Exposing!! The Corrupt Counterfeit (NIV) Bible, Verses That Have Been Tamped With!!

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

Mss evidence that even affects doctrine:

Colossians 2:2-3

Col 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;​

Col 2:3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.​

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2:2&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/colossians/2/#v51002002

The words do not occur as in KJB, in the following corrupted texts:

"...TEXT: "knowledge of God's mystery, of Christ"​

EVIDENCE: p46 B (Vaticanus)​

TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSV NASV NIV NEB TEV?​

RANK: B​

​

NOTES: "knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ"
EVIDENCE: D* four lat
TRANSLATIONS: TEV?​

​

NOTES: "knowledge of the mystery of God, Father of Christ"
EVIDENCE: S* A C 048 four lat cop(north) some cop(south)
TRANSLATIONS: TEVn​

​

...​

​

NOTES: "knowledge of God's mystery"
EVIDENCE: Db H P 1881 one cop(south)
TRANSLATIONS: TEVn​

​

OTHER: "knowledge of the mystery of Christ"
EVIDENCE: 81 1241 1739​

​

OTHER: "knowledge of the mystery of the God and Father of Christ"
EVIDENCE: Sb Psi syr(h) ..." - http://web.ovu.edu/terry/tc/lay21col.htm​

Here is the extant literature which has the text in it:

"... NOTES: "knowledge of the mystery of the God and Father and of Christ"
EVIDENCE: Dc K 104 614 630 2495 Byz Lect syr(h+) syr(p) ("God the Father")
TRANSLATIONS: KJV NIVn TEVn..." - http://web.ovu.edu/terry/tc/lay21col.htm​

"D 06 - Paris: Claromontanus (corrected), K 018, L 020, Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.)" - https://www.scionofzion.com/colossians_2_2.htm​

Additionally:

"... All the words "AND OF THE FATHER, AND OF" are found again in the Majority of all texts - του μυστηριου του θεου και πατρος και του χριστου ​

​

The other so called "oldest and best" are in hopeless confusion. Vaticanus has a nonsensical reading which is "the mystery of God, of Christ."- του μυστηριου του θεου, χριστου​

​

Sinaiticus original had -"the mystery of God Father of Christ" - τοῦ θεοῦ πατρὸς Χριστοῦ​

​

Then Sinaiticus was changed to read like A and C - "the mystery of the God and Father of the Christ" τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ​

​

But D original had "the mystery of God who is Christ - τοῦ θεοῦ, ὃ ἐστιν Χριστός​

​

and then D was changed to read like the Majority, K, L, and the TR - "the mystery of God and the Father and of Christ." - τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ...​

​

... The words "the mystery of God, AND OF THE FATHER, AND OF Christ" are found in Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta" - https://brandplucked.webs.com/colossians.htm​

 

[Nehemiah6]

And yet the essence of Scripture remains the same. In Jesus Christ we have salvation.

That is not even the issue. We are contending about the inspired words of God given to apostles and prophets. There is a severe warning in Revelation to those who would tamper with Scripture. But that is exactly what the Gnostics did, and their corruptions have crept into the modern translation. It would require a book to address each and every corruption and its impact on Bible doctrine.

Take 1 Timothy 3:16 as an example. Only the KJV says what is clearly stated in EVERY MANUSCRIPT except two, "GOD" (THEOS) was manifest in the flesh -- a clear statement of the deity of Christ (even the Greek abbreviations in the uncials have Theos). But none of the modern versions has "GOD", and thus the sentence makes absolutely no sense. Some of the cults believe that Michael is Christ, but Jesus is not God.

King James Bible
...God was manifest in the flesh...

Young's Literal Translation [Young was not following the critical texts]
...God was manifested in flesh...

Darby Bible Translation [Darby could not bring himself to follow W & H in this, although he generally followed the critical text]
...God has been manifested in flesh...

New International Version
...He appeared in the flesh...

English Standard Version
...He was manifested in the flesh...

New American Standard Bible
...He who was revealed in the flesh...

Holman Christian Standard Bible
...He was manifested in the flesh...

International Standard Version
...In flesh was he revealed to sight...

American Standard Version
...He who was manifested in the flesh..

