Is NIV false doctrine?

[JDavis]

 

I guess I just care about getting it exactly right, rather than close?  Some people are ok with close.  When I was Pastor of a denominational church, I remember them going through sections of the manual, and discussing minor word changes.  Simply changing "shall" to "should" completely changed the way the churches operate.  If you say for instance that a deacon "shall" only serve 2 terms, that is definate, but if it says, "should", that leaves wiggle room.  They explained how words have meaning.  I have also heard Rush Limbaugh make that point more than once, and it is true. 

 

 

 

but you don't know that the KJV got it exactly right.  The fact that you agree with it does not make it right. 

 

If you wanted to show they got it right you would need to show how they translated that phrase in the rest of the NT and if they were consistent doing so.

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

Holy Spirit lives and moves through the NIV just as much as He lives and moves through the KJV, the NKJV and any other recognized translation.

That is a claim based on nothing.  I could simply say it is not true, but I can't prove that either, but I will put it like this.  The Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation too.  Technically, the Holy Spirit could reach someone through that book, but it is obviously not as good as the KJV Bible.  I have known someone saved as a result of "Jesus Christ Superstar."  God can use anything, but the NIV is still a very flawed translation, and is not nearly as good as the KJV Bible. 

 

 

It is no claim, but is the truth! You wouldn't dare deny it lest you deny your very God. when I say 'recognized' you can be assured I am in no way including the writings that cults like the JW's or the Mormons embrace. You are becoming tangential in your defense.

 

All translations have some flaws in some way---including the NIV

 

I do dare deny it, because what you said is false.  I trust the New World Translation for accuracy as much as the NIV.  I say that based on the fact both had an agenda to pervert the text.  The NWT was perverted to uphold JW doctrine, and the NIV was perverted to cater to radical feminists and homosexuals.  The proof is the finished product, the TNIV.  I dare deny the NIV because it is false, and I openly confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.  I reject the notion that all translations have flaws.  The KJV Bible has no flaws.  The only thing that is less than perfect with regard to the KJV Bible is the fact you can't translate from one language to another without something being lost in the translation, but I hold to the fact the translators used the best corresponding English Word in every case, and my KJV Bible is fully reliable.  I need no other translation. 

 

That being said, if I were to use another translation, I would want one that starts with the TR, and one that doesn't start with an agenda to change the original meaning of scripture like the NIV does.  The NIV is one of the worst translations available. 

 

 

There has been no agenda to pervert the word. You have become infected with the nasty rhetoric swirling around about the NIV---meanwhile, millions of people are coming to know Jesus Christ and to grow in the faith by the very words that come from the NIV. God bless them, every one. Your argument is a mere tempest in a teapot.

[Floatingaxe]

The KJV Bible correctly says that those who believe "should not perish," while the NIV incorrectly says, "shall not perish."  Big difference.  They can't both be right?  That brings us back to the whole unreliability of translation issue and more confusion.

 

Rolling my eyes here! Both are correct.  Seems to me one needs a lesson in English and to familiarize oneself with the use of Old English.

They are not both correct, and they can't both be correct because they don't say the same thing.  That very statement is ludicrous.  It is as absurd as when Obama claimed raising the debt ceiling won't necessarily lead to an increase in the national debt.  The only reason for raising it is to increase the debt.  There is a huge difference in should and shall, and if you don't know the difference, you need to purchase a good Dictionary.  Now I am rolling my eyes.

 

Yes, both are using the correct terms and are saying the same thing. You need to become more familiar about the King James era lingo.

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

Holy Spirit lives and moves through the NIV just as much as He lives and moves through the KJV, the NKJV and any other recognized translation.

That is a claim based on nothing.  I could simply say it is not true, but I can't prove that either, but I will put it like this.  The Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation too.  Technically, the Holy Spirit could reach someone through that book, but it is obviously not as good as the KJV Bible.  I have known someone saved as a result of "Jesus Christ Superstar."  God can use anything, but the NIV is still a very flawed translation, and is not nearly as good as the KJV Bible. 

