read:

“Fallen, fallen, is Babylon the great! She has become a lair for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, A HAUNT FOR EVERY UNCLEAN BIRD, AND A HAUNT FOR EVERY UNCLEAN AND DESPICABLE BEAST." (Holman Standard 2003, ESV 2001.)  So, it looks like not even the "old" NIV of 1984 nor the 1995 NASB are now "up to date with the latest scholarly findings"!!!

Revelation 18:2 NIV 1984 -  “Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great! She has become a HOME for demons and a haunt for every EVIL spirit, a haunt for every unclean and detestable BIRD."

Revelation 18:2 NIV 2011 -  "Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great!’ She has become a DWELLING for demons and a haunt for every IMPURE spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, A HAUNT FOR EVERY UNCLEAN AND and detestable ANIMAL."

The new NIV 2011 now takes part from the majority of texts and the other 5 words they add from just one manuscript which also omits the previous 5 Greek words found in the other manuscripts. So, they now include both readings in a single verse, and there is no Greek manuscript on this earth that reads that way.  Modern scholarship is a wonder to behold, isn't it? You always wonder what they will come up with next; and it they happen to "get it right" it's a Wonder.

 

The “new” NIV is way more “Gender Neutral” than even the old NIV was.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-09-01-bible-translation_N.htm

The same USA article about  the 2011 NIV had this to say regarding the gender neutrality of the TNIV -

“The NIV, now in pews and homes in 46 countries, was originally published in 1978; it was updated in 1984. A plan to revise it in 1997 died when word got out that it would use "inclusive language" — code for largely eliminating masculine pronouns.

The scholars and publishers tried again, releasing an accessible updated translation in 2005. This Bible had a slightly different name, Today's New International Version, or TNIV It eliminated masculine or feminine usage they said was unsupported by original manuscripts or unclear in modern lingo.

The TNIV was greeted with horror by traditionalists and scholars. Wayne Grudem, author of The TNIV and the Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy and a professor of the Bible and theology at Phoenix Seminary in Scottsdale, Ariz., spotted 3,000 places where words such as "man," "father," "son," "brother" and "he" vanished.

MORE F&R: Egalitarian or complementarian view of men and women in religion?

Tuesday, Danby said they erred in presenting past updates, failed to convince people revisions were needed and "underestimated" readers' loyalty to the 1984 NIV.  Maureen Girkins, president of Zondervan, says the "divisive" TNIV and "cherished" 1984 NIV will not be published after the newest NIV comes out. "We need to undo the damage," she adds.”

Some try to defend the use of "gender neutral language" when re-translating the Bible, and we can see the modern mindset of those who put out modern versions like the NIV by their own quotes. You can see these quotes in an online article written in August of 2011 by Michael Marlowe, who is not even a KJB only believer.  You can see his article here:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/niv.2011.html 

In his article called The 2011 Revision of the NIV, Mr. Marlowe writes:

"The Real Reason for the Revision

The explanation offered for the “updates” is also misleading in that it does not mention the real political and financial considerations that have caused the NIV committee to make three revisions within the past fifteen years. The considerations that set in motion this series of revisions are, however, indicated in a document that set forth a new “Policy on Gender-Inclusive Language” adopted by the committee in 1992. The document contains these paragraphs:


C. Authors of Biblical books, even while writing Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit, unconsciously reflected in many ways, the particular cultures in which they wrote. Hence in the manner in which they articulate the Word of God, they sometimes offend modern sensibilities. At such times, translators can and may use non-offending renderings so as not to hinder the message of the Spirit.


D. The patriarchalism (like other social patterns) of the ancient cultures in which the Biblical books were composed is pervasively reflected in forms of expression that appear, in the modern context, to deny the common human dignity of all hearers and readers. For these forms, alternative modes of expression can and may be used, though care must be taken not to distort the intent of the original text.