English Revised Version [this is Westcott & Hort's translation and as you can see all the modern versions have followed it slavishly]
... He who was manifested in the flesh...
[Unitarians reject the deity of Christ. Westcott & Hort brought a Unitarian - G. Vance Smith -- onto the Revision Committee, and he just loved this mutilation of the text, since it supported his doctrine. "When others complained about his appointment, both Hort and Westcott as well as Bishop Thirlwall, threatened to resign if he (Smith) left." ]

 

[posthuman]

No! I am not saying that" it's fairly inconsequential for God to be against someone" because He shows in scripture that He is and can be against someone as He see's fit
There is this doctrinal beliefs out there that says "God will never break a promise" which a false statement. Because except for the promise of Agape Love every single promise God has ever made in scripture had conditions attached to God keeping His promise. This means that when the Israelites came back from scouting the land and became disobedient by becoming doubtful that God would be able to conquer the people's of the land, God took back His promise He made to them when He promised that He would take them to a land of milk and honey.
Exo 3:8 And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites.
So by what is said in Exo 3:8 and in Num. 14:34 shows us that God will break a promise He gave us if we don't abide by or keep the conditions put forth by God, we will suffer the breach/breaking of His promise and the punishment for not keeping our end of the condition. In other words all promises except one made by God are a Quid Pro Quo.

You are arguing that it is closer to the truth to say that God BREAKS HIS PROMISES?
The above question is a minipulating and suggestive question designed to trap me. The words"God BREAKS HIS PROMISES" are a distortion of my words and away from the subject matter here.
I never said anything about God breaking His promises in the plural and we are talking about one promise. Not more then one promise as you are implying. Satan is the author of Manipulation's which is also called "Witchcraft" in the Bible.
Don't try to use Manipulation's on me and I won't compare your questions to Satan's craftsmanship.

So Yes, that is excatly what I am saying. The words "Breach of Promise" or "God will break His promise to us" if we are disobedent and do not abide or keep the conditions set forth by God so that He can keep His promise He made to us.
And yes, the words "Breach of Promise" is much closer to the truth of who God is and how He will react to our disobedeince.

My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of My lips.
(Psalm 89:34) ​

​

the covenant at Sinai included blessings and curses - blessing if they obeyed, and a curse for disobedience. and this law was given to a people who had been stiff-necked, disobedient and grumbling from the very day He brought them out.
God is faithful. He did not break His covenant.

But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:​

Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.​

Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.​

Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.​

Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.​

The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken Me.​

(Deuteronomy 28:15-20) ​

​

so when He pronounces a judgment in Numbers 14:34 this is called keeping His promise not breaking it.

it is not good to call Him a breaker of a promise.
if your beliefs cause you to do that, you should re-examine your belief.

the word in question in Numbers 14:34 ((Strong's 8569, "rejection")) occurs once more in scripture, in Job 33:10 -- can we make 'break His promise' fit in that verse? and if we cannot, can we explain why it means one thing here, and something else entirely there?

 

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

Uncials (Majuscules), Miniscules, Cursives, Papyrii, Codices, Lectionaries, Breviaries, Commentaries, Letters, Manuscripts, etc.

1 John 5:13

1Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.​

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+5:13&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/1-john/5/#v62005013

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

Aleph* (Sinaiticus*), A (Alexandrinus), B (Vaticanus), pc, Old Latin: r, Vulgate, Syriac: Harclean, Armenian, Ethiopic​

Here is the vast extant literature which has the text in it:

​

"... K, L, P​

(Psi)​

Cursives: MAJORITY​

​

Also extant in 048, 049, 056, 0142 ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, pages 147​

 

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

It is simply amazing to see the 'choices' made among the mss in modern translations, when their basic premise is ignore the MAJORITY, BYZANTINE, etc and run with the two most emended texts (codices, Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus)), in most instances, and then in other instances turn right around and ignore them altogether. It seems the real 'mss' that the modern translation committees go by is the 'mss' in their own heads.

Revelation 1:11

Rev 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.​

​

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+1:11&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/revelation/1/#v66001011

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

Aleph (Sinaiticus), A (Alexandrinus), C, 046, pm-046 Mss, Vulgate, Syriac: Philoxonean, Harclean, Coptic: Sahaidic, Bohairic, Armenian Ethiopic​

​

Here is the extant literature which has the text in it:

"... P​

Cursives: pm-Andreas Mss​

​

See KJVMT p 80. ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, pages 149​

Additionally:

​

"... 296, 1894, 2066.​

About 10 of Hoskiers cursives.​

Vulgate: Clementine;​

Coptic: Bohairic;​

Armenian, Arabic.​

​

Bede, England, Latin, 735. ..." - When The KJV Departs From The "Majority" Text of Hodge & Farstad, cited by the corrupt NKJV, by Jack Moorman, page 80​