 

 

It is no claim, but is the truth! You wouldn't dare deny it lest you deny your very God. when I say 'recognized' you can be assured I am in no way including the writings that cults like the JW's or the Mormons embrace. You are becoming tangential in your defense.

 

All translations have some flaws in some way---including the NIV

 

I do dare deny it, because what you said is false.  I trust the New World Translation for accuracy as much as the NIV.  I say that based on the fact both had an agenda to pervert the text.  The NWT was perverted to uphold JW doctrine, and the NIV was perverted to cater to radical feminists and homosexuals.  The proof is the finished product, the TNIV.  I dare deny the NIV because it is false, and I openly confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.  I reject the notion that all translations have flaws.  The KJV Bible has no flaws.  The only thing that is less than perfect with regard to the KJV Bible is the fact you can't translate from one language to another without something being lost in the translation, but I hold to the fact the translators used the best corresponding English Word in every case, and my KJV Bible is fully reliable.  I need no other translation. 

 

That being said, if I were to use another translation, I would want one that starts with the TR, and one that doesn't start with an agenda to change the original meaning of scripture like the NIV does.  The NIV is one of the worst translations available. 

 

 

Was King James a true believer? What about the translators that worked on the KJV? How many of them were alcoholics or adulterers, or just merely religious people?

 

It matters not who worked as translator---God set it in motion---both the KJV and the NIV as well as the NKJV and the NLT and the Amplified---all the good and well-used versions we all use today.

[Floatingaxe]

The KJV Bible correctly says that those who believe "should not perish," while the NIV incorrectly says, "shall not perish."  Big difference.  They can't both be right?  That brings us back to the whole unreliability of translation issue and more confusion.

 

Rolling my eyes here! Both are correct.  Seems to me one needs a lesson in English and to familiarize oneself with the use of Old English.

They are not both correct, and they can't both be correct because they don't say the same thing.  That very statement is ludicrous.  It is as absurd as when Obama claimed raising the debt ceiling won't necessarily lead to an increase in the national debt.  The only reason for raising it is to increase the debt.  There is a huge difference in should and shall, and if you don't know the difference, you need to purchase a good Dictionary.  Now I am rolling my eyes.

 

Yes, both are using the correct terms and are saying the same thing. You need to become more familiar about the King James era lingo.

No they are not, and you can repeat that as many times as you wish but it won't make it true.

 

Well, they are saying the exact same thing. I am assured and set free about this issue by Holy Spirit and from my own research into it, thanks.

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

 

 

Holy Spirit lives and moves through the NIV just as much as He lives and moves through the KJV, the NKJV and any other recognized translation.

That is a claim based on nothing.  I could simply say it is not true, but I can't prove that either, but I will put it like this.  The Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation too.  Technically, the Holy Spirit could reach someone through that book, but it is obviously not as good as the KJV Bible.  I have known someone saved as a result of "Jesus Christ Superstar."  God can use anything, but the NIV is still a very flawed translation, and is not nearly as good as the KJV Bible. 

 

 

It is no claim, but is the truth! You wouldn't dare deny it lest you deny your very God. when I say 'recognized' you can be assured I am in no way including the writings that cults like the JW's or the Mormons embrace. You are becoming tangential in your defense.

 

All translations have some flaws in some way---including the NIV

 

I do dare deny it, because what you said is false.  I trust the New World Translation for accuracy as much as the NIV.  I say that based on the fact both had an agenda to pervert the text.  The NWT was perverted to uphold JW doctrine, and the NIV was perverted to cater to radical feminists and homosexuals.  The proof is the finished product, the TNIV.  I dare deny the NIV because it is false, and I openly confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.  I reject the notion that all translations have flaws.  The KJV Bible has no flaws.  The only thing that is less than perfect with regard to the KJV Bible is the fact you can't translate from one language to another without something being lost in the translation, but I hold to the fact the translators used the best corresponding English Word in every case, and my KJV Bible is fully reliable.  I need no other translation. 

 

That being said, if I were to use another translation, I would want one that starts with the TR, and one that doesn't start with an agenda to change the original meaning of scripture like the NIV does.  The NIV is one of the worst translations available. 

