I just bought an NIV the day after CHRISTmas, and I have to admit, I really love it. Now, what are the good and bad in regards to this translation? What makes it really good, and what makes it really bad? Any info would help.
NIV strong points and weaknesses?
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by convicted1, Jan 8, 2012.
Page 1 of 3
-
-
-
-
NIV
Acts 8
36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?”
38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.
KJV
Acts 8
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
In the NIV, the most important verse in this teaching is reduced to a footnote. -
Here are a few I've noticed as I work though 1 Corinthians in a multi-translation morning class.
The NIV's :
STRENGTHS: 1) Reads smoothly and easily; particularly good for reading out loud.
2) Updated scholarship – they have added quotation marks where it is thought that the author quoted another source (e.g. 1 Corinthians 7:1; 8:1).
3) They have corrected some mistaken translations from the earlier NIV (e.g. 1 Cor. 7:1).
WEAKNESSES: As with any translation, when moving smoothly from one language to another some loss of structure of the original text occurs. Structure was not a high priority in the NIV.
Personally I like to see some of the original structure and am willing to sacrifice smooth reading.
I'm not a regular user of the NIV however that's begining to change a bit as I use it in class.
I recently purchased an NIV Study Bible for a friend for Christmas because I thought it suited his needs best.
Al-in-all I feel it's a very worthy translation.
Rob -
In many instances, the NIV denies or leaves out scripture that supports the diety of Jesus. Compare the uses of the words "God" and "Jesus" between the NIV and the KJV. Yes, Jesus is God, but for proper understanding sometimes we need to know whether it is referencing God the Father, or God the Son, as the entire meaning of the scripture can change if the distinction is not made.
To me, this blurs the message and causes confusion. If the two translations have two different interpretations of a particular scripture, then only one can be right.
After all, there can be only one truth.
John -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Jude 25
25to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. [NIV]
25To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. [KJV]
KJV OMITS Jesus Christ our Lord
Romans 1:4
4and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. [NIV]
4And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead [KJV]
KJV OMITS Jesus Christ our Lord
Acts 4:25
25You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:
" 'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain? [NIV]
25Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? [KJV]
KJV OMITS Holy Spirit, denying inspiration
Colossians 2:9
9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, [NIV]
9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. [KJV]
KJV changes "Christ" to "him", uses archaic "Godhead" instead of "Deity"
See also:
Acts 13:38, Heb. 3:3; KJV : this man NIV : Jesus
Mark 3:20, Mark 7:19, John 10:40; KJV [nothing] NIV : Jesus
Rom 9:5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. [NIV]
Rom. 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. [KJV]
AND
Phillipians 2:6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, [NIV]
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: [KJV]
KJV softens the Diety of Christ -
Here's a King James site with indepth comparisons of the NIV versions and comparisons to the KJV. This isn't an endorsement of KJVO, as I'm not, at this point in time. That said, there's much leg-work here to consider when doing an evaluation of the NIV. And several other versions, as well. http://brandplucked.webs.com/whatabouttheniv2011.htm
Read and evaluate as the Holy Spirit leads. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
To be fair the NIV is NOT the only translation that does this. These verses (and others) were in dispute before the NIV came into existence. -
...leaving verses out, hummmmm.....
Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
and your dominion endures through all generations.
The LORD is trustworthy in all he promises
and faithful in all he does.
Psalm 145:13 NIV
Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations.
Psalm 145:13 KJV
Don’t these verses like these make you want to know why there are differences?
Doesn’t this make you curious as to why these versions differ?
Wouldn’t a student of scripture want to know why?
To be truthful, the NIV doesn’t leave these verses out – to say so is disingenuous!
The NIV puts questionable verses in a footnote and lets you know the reason… they are not in the older manuscripts of scripture … a point even the footnotes of the NKJV sometimes makes.
The conclusion the NIV translators make is that some of these verses were probably not in the original writings.
A simpleton might infer the difference makes one version dumb and leave it at that.
An old-timer should want to find out why there are differences.
Rob -
-
-
-
Thanks to all who have responded to my thread!! :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: -
It's been an interesting study over the last year or so on which bibles agree and disagree with each other. Which ones follow the majority text and the ones based on the minority text considering all the differences between the two. And considering the impact that Hort and Westcott have had on bible versions since 1881. -
-
Would say that it does use modern scholarship, and that the Commitee did NOT have an agenda to water down the Bible, denying Christ etc!
Would say that it, along with the HCSB, best "mediating" compromise version
would also say though that for serious study, that the Niv 2011 is good, but the NASB and NKJV would be even better!
Also, NOT a fan of going so much inclusive language renderings for now, some OK, not the amount getting done in current versions though! -
Page 1 of 3