Private discussion: NIV and KJV

Moderator note: This has been pre-approved as a private debate. All posts not made by the debaters will be deleted without notice


First of all before we start this discussion, I would like to start off by saying thank you for taking the time to talk to me. Secondly I would like to clarify some issues before we begin this discussion so that we both can be on the same level.

The first issue that we need to come to terms on before we can discuss anything concerning bible translations and the KJVO theory is that the NIV is not an updated AV1611. By pointing out this fact, I have just disarmed many KJVO theories and accusations thrown at the NIV accusing the NIV of changing the KJV. Now if the NIV claimed to be an updated KJV, then I could understand some of the KJVO concerns. As it stands the NIV is a translation taken from the manuscripts that are written in Greek, Hebrew, and some Aramaic. Likewise the current KJV’s which includes the 1762 Cambridge, 1769 Oxford, and the 1873 are revisions of the AV1611 which is a translation taken from the Hebrew, Greek, etc… We must establish the fact that both the KJV and NIV are translations of the Word of God. The KJV and NIV did not descent from Heaven and neither translation is without some errors in the text. I will say that both translations are in fact the perfect Word of the Lord as found in all faithful translations in any language and in any time period.

The AV1611 contains The Message to the Reader. In this message the AV1611 translators put forth some wisdom that holds true today. Note the following and keep this in mind as we discuss the NIV and KJV:

“Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and auow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee haue seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the Kings Speech which hee vttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latine, is still the Kings Speech, though it be not interpreted by euery Translator with the like grace, nor peraduenture so fitly for phrase, nor so expresly for sence, euery where. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a naturall man could say, Verum vbi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, &c. A man may be counted a vertuous man, though hee haue made many slips in his life, (els, there were none vertuous, for in many things we offend all) also a comely man and louely, though hee haue some warts vpon his hand, yea, not onely freakles vpon his face, but also skarres. No cause therefore why the word translated should bee denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting foorth of it.”

Also:

“Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled...[that] it hath pleased God in his diuine prouidence, heere and there, to scatter wordes and sentences of that difficultie and doubtfulnesse, not in doctrinal points that concerne saluation (for in such it hath beene vouched that the Scriptures are plaine) but in matters of lesse moment, that fearfulnesse would better beseeme vs than confidence. . .and to resolue upon modestie....There be many words in Scripture, which be neuer found there but once. ..there be many rare names of certaine birds, beastes and precious stones, &c. concerning which the Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves...so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (euen in thejudgement of the iudicious) questionable, can be no lesse than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that varietie of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures; so diuersitie of signification and sense in the margine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes doe good, yea, is necessary, as we are perswaded....They that are wise, had rather haue their judgements at libertie in differences of readings, then to be captiuated to one, when it may be the other.”

It is very clear that the AV1611 translators were not KJVOist. These men did not intend on their work being the final English bible. No where in the AV1611 is AV1611 onlyism found.

Now that I have pointed out that the NIV is not an updated KJV and that the AV1611 translators stand against modern KJVO theories, we must look a little deeper into both the NIV and KJV before we go any further.

The KJV tries to be as close to word for word as possible to the Greek, etc… In most cases the KJV tries to be as close to word for word interpretation as possible when dealing with translating from one language to another. This type of translation process can be choppy at times and it will never read as smooth as a dynamic equivalent translation. The NASB, NKJV, and KJV are examples of this type of translational practice.

The NIV uses what is called dynamic equivalence. Which means it takes the word for word and translates it thought for thought. The meaning is still the same but the wording is not strictly a word for word rendering. This type of translation will read smoother than the NASB, NKJV, and KJV simply because it smoothes out the original language into our common English.

The translation type must be considered when comparing the NIV and KJV. To say that the NIV changes the KJV is a false statement simply because the NIV is not a KJV revision. To say that the NIV changed the KJV would be the same as saying the AV1611 changed the Geneva Bible. In order to be able to discuss bible versions, we must understand how we got our English bibles and accept the fact that English bibles existed before, during, and after the creation of the AV1611. People who claim KJVO generally do not use the first KJV which is the AV1611. Using KJVO logic, I could say that modern KJV’s changed the AV1611 therefore only the true AV1611 is the perfect bible. Such an assumption is false and misleading therefore I stand against any type of onlyism.