 

 

Was King James a true believer? What about the translators that worked on the KJV? How many of them were alcoholics or adulterers, or just merely religious people?

 

It matters not who worked as translator---God set it in motion---both the KJV and the NIV as well as the NKJV and the NLT and the Amplified---all the good and well-used versions we all use today.

 

They didn't all start out to create a translation that was inaccurate to promote an agenda, like the NIV translators did with the TNIV.  Why are you so defensive about the NIV?  There are probably 50 or 60 other modern English translations.  Why do you wish to defend the NIV?  How do you feel about the TNIV? 

 

Yes, there are paraphrases like the Amplified Bible, and numerous modern English translations that weren't created by someone wanting to change the original meaning, like the NIV translators did with the TNIV, so once again, why are you so defensive about the NIV?

 

 

 

LOL! The NIV translators didn't have any such agenda...but God did!

 

I don't actually defend God's word in the New International Version, and I don't often use it, but I know that God doesn't allow His word to be defiled on one hand and lead people to Himself with the same version. Nothing of the message of the word of God has been changed or removed. All of God's truth is there. Conspiracies and silly conspiracy theorists abound, but God's word is triumphant---always.

[Floatingaxe]

The KJV Bible correctly says that those who believe "should not perish," while the NIV incorrectly says, "shall not perish."  Big difference.  They can't both be right?  That brings us back to the whole unreliability of translation issue and more confusion.

 

Rolling my eyes here! Both are correct.  Seems to me one needs a lesson in English and to familiarize oneself with the use of Old English.

They are not both correct, and they can't both be correct because they don't say the same thing.  That very statement is ludicrous.  It is as absurd as when Obama claimed raising the debt ceiling won't necessarily lead to an increase in the national debt.  The only reason for raising it is to increase the debt.  There is a huge difference in should and shall, and if you don't know the difference, you need to purchase a good Dictionary.  Now I am rolling my eyes.

 

Yes, both are using the correct terms and are saying the same thing. You need to become more familiar about the King James era lingo.

No they are not, and you can repeat that as many times as you wish but it won't make it true.

 

Well, they are saying the exact same thing. I am assured and set free about this issue by Holy Spirit and from my own research into it, thanks.

Well, I am assured you are wrong, so what now?  It is like the man that was almost persuaded to be a Christian.  It didn't make him saved.  Demons believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Some people believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Maybe they should be saved, but they aren't, so your translation can't be right.

 

Your being so adamant is not unlike you, Butero, but I will stand toe to toe with you about this issue, fully convinced that God is in control of His own word, and further convinced by the many lives I have witnessed and still witness that are transformed and empowered by Holy Spirit through His working through the pages of the NIV in their lives---which makes your argument MOOT. God's written word is not all just words on paper---it is alive, supernatural and full of power to change lives!

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Holy Spirit lives and moves through the NIV just as much as He lives and moves through the KJV, the NKJV and any other recognized translation.

That is a claim based on nothing.  I could simply say it is not true, but I can't prove that either, but I will put it like this.  The Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation too.  Technically, the Holy Spirit could reach someone through that book, but it is obviously not as good as the KJV Bible.  I have known someone saved as a result of "Jesus Christ Superstar."  God can use anything, but the NIV is still a very flawed translation, and is not nearly as good as the KJV Bible. 

 

 

It is no claim, but is the truth! You wouldn't dare deny it lest you deny your very God. when I say 'recognized' you can be assured I am in no way including the writings that cults like the JW's or the Mormons embrace. You are becoming tangential in your defense.

 

All translations have some flaws in some way---including the NIV

 

I do dare deny it, because what you said is false.  I trust the New World Translation for accuracy as much as the NIV.  I say that based on the fact both had an agenda to pervert the text.  The NWT was perverted to uphold JW doctrine, and the NIV was perverted to cater to radical feminists and homosexuals.  The proof is the finished product, the TNIV.  I dare deny the NIV because it is false, and I openly confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.  I reject the notion that all translations have flaws.  The KJV Bible has no flaws.  The only thing that is less than perfect with regard to the KJV Bible is the fact you can't translate from one language to another without something being lost in the translation, but I hold to the fact the translators used the best corresponding English Word in every case, and my KJV Bible is fully reliable.  I need no other translation. 