​

Internal structural evidence:

(1) Isaiah 55:4 --> Revelation 1:5 (Witness)​

​

(2) Daniel 7:13 --> Revelation 1:7 (Coming with Clouds of angels)​

​

(3) Zechariah 12:10-14 --> Revelation 1:7 (Pierced and Wail)​

​

(4) Isaiah 41:4,6 --> Revelation 1:8 (I AM)​

​

(4) Isaiah 41:4,6 --> Revelation 1:11 (I AM)​

​

(3) Zechariah 4:2 --> Revelation 1:12 (Candlestick, Sanctuary, HolyPlace)​

​

(2) Daniel 7:9,13,22 --> Revelation 1:13-15 (Priest)​

​

(1) Isaiah 49:2 --> Revelation 1:16 (Sharp Sword)​

​

Which is why, Revelation 1:8 "I AM" and 1:11 "I AM" (etc) must both be there, for it is inherent within the very structure, remove one of the "I AM" and it destroys that structure and cripples the text. Revelation (and even the whole Bible, take for instance the First two chapters of Genesis (Paradise Lost), and the Last two chapters of Revelation (Paradise Restored), they are written in A B B A pattern, with the Book of Job being sort of a great center for the Great Controversy between Christ and satan.) is written in a special Chiastic structure that cannot be broken.​

There is also another parallelism in the greater body of Revelation that Revelation 1:11 must also align with.

Revelation 1:8,11 "... Alpha and Omega ..." parallels structurally Revelation 21:6, 22:13 ".,.. Alpha and Omega ..."​

Revelation 1:8 "... the beginning and the ending ..." parallels structurally Revelation 21:6, 22:13, "... the beginning and the ending ..."​

​

More detail on the structure and parallelism of Revelation (and Daniel) may be viewed here:

Study Notes – Daniel & the Revelation compared, 7 Branch Candlestick (PDF)

Full image here (click)

 

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

All the mss fragments, etc, that we have, and they are still looking for more, to 'finally be able to know what the original said', hoping it matches the one in their head.

Revelation 2:15

Rev 2:15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.​

​

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern.

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

Aleph (Sinaiticus), A (Alexandrinus), C, 046, pm-046 Mss, Vulgate, Syriac: Philoxonean, Harclean, Coptic: Bohairic​

Here is the vast extant literature which has the text in it:

​

"... P​

Cursives: pm-Andreas Mss​

Armenian​

See p 79 in KJVMT (latest version, p 82). ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, pages 149-150​

Additionally:

"... l, 61-mg, 2037.​

About 22 of Hoskiers cursives, including 11 which have a variant which translates as the KJV.​

Armenian.​

Andreas, Cappadocia, 614. ...​

​

Many other mss. have the words "which I hate", but in conjunction with "in the same way". ..." - When the KJV Departs From The "Majority" Text Of Hodge & Farstad, Cited By The Corrupt NKJV, by Jack Moorman, page 82​

​

Additionally, the internal structure and parallelism aligns Revelation 2:15 "which thing I hate", to Revelation 2:6, "which I also hate", both of which are in relation to the "Nicolaitans", one in their "deeds", and the other in "doctrine".

 

[WithinReason]

and spammed some more.

BTW, the information on the missing texts? I am getting it from this site (which even says, "... These cultists are playing around with the Bible and it isn't funny. ...", so it will be fairly easy to see which text I will be addressing next - http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/translations/neworld.htm

'catholics' disagreeing with 'catholics', same ol', same ol'.

 

[massorite]

​

My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of My lips.​

(Psalm 89:34) ​

​

the covenant at Sinai included blessings and curses - blessing if they obeyed, and a curse for disobedience. and this law was given to a people who had been stiff-necked, disobedient and grumbling from the very day He brought them out.
God is faithful. He did not break His covenant.

But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:​

Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.​

Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.​

Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.​

Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.​

The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken Me.​

(Deuteronomy 28:15-20) ​

​

so when He pronounces a judgment in Numbers 14:34 this is called keeping His promise not breaking it.

it is not good to call Him a breaker of a promise.
if your beliefs cause you to do that, you should re-examine your belief.

the word in question in Numbers 14:34 ((Strong's 8569, "rejection")) occurs once more in scripture, in Job 33:10 -- can we make 'break His promise' fit in that verse? and if we cannot, can we explain why it means one thing here, and something else entirely there?