I would ask that you deal with the scriptures and issues that I will bring up in this discussion. Please answer my questions fully without any circular reasoning assuming that just because the KJV is the KJV that it is right 100% of the time. Do not stray off subject and do not answer questions with questions. I simply want you to deal with the issues that I bring up. You have already posted your reasons in another thread for being against the NIV, so if needed I can refer to that thread. There is no reason to repost those statements here as they might be viewed as trying to avoid the questions that I am asking. I am dealing with a different type of debate therefore I would ask that you simply answer my questions without posting off topic replies. If you do not have an answer then simply tell me that you do not have an answer. I don’t have all the answers; therefore, I don’t expect you to feel as though you must answer everything completely. I also ask that you do not ignore my points and that you address each example giving me the best answer that you can. If you fail to follow these simple rules then I will have every right to terminate this discussion.

The reason that I am doing this is because you made some claims about the NIV. Now I am taking the NIV and pointing out some things that you may have overlooked or never thought about. I will refrain from using circular reasoning that so many KJVOist authors like Sam Gipp, Peter Ruckman, David Cloud, and Gail Riplinger use to make a point. I am taking the NIV and challenging your claims using the some techniques that many KJVOist use against modern translations and simply applying it to the KJV. Please understand that I am not trying to pull you away from the KJV and it is not my goal to embarrass or hurt you. I am trying to show you that many KJVO theories are applicable to the KJV as well. By KJVO standards the KJV itself fails the KJVOist tests methods of condemnation that they use to wrongfully attack faithful translations of the Word of the Most High.

As a former KJVO, I am well versed in KJVO dogma. I’m not a “be all know all of KJVOism”, but I was very active in spreading KJVO myths for many years. Now keep in mind that I am 100% anti-KJVO because KJVOism is liberal modernism that was started by a Seventh Day Adventist named Benjamin G. Wilkinson in 1930. I am 100% pro-KJV because it is a faithful translation of the Word of the Most High that has been honored both by time and many souls have been lead to the Lord by it. If you want to use the KJV then by all means do so. I will never tell anyone not to use the KJV. I would suggest that you continue to study the KJV daily and grow in the Word through prayer. As a Christian, I want to uplift you in my prayers asking that God would grant you wisdom and understanding as you grow in the Lord. Do I want you to abandon the KJV? No, I will not ask you do put down the KJV for another translation. That is not the purpose of this discussion. Just because I use the NASB 99% of the time is no reason for me to question another Christian’s bible of preference. For the sake of this discussion I will be using the NIV instead of the NASB because the post you made was about the NIV.

This discussion will consist of three parts and then a summary post. Each part will be discussed separately in order to prevent jumping from issue to issue. The parts will consist of the following:

Reading levels and clarity

Difference in the text and watered down doctrines

Being fair: problems that both the KJV and NIV share

Summary

[ September 16, 2004, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

Rules for this debate:

I will ask a set of questions with examples. Please answer every question. Do not avoid any questions or examples.

You get to follow up and answer in one posting. This keeps the post from getting too messy. Just follow my examples and answer each section. Please do not skip any questions. In your follow up stick to what I asked. Do not bring up anything that is not related to the issues at hand. You can use the summary post at the end of this debate for that type of material.

By doing this we will get to the heart of the issue and I feel that you will better see my points.

If I have anything to further to ask you before going to the next part of the debate, then I will post the questions. Hopefully we will be able to get the issues answered in just on post per topic. Since I am asking the questions, I will ask that you do not post any questions until we get to the summary part of this discussion(the part after the third section: Being fair: problems that both the KJV and NIV share). The reason that I am asking this is to avoid questions being answered with questions.

Take you time and don’t worry about the length of the post.

Any off topic and questions to answer questions will be ignored. I want to get to the meat of the issues and avoid any tactics that avoid answering my questions. I don’t say this to attack you. I’m just being honest with you and letting you know where I stand and that I don’t have time to chase rabbits.

Personal attacks and slander will automatically end this discussion. Again, I’m not accusing you of doing this and from our private messages I do not think that you would behave in this manner. I’m just saying this because this is how I like to discuss issues about the bible in general. When I hosting a bible study, I expect the same thing from everyone who participates. Please understand that this is not in any way an attack upon your character. I want those who read this thread to see how brothers in the Lord should discuss things and work out differences.

After we finish all three sections of this debate, then each of us will be given one chance to post a summary. Again, this will keep both of us on track and prevent either of us from floating off topic. This is the part of the discussion that you can ask your questions to me if you have any to ask. I don’t expect quick answers and I want you to research and ponder everything that I list.

 

Before we get started please tell me which KJV you are using. Are you using a 1762, 1769 or 1873 KJV. If you don’t know how to tell the difference then here is how:

1762- Jer. 34:16 "whom ye”
1769- Jer. 34:16 "whom he” Ruth 3:15 “and she went into the city”
1873- Jer. 34:16 "whom ye” Ruth 3:15 “and he went into the city”

This is not a trick question. I just want to know which KJV you are using.

