When it comes to Bible translations, the vast majority of Evangelical Christians use basically two versions- The King James Version, also known as the Authorized Version, and the New International Version. There are others also widely used, (the English Standard, the Revised Standard, the Amplified, The New American Standard, etc), but the two standards are the KJV and the NIV. I prefer the KJV over the NIV for several reasons.
First the NIV is a weaker version theologically. What do I mean? Let us examine the texts and I will explain.
We begin with one of my favorite verse in the New Testament, Romans 8:1
KJV:
"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
NIV:
"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."
What's the difference? "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Why is this significant? Because if we are in Christ Jesus, (i.e. are saved), but we are not walking after the Spirit then we should absolutely feel a healthy amount of conviction while we are serving our enemy the flesh. The NIV relegates the second half of verse one to a footnote, saying that the provision that we must walk after the Spirit is somehow unimportant. If we are walking (living) in the Spirit then there is no condemnation. If we are walking in our flesh then there should be a certain amount of condemnation.
We continue with Romans 12:1
KJV:
1I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
NIV:
1Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God-this is your spiritual act of worship.
The difference?
"this is your spiritual act of worship", vs "which is your reasonable service". "Spiritual act of worship" places the act of presenting your self a living sacrifice to God outside of your daily life. The implication I get from that Scripture in the NIV is that one can only present themselves to God when they are feeling super spiritual. "Reasonable service " takes offering ourselves To God as a living sacrifice out of the ethereal and places it into the daily walk of faith that we are called to.
The most important difference between the NIV and the KJV occurs in 1 John 5:7
In the KJV, verses 7-8 state: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
In the NIV, The verses say: 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.
The difference? In the NIV there is ZERO mention of one of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith- that of the Trinity. This the only place in the Scriptures that ascribes deity and equality to all three parts of the Godhead at the same time, and the NIV removes it from the verse and places it in a footnote. The footnote states: "1 John 5:8 Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"
My question to the translators of the NIV is why was this added in to the Scriptures so late if it is a fundamental doctrine of the Christian Faith for 16 centuries? I mean wouldn't someone have placed that reference to the Trinity in much earlier?
The last Scriptural Beef I have with the NIV is found in the book of Romans, Chapter 6
In the KJV, Verses 1-2 read
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
The NIV reads as follows
What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?
The difference? "God Forbid" vs "By no means!" Question- which sounds stronger to you. God, (the Almighty, The King of Kings and Lord of Lords) forbid, or by no means? God forbid sounds a lot stronger to me because God does indeed actually forbid those who claim Christ to stay in known sin.
I prefer the KJV over the NIV not only for those reasons, but also because of the language itself. The King James Bible has some of the most beautiful wording in the English Language. The Wording of the KJV is simple, but it also beautiful. There is a reason that the King James Version has been around for 400 years- it has stood the test of time.
These are some of the reasons that I prefer the King James Version over the New International Version.
5 comments:
The KJV is indeed a masterpiece and its popularity endures across a wide Christian spectrum. Best wishes with your studies.
I agree that the NIV is weaker than the KJV, and I think the KJV is just amazing... reading it aloud, so much of it is just so well-written. As an English major, I am constantly astonished at the rhythm of the passages, and the perfection of the phrasing, even in the Old Testament.
On the other hand, though I am surprised (and, to admit a nip of snobbery) a little bit disappointed when I see people relying on The Message, or other translations (paraphrases) I haven't personally seen a correlation between people who are really walking for the Lord and the Bible versions they read.
One other point: I find the NIV's constant footnoting and stuff like 'some manuscripts include..." and "some versions read..." disquieting. It's as if the NIV translators insisted on introducing fallibility into the infallible Word of God, and it's a constant "reminder" to anyone who may doubt the Scripture that it was written by man, and not by God.
Of course, I believe that all Scripture is written by the Holy Spirit, but for many people, the stumbling block is their inability to trust the Bible. The NIV, with its "scholarly" in-depth treatments of the differences between ancient manuscripts, seems to increase this stumbling block, not diminish it.
I agree with Peter. The reason I find this so disturbing is the Bible's clear warnings about putting stumbling blocks in people's paths (see Leviticus 19:14, Romans 14:13, and Mark 9:42). It appears to me that this particular stumbling block casts doubt on what God said, or perhaps on what He meant when He said it. This is the very first deception Satan used against Eve. I should hate for anyone to doubt God's Word BECAUSE of His Word!
Hey Compassionate Conservative,
I think your mom is following me!!!
:)
Peter
In lieu of an overlong comment, I have posted my thoughts at my blog.
Post a Comment