 

That being said, if I were to use another translation, I would want one that starts with the TR, and one that doesn't start with an agenda to change the original meaning of scripture like the NIV does.  The NIV is one of the worst translations available. 

 

 

Was King James a true believer? What about the translators that worked on the KJV? How many of them were alcoholics or adulterers, or just merely religious people?

 

It matters not who worked as translator---God set it in motion---both the KJV and the NIV as well as the NKJV and the NLT and the Amplified---all the good and well-used versions we all use today.

 

They didn't all start out to create a translation that was inaccurate to promote an agenda, like the NIV translators did with the TNIV.  Why are you so defensive about the NIV?  There are probably 50 or 60 other modern English translations.  Why do you wish to defend the NIV?  How do you feel about the TNIV? 

 

Yes, there are paraphrases like the Amplified Bible, and numerous modern English translations that weren't created by someone wanting to change the original meaning, like the NIV translators did with the TNIV, so once again, why are you so defensive about the NIV?

 

 

 

LOL! The NIV translators didn't have any such agenda...but God did!

 

I don't actually defend God's word in the New International Version, and I don't often use it, but I know that God doesn't allow His word to be defiled on one hand and lead people to Himself with the same version. Nothing of the message of the word of God has been changed or removed. All of God's truth is there. Conspiracies and silly conspiracy theorists abound, but God's word is triumphant---always.

 

I have given actual examples of changes and omissions.  God had nothing to do with the TNIV, and that was the creation of the NIV translators.  Of course God has allowed something perverted to lead people to the Lord.  I know someone saved as a result of "Jesus Christ Superstar."  This isn't a conspiracy theory.  The proof is in the TNIV.  Anyone can do a simple search and see what main stream ministers like James Dobson said about it. 

 

 

No so-called changes or omissions amount to anything.

 

The only perversion comes from the detractors of the NIV---so vile and vociferous.They are people that Christians need to stay clear of.

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The KJV Bible correctly says that those who believe "should not perish," while the NIV incorrectly says, "shall not perish."  Big difference.  They can't both be right?  That brings us back to the whole unreliability of translation issue and more confusion. 

 

 

Rolling my eyes here! Both are correct.  Seems to me one needs a lesson in English and to familiarize oneself with the use of Old English.

 

They are not both correct, and they can't both be correct because they don't say the same thing.  That very statement is ludicrous.  It is as absurd as when Obama claimed raising the debt ceiling won't necessarily lead to an increase in the national debt.  The only reason for raising it is to increase the debt.  There is a huge difference in should and shall, and if you don't know the difference, you need to purchase a good Dictionary.  Now I am rolling my eyes. 

 

 

Yes, both are using the correct terms and are saying the same thing. You need to become more familiar about the King James era lingo.

 

No they are not, and you can repeat that as many times as you wish but it won't make it true. 

 

 

Well, they are saying the exact same thing. I am assured and set free about this issue by Holy Spirit and from my own research into it, thanks.

 

Well, I am assured you are wrong, so what now?  It is like the man that was almost persuaded to be a Christian.  It didn't make him saved.  Demons believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Some people believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Maybe they should be saved, but they aren't, so your translation can't be right. 

 

 

Your being so adamant is not unlike you, Butero, but I will stand toe to toe with you about this issue, fully convinced that God is in control of His own word, and further convinced by the many lives I have witnessed and still witness that are transformed and empowered by Holy Spirit through His working through the pages of the NIV in their lives---which makes your argument MOOT. God's written word is not all just words on paper---it is alive, supernatural and full of power to change lives!

 

You aren't standing toe to toe.  You are denying things anyone can see for themselves.  They can go to a Christian book store and find the TNIV.  They can do a Google search to read about it and what main stream ministers say about it.  They can do a search and see a lesbian was one of the translators.  They can compare it to the KJV and see omissions and changes.  You don't go toe to toe.  You simply deny truth when it is shown to you. 

 

 

No--I deny your claims. Toe to toe against what you are claiming.