LOL No way Hosea. You should do better research before you post. The verses you used to prove your point were spoken by God after God had led them through the desert for forty years.
Deu 29:1 These are the words of the covenant, which the LORD commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb.
Deu 29:2 And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all his servants, and unto all his land;
Deu 29:3 The great temptations which thine eyes have seen, the signs, and those great miracles:
Deu 29:4 Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.
Deu 29:5 And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot.
God informed Moses that He was going to break His promise to them about crossing over Jordan before they were in the desert for forty years.
Num 14:34 After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.
You need to remember that every Israelite who was alive when God spoke to Moses and told him that He was going to break His promise was before they walked in the desert for forty years, were all dead by the time Deu. 28:15-20 was spoken to Moses. Except of course for Joshua and Caleb.
All of Deu. 28 was the new covenant spoken to an entirely new generation who were not alive or very young when God spoke Num. 14:34 to Moses. It was a New Covenant spoken to a New Generation of Israelites who never heard the first covenant.
Though you are correct in one aspect. God did keep the promise to punish the Iraelites for their disobedience but broke His promise to lead them to a land of milk and honey.

I didn't call God a promise breaker, His word did. The words "Breach Of Promise" are no different the the words "Breach of Contract".
A contract is made when a promise is made by two parties to each other and when that contract is breached by one or the other parties that promise is broken and today if there is good reason to break that promise legally the contract can be broken. The same applies to God by His own words which show that God had good reason to break His promise.
Num 14:34 After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, SHALL YE BEAR YOUR INIQUITIES, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.
I don't need to re-examine my beliefs because scriptures says what it says. I didn't write the book. I am just the paperboy. I deliver the Word in all of it's Glory.

 

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

How can any look at all the mss evidence and say that the NIV represents the truth?

Revelation 21:24

Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.​

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+21:24&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/revelation/21/#v66021024

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

Aleph (Sinaiticus), A (Alexandrinus), P, 046, MAJORITY - part of Andreas, and 046 Mss, Vulgate, Syriac: Philoxonean, Harclean, Coptic: Bohairic, Armenian, Ethiopic​

​

Here is the extant literature which has the text in it:

​

"... Cursives: al-part of Andreas Mss​

​

Also extant in 051. See KJVMT p 112. ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, pages 153​

Additionally:

​

"... l, 2049​

Von Soden apparently cites 2054, 2069.​

A variant contains the words "which are saved" and is supported by part of the Andreas tradition mss. ..." - When the KJV Departws From The "Majority" Text of Hodge & Farstad, Cited By The Corrupt NKJV, by Jack Moorman, page 112​

Additionally, the internal parallelism, or structure of Revelation requires this phrase to exist, as Revelation 21:23-24, "which are saved" and the "Lamb", "nations", "walk", "light", "glory", and "honour" are connected, Revelation 21:26-27, and the same words, "nations", "walk", "light", "glory" and "honour", which last phrase, "they which are written in the Lamb's book of Life" parallels "which are saved".

 

[WithinReason]

That you cite Ruckman and Riplinger says much about you... and none of it good.

NIV and the missing 64,000+ words:

"... Some seminary students, who are in the process of having their minds corrupted by “the best of modern scholarship”, lightly dismiss the charge that the NIV perversion is missing some 64,000 words, saying that this figure is only a Riplingerism and not factual.

Not only does Mrs. Riplinger make this factual charge but so also does the Australian author and KJB defender Les Garrett in his book "Which Bible Can We Trust?". If one runs the KJB and the NIV through a computer, the KJB contains over 800,000 words and the NIV has a little more than 64,000 fewer words in it.

If you put them all together, that would be from about the middle of the book of Acts to the end of Revelation. Most of this is not due to the approximately 6000 words missing due to a different Greek text employed by the NIV editors. The differences in Greek texts do account for 617 words (in the red letter editions) actually spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ, literally thousands of other words penned by the apostles, and the names of "Lord" 35 times, "Jesus" 34 times and "Christ" 44 times for a total of 115.

However I am not talking about these deleted words due to a different text in the NIV, ESV and NASB versions, but rather I am going to address the words deleted and added to the NIV which are found in the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts that the NIV editors themselves use as the basis for their translation.

You can look up this information for yourself, (attention learned seminary student who tells us on the KJB side that we don't want to be confused by the facts). This information is available in "The NIV Exhaustive Concordance" by Edward W. Goodrick & John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan Publishing House 1990. I have a copy right here in front of me, and I am not making this stuff up out of my own imagination.