The same committee wrote, in the Preface to the 1996 revision published in Great Britain, that they believed “it was often appropriate to mute the patriarchalism of the culture of the biblical writers through gender-inclusive language when this could be done without compromising the message of the Spirit” (p. vii)" (end of quotes by Michael Marlowe article)

Well, here's a New's Flash for all these modern "bible scholars". GOD HIMSELF is a MALE and HE inspired the words of the Bible.
The Bible is NOT "the patriarchalism of the culture of the biblical writers" but the Eternal God Himself stepped into history and caused chosen men to write His inspired words of absolute Truth.  Modern "scholars" are in fact attempting to emasculate and feminize the Bible, and they view The Bible as being a mere cultural product of the times it was written in rather than the  inspired and infallible revelation of the Eternal God Himself.

The Bible reveals God to be a man, a Father and a Husband, and we His people are called His sons and daughters and we are the bride of the Lamb.  Exodus 15:3 tells us "The LORD is a MAN of war: the LORD is his name." The word "man" is in all Hebrew texts and is the same word used in Genesis 2:23-24 where Adam says of Eve "she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife." "The LORD is a man of war" is the reading of the Geneva Bible, Bishops bible, Coverdale, Wycliffe, Douay-Rheims, the KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV and ESV, but some modern versions like the NASB, NIV, NET, Holman and the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem have omitted the word "man" and now merely say "the Lord is a warrior."

The Bible likewise reveals God as an Husband - "For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name" - Isaiah 54:5; "my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD." - Jeremiah 31:31; "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." - 2 Corinthians 11:2; "the marriage of the Lamb is come and his wife hath made herself ready" Revelation 19:7.  And God Himself is everywhere in Scripture revealed as our Father - "Is he not thy father that hath bought thee?" - Deuteronomy 32:6; "Doubtless thou are our father..thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer, thy name is from everlasting." - Isaiah 63:16; "Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed by thy name." - Matthew 6:9.

What has happened in fact is that the new NIV 2011 is just as “gender neutral” as the former TNIV. Look at the following examples and see if you think they “got it right this time” or not.

The new NIV changes literally thousands of words from what the old NIV read, making the 2011 NIV far more gender neutral.

Here are just a few of the hundreds of examples:

1984 NIV Luke 9:24 - “For whoever wants to save HIS life will lose it, but whoever loses HIS life for me will save it.”

2011 NIV - “For whoever wants to save THEIR life will lose it, but whoever loses THEIR life for me will save it.”

Luke 9:25 1984 NIV - What good is it for A MAN to gain the whole world,  and yet lose or forfeit HIS very self?

2011 NIV - What good is it for SOMEONE to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit THEIR very self?

1984 Luke 10:16 - ““HE who listens to you listens to me; HE WHO rejects you rejects me; but HE WHO rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Luke 10:16 NIV 2011 - “WHOEVER listens to you listens to me; WHOEVER rejects you rejects me; but WHOEVER rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Luke 12:9 NIV 1984 - “But HE who disowns me before MEN will be disowned before the angels of God.”

Luke 12:9 NIV 2011 - “But WHOEVER disowns me before OTHERS will be disowned before the angels of God.”

Luke 14:15 NIV 1984 - “Then he asked them, “If one of you has a SON or an ox that falls into a well on the Sabbath day, will you not immediately pull HIM out?”

Luke 14:14 NIV 2011 - “Then he asked them, “If one of you has A CHILD or an ox that falls into a well on the Sabbath day, will you not immediately pull IT out?”

Luke 14:35 NIV 1984 - ““HE who has ears to hear, let HIM hear.”

Luke 14:35 NIV 2011 - “WHOEVER has ears to hear, let THEM hear.”

Luke 17:3 NIV 1984 - “So watch yourselves. “If your brother sins, rebuke HIM, and if HE repents, forgive HIM.”