 

Part One: Reading levels and clarity

The first topic that I want to discuss is the issue of reading level and clarity. You made some statements about the NIV vs. the KJV. Now let’s look at the two translations and see just which version is on the higher reading level and ease of understanding.

Now please answer each of the following as to which is easier for you and your peers to understand without researching the words in question. Answer using either the NIV or KJV as your answer. No spin or explanations, just answer the questions.


_________________________________________________
Answer like this:

Question 1: NIV

Question 2 : KJV

__________________________________________________


Question 1:

2 Cor. 6:12,”Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.” KJV

Or

2 Cor. 6:12,” We are not withholding our affection from you, but you are withholding yours from us.” NIV


Question 2:

1 Chron. 26:16-19,”To Shuppim and Hosah the lot came forth westward, with the gate Shallecheth, by the causeway of the going up, ward against ward. [17] Eastward were six Levites, northward four a day, southward four a day, and toward Asuppim two and two. [18] At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar. [19] These are the divisions of the porters among the sons of Kore, and among the sons of Merari.” KJV

Or

1 Chron. 26:16-19,”The lots for the West Gate and the Shalleketh Gate on the upper road fell to Shuppim and Hosah. Guard was alongside of guard: [17] There were six Levites a day on the east, four a day on the north, four a day on the south and two at a time at the storehouse. [18] As for the court to the west, there were four at the road and two at the court itself. [19] These were the divisions of the gatekeepers who were descendants of Korah and Merari.” NIV


Question 3:

John 2:6,”And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.” KJV

Or

John 2:6,”Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.” NIV


Question 4:


1 John 2:20,”But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.” KJV

Or

1 John 2:20,”But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.” NIV


Question 5:

Luke 6:1,”And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands.” KJV

Or

Luke 6:1,”One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels.” NIV


Question 6:

Ruth 4:1,” Then went Boaz up to the gate, and sat him down there: and, behold, the kinsman of whom Boaz spake came by; unto whom he said, Ho, such a one! turn aside, sit down here. And he turned aside, and sat down.” KJV

Or

Ruth 4:1,”Meanwhile Boaz went up to the town gate and sat there. When the kinsman-redeemer he had mentioned came along, Boaz said, "Come over here, my friend, and sit down." So he went over and sat down.” NIV



Question 7:

1 Samuel 30:31,”And to them which were in Hebron, and to all the places where David himself and his men were wont to haunt.” KJV

Or

1 Samuel 30:31,” and Hebron; and to those in all the other places where David and his men had roamed.” NIV



Question 8:

Acts 28:13,”And from thence we fetched a compass, and came to Rhegium: and after one day the south wind blew, and we came the next day to Puteoli:” KJV

Or

Acts 28:13,”From there we set sail and arrived at Rhegium. The next day the south wind came up, and on the following day we reached Puteoli.” NIV



Question 9:

Matthew 27:44,” The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.” KJV

Or

Matthew 27:44,” In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him.” NIV



Question 10:

Mark 9:18,”And wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not.” KJV

Or

Mark 9:18,” Whenever it seizes him, it throws him to the ground. He foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth and becomes rigid. I asked your disciples to drive out the spirit, but they could not." NIV


Now do this:


Now let’s look at the clarity of understanding in the above scriptures. Explain why you picked either the NIV or KJV. This time give me a brief *explanation about your choice.

*saying its right just because it’s the KJV or God said so does not qualify. I want evidence and the reason behind your decision.

_________________________________________________

Answser like this:

Question 1- KJV

Because the KJV….etc….


Question 2- NIV

Because the NIV …etc…


NO SPIN just explain to me why.
__________________________________________________


The next section is perhaps the most generic part of this discussion. I will list some words and you tell me if you know what they mean without the help of the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary or whatever older dictionary you might use.

_________________________________________________

Example of how I want you to answer:

Gins-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

When you reply please reply like this:

Just copy and paste my questions and do the following:

Gins-
Do you know what this word means? Yes or No
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means? Yes or No

_______________________________________________


Affinity-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?


Admire-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Nephew-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Shambles-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Sore-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Tutor-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Target-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Conceit-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Gin-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?

Shamefacedness-
Do you know what this word means?
Do you think that the average American knows what this word means?


End of section one “Reading levels and clarity” questions.

I’m hoping that we can get to the second part of this discussion. You may be wondering why I’m asking these questions. I have my reasons and I think that towards the end of this discussion you will better see my point. Just follow my instructions and we can move through this together.

Please keep in mind that I am very busy for the next two weeks. It may be a couple of days before I post Section Two of this discussion.

Thank you for your time and understanding.

In Christ,
David J.