KJV vs NIV

[OnlyJesusSaves]

I so no to NIV for many reasons but here is a good example why. from NIV online bible

Isaiah [SUP]12 [/SUP]How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

2nd Peter same NIV Bible Sight
[SUP]19 [/SUP]We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts

Same sight NIV Bible

Revelations 2:26-2:28
[SUP]26 [/SUP]To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— [SUP]27 [/SUP]that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery’[SUP][b][/SUP]—just as I have received authority from my Father. [SUP]28 [/SUP]I will also give that one the morning star.

Same verses but out of KJV

Isaiah [SUP]12[/SUP] How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations.

2Peter [SUP]19[/SUP] We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Revelations 2 [SUP]26[/SUP] And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
[SUP]27[/SUP] And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
[SUP]28[/SUP] And I will give him the morning star.

Does anyone else see how dangerous especially to a new person looking for truth in the bible and who has never read a bible can confuse what the NIV is saying?
If I were to give the NIV to them and say here is God's word and they read it as it is and understood from it what is being said.
Is it only me who gets the implication of the NIV?

OK some say oh its not talking about a fallen being in Isaiah chapter 14 its about the King of Babylon in context. ok even if that was true the NIV tells you The King of Babylon will arise in your heart in Peter 2 and Revelations 2 you will be given the King of Babylon!

No confusion in my KJV Isaiah 14 cause its Lucifer -Lu·ci·fer (l

s

-f

r)
n.1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.

[HR][/HR][Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin L

cifer, from l

cifer, light-bringer : l

x, l

c-, light; see leuk- in Indo-European roots + -fer, -fer.]

I know I know I will get wrath from people but its there its what is printed.

I could show many more examples but there is no need to.
That one mistake weather an oversight or intentional is very dangerous.

KJV God's preserved TRUE WORDS

God Bless ALL

 

[oldhermit]

I am no fan of the NIV but, if you want to compare the NIV or any other translation to something else compare it to the original language. That is the standard, not the KJV or any other translation.

 

[OnlyJesusSaves]

Here is a good sermon about this exact topic where KJV came from compared to others

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMAH1OAlBB8

 

[Bookends]

I so no to NIV for many reasons but here is a good example why. from NIV online bible

Isaiah [SUP]12 [/SUP]How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

2nd Peter same NIV Bible Sight
[SUP]19 [/SUP]We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts

Same sight NIV Bible

Revelations 2:26-2:28
[SUP]26 [/SUP]To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— [SUP]27 [/SUP]that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery’[SUP][b][/SUP]—just as I have received authority from my Father. [SUP]28 [/SUP]I will also give that one the morning star.

Same verses but out of KJV

Isaiah [SUP]12[/SUP] How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations.

2Peter [SUP]19[/SUP] We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Revelations 2 [SUP]26[/SUP] And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
[SUP]27[/SUP] And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
[SUP]28[/SUP] And I will give him the morning star.

Does anyone else see how dangerous especially to a new person looking for truth in the bible and who has never read a bible can confuse what the NIV is saying?
If I were to give the NIV to them and say here is God's word and they read it as it is and understood from it what is being said.
Is it only me who gets the implication of the NIV?

OK some say oh its not talking about a fallen being in Isaiah chapter 14 its about the King of Babylon in context. ok even if that was true the NIV tells you The King of Babylon will arise in your heart in Peter 2 and Revelations 2 you will be given the King of Babylon!

No confusion in my KJV Isaiah 14 cause its Lucifer -Lu·ci·fer (l

s

-f

r)
n.1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.

[HR][/HR][Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin L

cifer, from l

cifer, light-bringer : l

x, l

c-, light; see leuk- in Indo-European roots + -fer, -fer.]

I know I know I will get wrath from people but its there its what is printed.

I could show many more examples but there is no need to.
That one mistake weather an oversight or intentional is very dangerous.

KJV God's preserved TRUE WORDS

God Bless ALL

Many of us could show you where the KJV got it wrong too. When translating, the translators are often up against many words in the original language that have multiple meanings, thus they have to interpret it.

That said, I would give my young son and daughter a NIV before a KJV, because the NIV is more of thought for thought translation. Even thought I don't like the NIV that much, it is easier to understand and it has the Core message of the gospel correct.

Acts 16 NIV
30 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”

 

[breno785au]

What about a Geneva vs KJV comparison?

 

[Jason0047]

I so no to NIV for many reasons but here is a good example why. from NIV online bible

Isaiah [SUP]12 [/SUP]How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

2nd Peter same NIV Bible Sight
[SUP]19 [/SUP]We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts

Same sight NIV Bible

Revelations 2:26-2:28
[SUP]26 [/SUP]To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— [SUP]27 [/SUP]that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery’[SUP][b][/SUP]—just as I have received authority from my Father. [SUP]28 [/SUP]I will also give that one the morning star.

Same verses but out of KJV

Isaiah [SUP]12[/SUP] How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations.

2Peter [SUP]19[/SUP] We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Revelations 2 [SUP]26[/SUP] And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
[SUP]27[/SUP] And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
[SUP]28[/SUP] And I will give him the morning star.

Does anyone else see how dangerous especially to a new person looking for truth in the bible and who has never read a bible can confuse what the NIV is saying?
If I were to give the NIV to them and say here is God's word and they read it as it is and understood from it what is being said.
Is it only me who gets the implication of the NIV?

