Here are my pennies of thought on this matter, if anyone is interested:
1) The biggest reason why someone would skim over the text, or say here we go again, is because they've studied this topic before. I got saved in a KJVO church and spent my early 20s reading a lot of essays on the matter. Then I did a project where I studied the Hebrew text of Genesis, and it blew me away. I've never been a fan of the NIV. These days I tend to read NASB the most and refer to KJV on particularly interesting verses. Going through the original language of the text is always the most beneficial, but that can be too exhausting for a workaday devotional.
2) I confess that I don't have time to follow conspiracy theories about corporations. The KJV Bible I own now was printed by Zondervan. If you order a KJV from Amazon you're supporting a retailer that sells antiChristian material. If you read KJV online you're giving money to a cable company that props up secular channels like HBO. You're typing these forum posts on a computer. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs say you're welcome. Besides, the NIV translation went into print before Harper Collins even bought Zondervan. If Zondervan was still an independent company, they'd be printing the NIV exactly the same, and the HC argument would go flying out the window. You are really not angry about Harper Collins. You're angry about the NIV and using HC as handy ammunition.
3) I also confess that I'm not a native speaker of Elizabethan English, so the KJV can be difficult for me to read sometimes. If that makes me lazy and stupid, so be it. But God says His word is verified by 2 or 3 witnesses. If I read 3 sources to get a 3-dimensional view of a sentence, I feel more confident that I really understand it. It's easy to say the Spirit can flow through the text to give us understanding. But that doesn't mean we should handicap the Spirit by reading a text that's needlessly puzzling.
4) Final point: it's all too easy to build a protective force field around your argument by saying the alternative is nothing less than Satanic deception. Suddenly anyone who disagrees is a danger to themselves and others. A quick and cheap way to shut up the opposition. Of course we must always be on guard to discern the wiles of the enemy, but if we default to this conclusion too often, it starts looking like an assumption. If you really believe the NIV text is wrong, then let the text speak for itself, let others observe the errors, and let them reach the correct conclusion on their own. The correct way of winning a debate is not to pronounce your conclusion and then show ammo to support it. A true and correct conclusion will lead the reader to itself if your ammo is good enough. Yes, there are translation errors in the NIV. Yes, there are few passages where we see discrepancies. But that evidence leads us to say, okay the NIV has mistakes and we should balance it against other sources. You have enough ammo to convince us of that. You do not have enough ammo to prove any further.
Sorry for the long post, and sorry if it sounds overbearing. Just wanted to contribute.