Luke 17:3 NIV 2011 - “So watch yourselves. “If your brother OR SISTER sins against you, rebuke THEM; and if THEY repent, forgive  THEM.”

Luke 20:4 NIV 1984 - “John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or FROM MEN?”

Luke 20:4 NIV 2011 - “John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or OF HUMAN ORIGIN?”

Luke 21:17 NIV 1984 - “ALL MEN will hate you because of me.”

Luke 21:17 NIV 2011 - “EVERYONE will hate you because of me.”

Luke 21:26 NIV 1984 - “MEN will faint from terror...”

Luke 21:26 NIV 2011 - “PEOPLE will faint from terror...”

John 5:41 NIV 1984 - “I do not accept praise from MEN”

John 5:41 NIV 2011 - “I do not accept  glory from HUMAN BEINGS”

John 7:16 NIV 1984 - “Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from HIM who sent me.”

John 7:16 NIV 2011 - “Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from THE ONE who sent me.”

John 13:19 NIV 1984 - “I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am HE.”

John 13:19 NIV 2011 - “I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am WHO I AM.”

Acts 5:4 NIV 1984 - “You have not lied to MEN but to God.”

Acts 5:4 NIV 2011 - “You have not lied just to HUMAN BEINGS but to God.”

Romans 3:4 NIV 1984 -”Let God be true, and every MAN a liar.”

Romans 3:4 NIV 2011 - “Let God be true, and every HUMAN BEING a liar.”

Romans 5:5 NIV 1984 - “God has poured out HIS love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom HE has given us.”

Romans 5:5 NIV 2011 - “God’S love has been poured out into our hearts  through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.”

Romans 7:1 NIV 1984 - “Do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to MEN who know the law—that the law has authority over A MAN only as long as HE lives?”

Romans 7:1 NIV 2011 - “Do you not know, brothers AND SISTERS—for I am speaking to THOSE who know the law—that the law has authority over SOMEONE only as long as THAT PERSON lives?”

“HUMAN BEINGS” and the “new” NIV 2011


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFuFuNMIqJ0

This teaching video examines the text of the Bible and how its translation is being changed to become more “gender inclusive” and “gender neutral”.  Dr. Dell Johnson is the main speaker and he relates how he came from a critical text position to the King James Bible position. 

At the 6 minute point Dr. Theodore Letis begins to address the issue of the “gender inclusive” language found in the NIV.

 They are complaining about the “gender inclusive” and “feminist” language of the TNIV and yet the “new” NIV of 2011 almost as bad. The TNIV had the term “human beings” some 71 times, but the new NIV still has it 51 times!  The NIV translators have not repented in the least of their “gender bender” ways of translating. 

In fact, in some ways they have gotten worse.  The “new” NIV frequently translates the Greek word for “brothers” (adelphos) as “brothers and SISTERS”, and has paraphrased the word “saints” (hagios) to “God’s people”. 

In fact, you won’t find the word “saints” in the “new” NIV at all.  This is more in keeping with Catholic theology that not every common believer in Christ is a “saint”, but this word is reserved for a special class of super star Christians so canonized by the Pope of Rome. 

 And it is a little ironic that Theodore Letis is one of the men addressing this issue, but he himself does not believe that ANY Bible in any language is the infallible words of God. He is not a King James Bible only believer, but it appears that Dell Johnson is.

 The gender inclusive term “HUMAN BEINGS” instead of the Hebrew and Greek words for “MAN” or “MEN” was first introduced by the liberal RSV in the 1950’s and the term  “human beings” intend of “men” is found 11 times in the RSV.  It was not found in the King James Bible or any English translation until then.  It was not in the Revised Version of 1881 or the ASV of 1901.

It has only gotten worse since then.  Now the word “HUMAN BEINGS” occurs in the NKJV one time, the NASB 7 times, the Holman Standard 12 times, the Message 17 times, the NIV 2011 edition 52 times, and in the new UBS/Nestle-Aland 2011 Common English Bible a whopping 151 times!