 

All I see is an alarmist who cries foul because one of the people who worked on the translation has been discovered to be a homosexual. People are sitting in your pew at church, some of whom have ministry gifts and are working in them, and are hypocrites, indulging in sin, secretly. Sinners are always going to be among us! That doesn't mean God is taken aback by it! Do you think for one moment that God would allow someone like that to interfere with His word? Get a grip. Have more faith in God and what He is doing and what His power can counteract in the world than that!

 

God's agenda is supreme---and I have seen it at work in the lives of NIV users.

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The KJV Bible correctly says that those who believe "should not perish," while the NIV incorrectly says, "shall not perish."  Big difference.  They can't both be right?  That brings us back to the whole unreliability of translation issue and more confusion. 

 

 

Rolling my eyes here! Both are correct.  Seems to me one needs a lesson in English and to familiarize oneself with the use of Old English.

 

They are not both correct, and they can't both be correct because they don't say the same thing.  That very statement is ludicrous.  It is as absurd as when Obama claimed raising the debt ceiling won't necessarily lead to an increase in the national debt.  The only reason for raising it is to increase the debt.  There is a huge difference in should and shall, and if you don't know the difference, you need to purchase a good Dictionary.  Now I am rolling my eyes. 

 

 

Yes, both are using the correct terms and are saying the same thing. You need to become more familiar about the King James era lingo.

 

No they are not, and you can repeat that as many times as you wish but it won't make it true. 

 

 

Well, they are saying the exact same thing. I am assured and set free about this issue by Holy Spirit and from my own research into it, thanks.

 

Well, I am assured you are wrong, so what now?  It is like the man that was almost persuaded to be a Christian.  It didn't make him saved.  Demons believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Some people believe in Jesus, but they aren't saved.  Maybe they should be saved, but they aren't, so your translation can't be right. 

 

 

Your being so adamant is not unlike you, Butero, but I will stand toe to toe with you about this issue, fully convinced that God is in control of His own word, and further convinced by the many lives I have witnessed and still witness that are transformed and empowered by Holy Spirit through His working through the pages of the NIV in their lives---which makes your argument MOOT. God's written word is not all just words on paper---it is alive, supernatural and full of power to change lives!

 

You aren't standing toe to toe.  You are denying things anyone can see for themselves.  They can go to a Christian book store and find the TNIV.  They can do a Google search to read about it and what main stream ministers say about it.  They can do a search and see a lesbian was one of the translators.  They can compare it to the KJV and see omissions and changes.  You don't go toe to toe.  You simply deny truth when it is shown to you. 

 

 

No--I deny your claims. Toe to toe against what you are claiming.

 

All I see is an alarmist who cries foul because one of the people who worked on the translation has been discovered to be a homosexual. People are sitting in your pew at church, some of whom have ministry gifts and are working in them, and are hypocrites, indulging in sin, secretly. Sinners are always going to be among us! That doesn't mean God is taken aback by it! Do you think for one moment that God would allow someone like that to interfere with His word? Get a grip. Have more faith in God and what He is doing and what His power can counteract in the world than that!

 

What about the TNIV?  This is the finished work.  Not every Bible started with an agenda like that?  Now, you want me to have faith in God's ability when it comes to his Word?  I do.  I believe God preserved his Word perfect in English in the KJV Bible.  You said all translations have errors, so I obviously believe in God's ability more than you do. 

 

Once again, how do you refute the fact the NIV translators created the TNIV, and how do you feel about the TNIV?  BTW, God allowed the New World Translation, so obviously he will allow people to pervert his Word.  He allowed the Book of Mormon and allows the Watchtower too.  He allows the Koran and many other false texts to come about. 

 

 

You can keep the KJV. As for me, I choose scriptures that modern man can understand readily. Unbelievers are more easily ministered to without all the archaic language of the KJV. Jesus comes alive to them in modern language.

 

God didn't 'allow' the New World Translation. Deceived man machinated to bring that one about! Same thing with Watchtower and the Koran. That is man's doing under the watchful gaze and influence of Satan.

 

As for the TNIV, I have no idea what that is, so I have no opinion on it. I am discussing only the NIV.