This is only a partial list of the words that the NIV concordance tells us they have "not translated" (their own words) in any way but have deleted from the very Greek texts they use in their translation. If you go to the back of the NIV concordance, and look up the individual words, they will tell you how they translated it, how many times for each rendering, and the last figure is the number of times it is listed as "not translated".

These are some, not by any means all, of the new testament examples. The numbers listed are the number of times the NIV concordance says they did NOT translate a certain word; it is not the number of times this word occurs.

Examples from the New Testament

alla (but, rather) 82 times, allelwn (one another) 5 times, amen (verily) 18, anthropos (man) 15; autos (he, they, she) 675 times, anistimi (to stand up, rise) 6; apxw (to begin) 15; ginomai (to be, become, be made) 66; dia (through, by) 54; ego (I) 50; eimi (I am) 120; eis (to, into, toward) 279; heis (the number one) 12; ek (by, out of) 104; ekei (there) 9; ekeinos (he, that one) 25; en (in, by, through) 267; enwpion (before, in front of) 11; echo (outside of) 6; epi (upon, by, unto) 133; ergon (work) 8; erxomai (to come) 9; euthus (immediately) 5; exw (I have) 18; ndn (already) 11; hemera (day) 6; hina (in order to, that) 72; kathws (just as) 16, kai (and, both, also) 2958.

This is why the KJB has long sentences, "and"...."and"... The NIV apparently felt these God inspired words were unnecessary, so they edited them out of God's book, to make it more contemporary, and to have short, choppy sentences. I'm sure God will reward them for their labors.

More Examples from the New Testament

kardia (heart) 7; kata (according to , after) 42; lambano (to receive) 4, lego (I say) 286, logos (word) 15, monos (alone, only) 6; palin (again) 13; hoti (because, that) 417; oudeis (no one) 7; oun (therefore) 192; peri (around, concerning) 45; pous (feet) 4; pros (toward, to) 117; rhema (word) 7; sarx (flesh) 13; stoma (mouth) 6. su (you, yours) 135; soma (bodey) 4; hupo (by, undeer) 61; phone (voice) 5; cheir (hand) 6; psuxe (soul, life) 8; hos (as, like) 55, pas (all, every) 33, idou (behold, lo) 115.

This little word “Behold” in Greek idou, occurs 200 times in the underlying Greek text used by the NIV, yet over half of the time it is not translated. Theos (God) 3 times omitted or not translated when found in their texts.

These are just some examples and they are all documented in the NIV concordance itself, not in some pro KJB publication. These are hard facts, in black and white, in their own literature.

In addition to "not translating" literally thousands of words, the NIV also adds thousands more. I will give just a very few examples of this. In the new testament alone, the NIV adds the word "God" 151 times, when it is not found in any Greek text nor idiomatic expression. This can be seen by looking in the NIV concordance under the word God.

Beside the word “God” 151 times, you will see the letters NIG which stand for "not in Greek". The word "Jesus" is added by my personal count 336 times in the new testament alone. You will see either NIG, or the number for the word that really is "he". In the first chapter of Mark, you can see this in verses 1:10, 16, 21, 30, 32, 34, 35, 38, 41, 43, and 45. And it continues for a total of 336 times that Jesus is added to the NIV when it is not found in any Greek text.

The case is equally as bad in the Old Testament.

I will give just a very few examples. The word # 3378 in the NIV concordance is listed on page 1467. In the KJB it is translated as JEHOVAH, GOD or LORD. The NIV, NASB, ESV and NKJV do not contain this personal name of the redeemer God, Jehovah, at all, but only translate it as either God or Lord.

However 38 times when this word occurs in the Hebrew text, the NIV has "not translated" it at all. And 52 times they have put the word GOD in the English NIV when it is not in the Hebrew text. The word Elohim (God) is not translated 13 times, and added an additional 52 times in the NIV "bible". Thus, in these two instances alone of these 2 different Hebrew words for God, the NIV omits it 51 times and adds it 104 times.​

​

The NIV has a similar problem with the names of people. For example, the name DAVID is found 1075 times in the O.T. texts according to the NIV concordance. However the NIV has "translated" the Hebrew word DAVID (Dawid) as either "he", "him" or "his" 69 times, and 21 times they left it "untranslated" - their own word as found in the NIV complete concordance. In addition to this, as you go through the complete list of the times the NIV does write out the name DAVID we see that 25 times they put the name in the text, when in fact it is not there. We find the letters NIH listed 25 times, meaning Not In Hebrew.​