 The new NIV 2011 has now introduced the term "human beings" many times where it did not appear in the 1984 NIV edition..  It is getting worse and people simply DO NOT CARE!

Genesis 6:1 When HUMAN BEINGS began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them,

Genesis 6:6 The Lord regretted that he had made HUMAN BEINGS on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.

Genesis 9:5 And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each HUMAN BEING, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another HUMAN BEING.

Exodus 4:11 The Lord said to him, “Who gave HUMAN BEINGS  their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the Lord?

Leviticus 24:17 “‘Anyone who takes the life of a HUMAN BEING is to be put to death.

 Leviticus 24:21 Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a HUMAN BEING is to be put to death.

Leviticus 27:28 “‘But nothing that a person owns and devotes to the Lord—whether a HUMAN BEING or an animal or family land—may be sold or redeemed; everything so devoted is most holy to the Lord.

Numbers 23:19 God is not HUMAN, that he should lie, not a HUMAN BEING, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Deuteronomy 4:32  Ask now about the former days, long before your time, from the day God created HUMAN BEINGS on the earth; ask from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything so great as this ever happened, or has anything like it ever been heard of?

Joshua 10:14 There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the Lord listened to a HUMAN BEING. Surely the Lord was fighting for Israel!

1 Samuel 15:29 He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a HUMAN BEING, that he should change his mind.”

Job 21:4 “Is my complaint directed to a HUMAN BEING? Why should I not be impatient?

Job 25:6 how much less a mortal, who is but a maggot— a HUMAN BEING, who is only a worm!”

Psalm 8:4 what is mankind that you are mindful of them, HUMAN BEINGS that you care for them?

Psalm 78:25 HUMAN BEINGS ate the bread of angels; he sent them all the food they could eat.

Psalm 144:3 Lord, what are HUMAN BEINGS that you care for them, mere mortals that you think of them?

Psalm 146:3 Do not put your trust in princes, in HUMAN BEINGS, who cannot save.

Ecclesiastes 3:19 Surely the fate of HUMAN BEINGS is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; HUMANS have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless.

Isaiah 44:11 People who do that will be put to shame; such craftsmen are only HUMAN BEINGS. Let them all come together and take their stand; they will be brought down to terror and shame.

Isaiah 51:12 “I, even I, am he who comforts you. Who are you that you fear mere mortals, HUMAN BEINGS who are but grass,

Isaiah 52:14 Just as there were many who were appalled at him— his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any HUMAN BEING and his form marred beyond HUMAN likeness—

Ezekiel 1:10 Their faces looked like this: Each of the four had the face of a HUMAN BEING, and on the right side each had the face of a lion, and on the left the face of an ox; each also had the face of an eagle.

 Ezekiel 10:14 Each of the cherubim had four faces: One face was that of a cherub, the second the face of a HUMAN BEING, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.

Ezekiel 27:13 “‘Greece, Tubal and Meshek did business with you; they traded HUMAN BEINGS and articles of bronze for your wares.

 Ezekiel 41:19 the face of a HUMAN BEING toward the palm tree on one side and the face of a lion toward the palm tree on the other. They were carved all around the whole temple.

Daniel 6:7 The royal administrators, prefects, satraps, advisers and governors have all agreed that the king should issue an edict and enforce the decree that anyone who prays to any god or HUMAN BEING during the next thirty days, except to you, Your Majesty, shall be thrown into the lions’ den.

 Daniel 6:12 So they went to the king and spoke to him about his royal decree: “Did you not publish a decree that during the next thirty days anyone who prays to any god or HUMAN BEING except to you, Your Majesty, would be thrown into the lions’ den?” The king answered, “The decree stands—in accordance with the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be repealed.”

Daniel 7:4 “The first was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a HUMAN BEING, and the mind of a HUMAN was given to it.

Daniel 7:8  “While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a HUMAN BEING and a mouth that spoke boastfully.