​

A similar thing happens with just about any name that occurs with regularity in the Old Testament. The name SAUL is listed 11 times as NIH, meaning it is not found in the Hebrew text but the NIV wrote it in anyway. But 9 times that it does occur in the Hebrew text, the NIV left it "untranslated" and 18 times they translated it as either "he" or "his".​

​

So also with the names JACOB and ISRAEL. The NIV complete concordance shows that they have written the name JACOB 16 times (NIH) when it is not in the text and that 14 times when it is in the Hebrew text they have translated it as "he", "him" or "his". When we come to the name ISRAEL, the NIV shows 18 times "untranslated" (meaning that it IS in the Hebrew text but they chose not to translate it at all), 5 times they put it in the text when it is not there (NIH) and 28 times they translated it as "they", "them" or "their". These are the facts that are found right there in their own NIV concordance.​

​

Some examples from Zechariah.​

​

In Zechariah 1:7 the NIV omits the word "saying" # 606 in NIV concordance. It is not translated 878 times. This Hebrew word amarl, usually meaning to say, occurs 5317 times, so about one time out of every six the NIV omits this word.

Zech 1:11 the word "behold" is missing. # 2180 occurs 1061 times but is not translated at all some 550 times, or a little more than half.

Zech. 1:18 the NIV omits "eyes" and 36 times altogether. The word # 5228 "I beseech thee" or "I pray thee" occurs 405 times in the Hebrew, but is "not translated" at all 297 times by the NIV, or almost three out of every four times.

These are just a few of the hundreds of examples that could be given. I am not making this stuff up. These are facts admitted to by the NIV concordance regarding their own work. We will probably have to wait for the judgment seat of Christ to hear God's evaluation of their "labour of love". But, please, don't go around saying that the KJB onlyists are spreading false rumors about the NIV having omitted so many of God’s inspired words. ..." - https://brandplucked.webs.com/nivmissing64000words.htm​

​

 

[Lightskin]

Read it and weep all you NIV defenders.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but everyone who has faith in Jesus Christ has salvation regardless of what Bible translation they read. That’s so cool!

 

[Lightskin]

That is not even the issue. We are contending about the inspired words of God given to apostles and prophets.

Since we agree salvation is not the issue then you and I have nothing further to discuss on the subject at hand. Peace be with you.

 

[Sipsey]

Here is a site with 5 parallel Greek versions along with several English translations. I think it should be understood that the various translations fall into several categories. Some are better for study, some flow better for casual reading.

What would those of you who see the NIV as corrupt, tell a person who accepted The Christ Jesus as their personal Savior after reading the NIV? http://www.greeknewtestament.com/B43C001.htm

 

[John146]

Sorry to bust your bubble, but everyone who has faith in Jesus Christ has salvation regardless of what Bible translation they read. That’s so cool!

There’s more to living the Christian life after salvation. We must move towards maturity through the reading and studying of scripture.

 

[Dan_473]

All I know is that He did preserve His word in the English language in the KJV.

How did you come to that knowledge? Is there a test that the KJV passed that led you to believe that it is the word of God, every word?


My impression at this time is that you advocate that a person choose a Bible to be the word of God.


I see that there have been many posts on this thread about why the King James is better (or not better) than other translations. But if one translation is shown to be better, that doesn't mean that it is necessarily the word of God.


So if you want to talk about it more, I'm interested in what you have to say. but if you don't want to talk about it more and just leave me with that impression, that's okay too.

 

[Dino246]

NIV and the missing 64,000+ words:

"... Some seminary students, who are in the process of having their minds corrupted by “the best of modern scholarship”, lightly dismiss the charge that the NIV perversion is missing some 64,000 words, saying that this figure is only a Riplingerism and not factual.​

​

Not only does Mrs. Riplinger make this factual charge but so also does the Australian author and KJB defender Les Garrett in his book "Which Bible Can We Trust?". If one runs the KJB and the NIV through a computer, the KJB contains over 800,000 words and the NIV has a little more than 64,000 fewer words in it.​

​

If you put them all together, that would be from about the middle of the book of Acts to the end of Revelation. Most of this is not due to the approximately 6000 words missing due to a different Greek text employed by the NIV editors. The differences in Greek texts do account for 617 words (in the red letter editions) actually spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ, literally thousands of other words penned by the apostles, and the names of "Lord" 35 times, "Jesus" 34 times and "Christ" 44 times for a total of 115.​