John 5:41 “I do not accept glory from HUMAN BEINGS,

Acts 5:4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to HUMAN BEINGS but to God.”

Acts 5:29 Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than HUMAN BEINGS!

Romans 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal HUMAN BEING and birds and animals and reptiles.

Romans 2:3 So when you, a mere HUMAN BEING, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment?

 Romans 2:9 There will be trouble and distress for every HUMAN BEING who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile;

Romans 3:4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every HUMAN BEING a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.”

Romans 9:20  But who are you, a HUMAN BEING, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”

1 Corinthians 3:4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere HUMAN BEINGS?

1 Corinthians 4:9 For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like those condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to HUMAN BEINGS.

1 Corinthians 7:23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of HUMAN BEINGS.

Galatians 1:10 Am I now trying to win the approval of HUMAN BEINGS, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.

Galatians 1:16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any HUMAN BEING.

1 Thessalonians 4:8 Therefore, anyone who rejects this instruction does not reject a HUMAN BEING but God, the very God who gives you his Holy Spirit.

 Hebrews 8:2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere HUMAN BEING.

James 3:8 but no HUMAN BEING can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

James 3:9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse HUMAN BEINGS, who have been made in God’s likeness

James 5:17 Elijah was a HUMAN BEING, even as we are. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years.

 

Revelation 18:13 cargoes of cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine flour and wheat; cattle and sheep; horses and carriages; and HUMAN BEINGS sold as slaves.

Well, what about the ESV (English Standard Version)

 1. Ezekiel 27:13 Javan, Tubal, and Meshech traded with you; they exchanged HUMAN BEINGS  and vessels of bronze for your merchandise.

 2. Matthew 24:22 And if those days had not been cut short, no HUMAN BEING would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

 3. Mark 13:20 And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no HUMAN BEING would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days.

 4. John 16:21 When a woman is giving birth, she has sorrow because her hour has come, but when she has delivered the baby, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a HUMAN BEING has been born into the world.

 5. Romans 2:9 There will be tribulation and distress for every HUMAN BEING who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek,

 6. Romans 3:20 For by works of the law no HUMAN BEING will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

 7. 1 Corinthians 1:29 so that no HUMAN BEING might boast in the presence of God.

 8. 1 Corinthians 3:4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely HUMAN?

 9. Philippians 2:8 And being found in HUMAN form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

 10. James 3:8 but no HUMAN BEING can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

The NKJV - only once.

 

John 16:21 A woman, when she is in labor, has sorrow because her hour has come; but as soon as she has given birth to the child, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that A HUMAN BEING has been born into the world.

 

What about the NASB?

 

1. Leviticus 24:17  ‘If a man takes the life of any HUMAN BEING, he shall surely be put to death.

 

2. Numbers 31:35 and of HUMAN BEINGS, of the women who had not known man intimately, all the persons were 32,000.

 

3. Numbers 31:40 and the HUMAN BEINGS were 16,000, from whom the Lord’s levy was 32 persons.

 

4. Numbers 31:46 and the HUMAN BEINGS were 16,000—

 

5. Ezekiel 1:5 Within it there were figures resembling four living beings. And this was their appearance: they had HUMAN form.

 

6. Daniel 10:16 And behold, one who resembled A HUMAN BEING was touching my lips; then I opened my mouth and spoke and said to him who was standing before me, “O my lord, as a result of the vision anguish has come upon me, and I have retained no strength.

 

7. 2 Corinthians 3:3 being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of HUMAN hearts.

 

Any modern bible version that is based on the UBS, Nestle-Aland/Vatican critical Greek text is in fact a Vatican Version. Don’t believe it?  Here is the documented proof from right out of their own Nestle-Aland critical textbook, the UBS homepage and the Vatican’s own website.

Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET etc. are  the new "Vatican Versions"

http://brandplucked.webs.com/realcatholicbibles.htm

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”  Luke 8:8



Sometimes the NIV just arbitrarily changes the numbers.

Luke 16:6 KJB - “And he said, AN HUNDRED measurs of oil. (All Greek texts read 100 - hekaton) And he said, sit down quickly, and write FIFTY.” (All Greek texts say 50 - penteekonta)

Luke 16:6 NIV 1984 “‘EIGHT HUNDRED gallons of olive oil,’ he replied. “The manager told him, ‘Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it FOUR HUNDRED..’

Luke 16:6 NIV 2011 - “NINE HUNDRED gallons of olive oil,’ he replied. “The manager told him, ‘Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY.:”

Revelation 6:6 KJB - “A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny...”

Revelation 6:6 NIV 1984 - “A QUART of wheat for a day’s wages, and THREE QUARTS of barley for a day’s wages...”

Revelation 6:6 NIV 2011 - “TWO POUNDS of wheat for a day’s wages, and  SIX POUNDS of barley for a day’s wages...”



Sometimes the new NIV is just weird
-

2 Corinthians 2:14 KJB - “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ...”

2 Corinthians 2:14 NIV 1984 - “But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ...”

2 Corinthians 2:14 NIV 2011 - “But thanks be to God, who always LEADS US AS CAPTIVES in Christ’s triumphal procession...”

Galatians 3:13 KJB - “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on A TREE.” (See Deut. 21:23)

Galatians 3:13 NIV 1984 - “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a TREE.”

Galatians 3:13 NIV 2011 - “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a POLE.”

Ephesians 5:13 KJB - “But all things that are reproved are made manifest b the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.”  [Note: The light of God’s truth shows everything to be what it is.]

Ephesians 5:13 NIV 1984 - “But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, for it is light that makes everything visible.” [Same meaning as found in the KJB.]

Ephesians 5:13 NIV 2011 - “But everything exposed by the light becomes visible,—and everything that is illuminated becomes a light.” [Note, to expose sin and false doctrine by  the light does not make sin and false doctrine to become light.]


These are just a few of the hundreds and even thousands of changes the “this time we’ll get it right” new NIV of 2011 has introduced.  What we in fact see is that the modern versionists have no settled text and their so called “science” of textual criticism is about as scientific as throwing darts at a dart board.

At present the majority of present day Christians no longer believe that ANY Bible in ANY language IS or ever was the complete, inspired and infallible words of God.

May I suggest you get yourself the only Bible that has stood the test of time and is believed by thousands of blood bought Christians to be in fact the 100% historically true words of the living God - the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

”for ye have perverted the words of the living God” - Jeremiah 23:36

“Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.”  Jeremiah 15:16

All of grace, believing The Book,

Will Kinney

Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm

 

Excellent Online Book  - "Serious Omissions in the NIV Bible” by Keith Piper

Here is a very thorough examination of the NIV, what it is missing and how it perverts what it does have of the true words of God. It is done by Keith Piper and he obviously spent a lot of time putting this together.   

 

It is called “Serious Omissions in the NIV Bible”

 

http://www.kingjamesvideoministries.com/NIVOmissions.pdf 

 

NIV 2011  Changes 

http://biblewebapp.com/niv2011-changes/

Summary

 

Whole Bible

The first three rows show the number of verses and percentage of verses where the NIV2011 and NIV1984 are the same, when the NIV2011 kept the tNIV rendering, and when the NIV2011 has something completely new.

The last two rows compare the total number of words that are the same and how many were changed (the average of added and removed). Puncation is not included in this count.

NIV2011 verse same as 1984

18,666

60.02%

NIV2011 verse same as tNIV

9,726

31.27%

NIV2011 rejected tNIV, reverted to NIV1984

269

.86%

NIV2011 verse verse is new

2,440

7.85%

NIV2011 words same as 1984

356,610

91.37%

NIV2011 changed words

33,666

8.63%

NIV2011 removed words

32,863

 

NIV2011 added words

34,469

 

Book by Book

The first three columns show the number of verses and percentage of verses where the NIV2011 and NIV1984 are the same, when the NIV2011 kept the tNIV rendering, and when the NIV2011 has something completely new.