​

However I am not talking about these deleted words due to a different text in the NIV, ESV and NASB versions, but rather I am going to address the words deleted and added to the NIV which are found in the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts that the NIV editors themselves use as the basis for their translation.​

​

You can look up this information for yourself, (attention learned seminary student who tells us on the KJB side that we don't want to be confused by the facts). This information is available in "The NIV Exhaustive Concordance" by Edward W. Goodrick & John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan Publishing House 1990. I have a copy right here in front of me, and I am not making this stuff up out of my own imagination.​

​

This is only a partial list of the words that the NIV concordance tells us they have "not translated" (their own words) in any way but have deleted from the very Greek texts they use in their translation. If you go to the back of the NIV concordance, and look up the individual words, they will tell you how they translated it, how many times for each rendering, and the last figure is the number of times it is listed as "not translated".​

​

These are some, not by any means all, of the new testament examples. The numbers listed are the number of times the NIV concordance says they did NOT translate a certain word; it is not the number of times this word occurs.​

​

Examples from the New Testament​

​

alla (but, rather) 82 times, allelwn (one another) 5 times, amen (verily) 18, anthropos (man) 15; autos (he, they, she) 675 times, anistimi (to stand up, rise) 6; apxw (to begin) 15; ginomai (to be, become, be made) 66; dia (through, by) 54; ego (I) 50; eimi (I am) 120; eis (to, into, toward) 279; heis (the number one) 12; ek (by, out of) 104; ekei (there) 9; ekeinos (he, that one) 25; en (in, by, through) 267; enwpion (before, in front of) 11; echo (outside of) 6; epi (upon, by, unto) 133; ergon (work) 8; erxomai (to come) 9; euthus (immediately) 5; exw (I have) 18; ndn (already) 11; hemera (day) 6; hina (in order to, that) 72; kathws (just as) 16, kai (and, both, also) 2958.​

​

This is why the KJB has long sentences, "and"...."and"... The NIV apparently felt these God inspired words were unnecessary, so they edited them out of God's book, to make it more contemporary, and to have short, choppy sentences. I'm sure God will reward them for their labors.​

​

More Examples from the New Testament​

​

kardia (heart) 7; kata (according to , after) 42; lambano (to receive) 4, lego (I say) 286, logos (word) 15, monos (alone, only) 6; palin (again) 13; hoti (because, that) 417; oudeis (no one) 7; oun (therefore) 192; peri (around, concerning) 45; pous (feet) 4; pros (toward, to) 117; rhema (word) 7; sarx (flesh) 13; stoma (mouth) 6. su (you, yours) 135; soma (bodey) 4; hupo (by, undeer) 61; phone (voice) 5; cheir (hand) 6; psuxe (soul, life) 8; hos (as, like) 55, pas (all, every) 33, idou (behold, lo) 115.​

​

This little word “Behold” in Greek idou, occurs 200 times in the underlying Greek text used by the NIV, yet over half of the time it is not translated. Theos (God) 3 times omitted or not translated when found in their texts.​

​

These are just some examples and they are all documented in the NIV concordance itself, not in some pro KJB publication. These are hard facts, in black and white, in their own literature.​

​

In addition to "not translating" literally thousands of words, the NIV also adds thousands more. I will give just a very few examples of this. In the new testament alone, the NIV adds the word "God" 151 times, when it is not found in any Greek text nor idiomatic expression. This can be seen by looking in the NIV concordance under the word God.​

​

Beside the word “God” 151 times, you will see the letters NIG which stand for "not in Greek". The word "Jesus" is added by my personal count 336 times in the new testament alone. You will see either NIG, or the number for the word that really is "he". In the first chapter of Mark, you can see this in verses 1:10, 16, 21, 30, 32, 34, 35, 38, 41, 43, and 45. And it continues for a total of 336 times that Jesus is added to the NIV when it is not found in any Greek text.​

​

The case is equally as bad in the Old Testament. ​

​

I will give just a very few examples. The word # 3378 in the NIV concordance is listed on page 1467. In the KJB it is translated as JEHOVAH, GOD or LORD. The NIV, NASB, ESV and NKJV do not contain this personal name of the redeemer God, Jehovah, at all, but only translate it as either God or Lord.​

​

However 38 times when this word occurs in the Hebrew text, the NIV has "not translated" it at all. And 52 times they have put the word GOD in the English NIV when it is not in the Hebrew text. The word Elohim (God) is not translated 13 times, and added an additional 52 times in the NIV "bible". Thus, in these two instances alone of these 2 different Hebrew words for God, the NIV omits it 51 times and adds it 104 times.​

​

The NIV has a similar problem with the names of people. For example, the name DAVID is found 1075 times in the O.T. texts according to the NIV concordance. However the NIV has "translated" the Hebrew word DAVID (Dawid) as either "he", "him" or "his" 69 times, and 21 times they left it "untranslated" - their own word as found in the NIV complete concordance. In addition to this, as you go through the complete list of the times the NIV does write out the name DAVID we see that 25 times they put the name in the text, when in fact it is not there. We find the letters NIH listed 25 times, meaning Not In Hebrew.​

​

A similar thing happens with just about any name that occurs with regularity in the Old Testament. The name SAUL is listed 11 times as NIH, meaning it is not found in the Hebrew text but the NIV wrote it in anyway. But 9 times that it does occur in the Hebrew text, the NIV left it "untranslated" and 18 times they translated it as either "he" or "his".​

​

So also with the names JACOB and ISRAEL. The NIV complete concordance shows that they have written the name JACOB 16 times (NIH) when it is not in the text and that 14 times when it is in the Hebrew text they have translated it as "he", "him" or "his". When we come to the name ISRAEL, the NIV shows 18 times "untranslated" (meaning that it IS in the Hebrew text but they chose not to translate it at all), 5 times they put it in the text when it is not there (NIH) and 28 times they translated it as "they", "them" or "their". These are the facts that are found right there in their own NIV concordance.​

​

Some examples from Zechariah.​

​

In Zechariah 1:7 the NIV omits the word "saying" # 606 in NIV concordance. It is not translated 878 times. This Hebrew word amarl, usually meaning to say, occurs 5317 times, so about one time out of every six the NIV omits this word.​

​

Zech 1:11 the word "behold" is missing. # 2180 occurs 1061 times but is not translated at all some 550 times, or a little more than half.​

​

Zech. 1:18 the NIV omits "eyes" and 36 times altogether. The word # 5228 "I beseech thee" or "I pray thee" occurs 405 times in the Hebrew, but is "not translated" at all 297 times by the NIV, or almost three out of every four times.​

​

These are just a few of the hundreds of examples that could be given. I am not making this stuff up. These are facts admitted to by the NIV concordance regarding their own work. We will probably have to wait for the judgment seat of Christ to hear God's evaluation of their "labour of love". But, please, don't go around saying that the KJB onlyists are spreading false rumors about the NIV having omitted so many of God’s inspired words. ..." - https://brandplucked.webs.com/nivmissing64000words.htm​

​

I see you continue to waste your time and effort. Your premise is still a logical fallacy.

 

[John146]

How did you come to that knowledge? Is there a test that the KJV passed that led you to believe that it is the word of God, every word?


My impression at this time is that you advocate that a person choose a Bible to be the word of God.


I see that there have been many posts on this thread about why the King James is better (or not better) than other translations. But if one translation is shown to be better, that doesn't mean that it is necessarily the word of God.


So if you want to talk about it more, I'm interested in what you have to say. but if you don't want to talk about it more and just leave me with that impression, that's okay too.

Ok, if we have shown that it’s better, why use anything else? Read, study the KJV with a ready mind. Maybe the Lord will show you.

 

[Dan_473]

Ok, if we have shown that it’s better, why use anything else? Read, study the KJV with a ready mind. Maybe the Lord will show you.

My understanding is that the issue was not which translation was better, but if there was a translation that was the word of God, every word.


Showing that one translation is better does not lead to the necessary conclusion that it is is the word of God.

 

[WithinReason]

What would those of you who see the NIV as corrupt, tell a person who accepted The Christ Jesus as their personal Savior after reading the NIV?

Glad they are a brother or sister, and tell them the truth in "charity" (1 Cor. 13 KJB) that they will need to grow, and mature in the things of God, and for that, they will need to study the issue of 'versions' for themselves, and to understand how God has an inspired and preserved word of God in English, the KJB, and that the NIV has many contradictions due to the bungling of modern translation and textual criticism.

A person can "accept Christ Jesus as their personal Saviour" without ever having read one scripture, but just by hearing the Gospel preached and believe it.

 

[John146]

My understanding is that the issue was not which translation was better, but if there was a translation that was the word of God, every word.


Showing that one translation is better does not lead to the necessary conclusion that it is is the word of God.

I understand, but if you see that one is better, why use anything else? The KJV has never been proven false. Anywhere.