The last two columns compare the total number of words that are the same and how many were changed (the average of added and removed). Puncutation is not included in this count.

Section

NIV2011 verse same as 1984

NIV2011 verse same as tNIV

NIV2011 verse is new

NIV2011 words same as 1984

NIV2011 words changed from 1984

Total

18,666

60.02%

9,726

31.27%

2,440

7.85%

356,610

91.37%

33,666

8.63%

Genesis

1,163

75.86%

294

19.18%

73

4.76%

10,847

93.26%

784

6.74%

Exodus

868

71.56%

287

23.66%

56

4.62%

10,235

92.06%

883

7.94%

Leviticus

392

45.63%

405

47.15%

61

7.1%

14,052

88.89%

1,757

11.11%

Numbers

823

63.9%

420

32.61%

40

3.11%

13,951

91.51%

1,295

8.49%

Deuteronomy

623

64.96%

248

25.86%

81

8.45%

11,155

93.27%

806

6.73%

Joshua

416

63.22%

193

29.33%

45

6.84%

7,369

89.7%

847

10.3%

Judges

336

54.37%

217

35.11%

60

9.71%

9,062

91.79%

811

8.21%

Ruth

36

42.35%

30

35.29%

19

22.35%

1,658

92.5%

135

7.5%

1 Samuel

502

61.98%

269

33.21%

34

4.2%

10,939

93.41%

772

6.59%

2 Samuel

421

60.58%

236

33.96%

33

4.75%

9,688

93.62%

661

6.38%

1 Kings

583

71.45%

197

24.14%

31

3.8%

7,893

93.52%

547

6.48%

2 Kings

494

68.71%

206

28.65%

16

2.23%

8,476

94.39%

504

5.61%

1 Chronicles

696

73.89%

210

22.29%

34

3.61%

6,740

94.27%

410

5.73%

2 Chronicles

555

67.52%

229

27.86%

35

4.26%

9,716

94.4%

577

5.6%

Ezra

195

69.64%

68

24.29%

16

5.71%

2,712

94.96%

144

5.04%

Nehemiah

265

65.27%

114

28.08%

25

6.16%

4,737

94.98%

251

5.02%

Esther

114

68.26%

49

29.34%

4

2.4%

2,129

93.32%

153

6.68%

Job

694

64.86%

290

27.1%

68

6.36%

7,046

88.8%

889

11.2%

Psalm

1,162

47.22%

1,086

44.13%

176

7.15%

25,234

88.34%

3,331

11.66%

Proverbs

311

33.99%

490

53.55%

103

11.26%

9,859

81.72%

2,206

18.28%

Ecclesiastes

108

48.65%

81

36.49%

33

14.86%

2,932

86.52%

457

13.48%

Song of Songs

48

41.03%

67

57.26%

2

1.71%

1,903

94.23%

117

5.77%

Isaiah

744

57.59%

389

30.11%

142

10.99%

18,366

92.83%

1,419

7.17%

Jeremiah

847

62.1%

328

24.05%

135

9.9%

19,167

94.23%

1,174

5.77%

Lamentations

91

59.09%

49

31.82%

10

6.49%

1,847

94.86%

100

5.14%

Ezekiel

811

63.71%

325

25.53%

130

10.21%

16,131

91.95%

1,413

8.05%

Daniel

234

65.55%

108

30.25%

14

3.92%

4,690

93.77%

312

6.23%

Hosea

115

58.38%

59

29.95%

22

11.17%

2,468

91.71%

223

8.29%

Joel

46

63.01%

22

30.14%

5

6.85%

925

92.55%

75

7.45%

Amos

63

43.15%

38

26.03%

32

21.92%

2,765

93.24%

201

6.76%

Obadiah

12

57.14%

5

23.81%

3

14.29%

338

94.41%

20

5.59%

Jonah

20

41.67%

16

33.33%

11

22.92%

822

87.87%

114

12.13%

Micah

51

48.57%

26

24.76%

27

25.71%

1,787

91.64%

163

8.36%

Nahum

28

59.57%

17

36.17%

2

4.26%

605

92.86%

47

7.14%

Habakkuk

25

44.64%

26

46.43%

5

8.93%

942

94.72%

53

5.28%

Zephaniah

11

20.75%

34

64.15%

6

11.32%

1,400

89.46%

165

10.54%

Haggai

21

55.26%

12

31.58%

4

10.53%

670

96.2%

27

3.8%

Zechariah

112

53.08%

71

33.65%

26

12.32%

3,215

91.69%

292

8.31%

Malachi

16

29.09%

34

61.82%

5

9.09%

1,411

89.33%

169

10.67%

Matthew

666

62.18%

269

25.12%

128

11.95%

11,374

91.86%

1,008

8.14%

Mark

471

69.47%

149

21.98%

56

8.26%

5,806

92.12%

497

7.88%

Luke

788

68.46%

282

24.5%

76

6.6%

10,070

92.19%

853

7.81%

John

493

56.09%

317

36.06%

66

7.51%

10,466

91.27%

1,002

8.73%

Acts

628

62.36%

303

30.09%

67

6.65%

10,413

91.59%

956

8.41%

Romans

187

43.19%

169

39.03%

74

17.09%

6,560

89.08%

805

10.92%

1 Corinthians

210

48.05%

172

39.36%

53

12.13%

5,618

86.94%

844

13.06%

2 Corinthians

147

57.2%

86

33.46%

21

8.17%

3,138

91.15%

305

8.85%

Galatians

46

30.87%

53

35.57%

48

32.21%

2,507

88.01%

342

11.99%

Ephesians

99

63.87%

43

27.74%

12

7.74%

1,308

89.93%

147

10.07%

Philippians

47

45.19%

50

48.08%

7

6.73%

1,334

87.5%

191

12.5%

Colossians

54

56.84%

29

30.53%

12

12.63%

1,076

87.69%

151

12.31%

1 Thessalonians

36

40.45%

43

48.31%

9

10.11%

1,173

89.17%

143

10.83%

2 Thessalonians

27

57.45%

16

34.04%

4

8.51%

489

85.56%

83

14.44%

1 Timothy

68

60.18%

39

34.51%

6

5.31%

1,109

87.98%

152

12.02%

2 Timothy

51

61.45%

26

31.33%

6

7.23%

793

90.99%

79

9.01%

Titus

26

56.52%

18

39.13%

2

4.35%

423

88.77%

54

11.23%

Philemon

14

56%

10

40%

1

4%

239

86.13%

39

13.87%

Hebrews

155

51.16%

120

39.6%

28

9.24%

4,083

90.51%

428

9.49%

James

40

37.04%

43

39.81%

23

21.3%

1,620

88.4%

213

11.6%

1 Peter

48

45.71%

41

39.05%

16

15.24%

1,559

89.65%

180

10.35%

2 Peter

28

45.9%

30

49.18%

3

4.92%

913

89.86%

103

10.14%

1 John

52

49.52%

34

32.38%

18

17.14%

1,389

88.84%

175

11.16%

2 John

7

53.85%

5

38.46%

1

7.69%

126

90.32%

14

9.68%

3 John

8

57.14%

2

14.29%

4

28.57%

148

86.3%

24

13.7%

Jude

8

32%

14

56%

3

12%

498

90.05%

55

9.95%

Revelation

210

52.11%

118

29.28%

72

17.87%

6,496

92.34%

539

7.66%