OK some say oh its not talking about a fallen being in Isaiah chapter 14 its about the King of Babylon in context. ok even if that was true the NIV tells you The King of Babylon will arise in your heart in Peter 2 and Revelations 2 you will be given the King of Babylon!

No confusion in my KJV Isaiah 14 cause its Lucifer -Lu·ci·fer (l

s

-f

r)
n.1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.

[HR][/HR][Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin L

cifer, from l

cifer, light-bringer : l

x, l

c-, light; see leuk- in Indo-European roots + -fer, -fer.]

I know I know I will get wrath from people but its there its what is printed.

I could show many more examples but there is no need to.
That one mistake weather an oversight or intentional is very dangerous.

KJV God's preserved TRUE WORDS

God Bless ALL

I agree. The devil places his name all over the Modern Translations. In fact, many Bible versions say that it is the dragon who is standing on the sea shore in Revelation. This is just evil and wrong.

See Parallel Version for Revelation 13:1 here...

Revelation 13:1

See, if you know anything about Bible language, standing on something means that you "own it"; And the devil wants to own you. In the King James, John is standing on the seashore. Yet in many Bible versions the dragon (i.e. the devil) is standing on the seashore.

Why is this a problem?

Lets look at...

Genesis 22:17

"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;"'

​

Did you catch that? God says to Abraham that He will multiply his seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore where he will then possess the gate of his enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom). The apostle John who wrote Revelation was Jewish and he was the promised seed of Genesis 22 standing on the seashore in Revelation 13. It was not the dragon or the devil standing on the seashore.

For certain Modern Versions eliminate the part of the passage in Revelation 13:1 that says that John is standing on the seashore (When he refers to himself as "I").

You may also want to check out this link here, too.

The N. I. V. INFECTION

 

[Bookends]

I agree. The devil places his name all over the Modern Translations. In fact, many Bible versions say that it is the dragon who is standing on the sea shore in Revelation. This is just evil and wrong.

See Parallel Version for Revelation 13:1 here...

Revelation 13:1

See, if you know anything about Bible language, standing on something means that you "own it"; And the devil wants to own you. In the King James, John is standing on the seashore. Yet in many Bible versions the dragon (i.e. the devil) is standing on the seashore.

Why is this a problem?

Lets look at...

Genesis 22:17

"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;"'

​

Did you catch that? God says to Abraham that He will multiply his seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore where he will then possess the gate of his enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom). The apostle John who wrote Revelation was Jewish and he was the promised seed of Genesis 22 standing on the seashore in Revelation 13. It was not the dragon or the devil standing on the seashore.

For certain Modern Versions eliminate the part of the passage in Revelation 13:1 that says that John is standing on the seashore (When he refers to himself as "I").

You may also want to check out this link here, too.

The N. I. V. INFECTION

There is a valid reason why some translate "I" as "he" or "dragon"...1. manuscripts more ancient have the rendering as "he" as referring to the dragon in Revelations chapter 12:17, 2. chapters and verse where add later to make it easier to find passages and chapters and verse themselves are not divine in themselves. Thus, rendering he or dragon could be referring the previous verse.

 

[Bookends]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA" target="_blank">[video=youtube;r5T2aqbyxuA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA[/video]


Some problems for King James onlyists to consider

 

[Nick01]

Oh for goodness sake.

There are already plenty of other threads on this topic. Go read them, instead of going over the same arguments over and over again. Everything in the OP has been discussed extensively elsewhere, some of it even in the last couple of months.


"There is nothing new under the sun..."

 

[thecreationtutor]

Oh for goodness sake.

There are already plenty of other threads on this topic. Go read them, instead of going over the same arguments over and over again. Everything in the OP has been discussed extensively elsewhere, some of it even in the last couple of months.


"There is nothing new under the sun..."

You should probably eat your words and look at them and put yourself in there

 

[Tintin]

Oh for goodness sake.

There are already plenty of other threads on this topic. Go read them, instead of going over the same arguments over and over again. Everything in the OP has been discussed extensively elsewhere, some of it even in the last couple of months.


"There is nothing new under the sun..."

Oh, I absolutely agree! Often it seems like only a few of us ever use the Search function. It's there for a reason, people! Please use it.

 

[Jason0047]

There is a valid reason why some translate "I" as "he" or "dragon"...1. manuscripts more ancient have the rendering as "he" as referring to the dragon in Revelations chapter 12:17, 2. chapters and verse where add later to make it easier to find passages and chapters and verse themselves are not divine in themselves. Thus, rendering he or dragon could be referring the previous verse.

Hey, look. If this was the only instance or example of this in the Bible, I would say maybe you might be right. But there is a repeat pattern of this over and over and over again of the devil placing his name in Modern Versions. Coming up with excuses to ignore all of them is just not wanting to see it.

 

[Nick01]

You should probably eat your words and look at them and put yourself in there

Which ones?

 

[Jason0047]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA" target="_blank">[video=youtube;r5T2aqbyxuA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA[/video]


Some problems for King James onlyists to consider

First, there are just as many extreme religionists in the Anti-KJV-Only Camp than there are in the KJV-Only camp. Pointing to folks who have extreme views who believe in the KJV is not being openly honest about KJV-Onlyists. Second, Will Kinney has pointed out that he is being hypocritical in his views, too. You can check that out here:

Acts 10:11;Isa.19:10fish - Another King James Bible Believer

Third, James White is a Calvinist (Reformed), which means He is against the Biblical View of Conditional Salvation.

 

[Alligator]

I agree. The devil places his name all over the Modern Translations. In fact, many Bible versions say that it is the dragon who is standing on the sea shore in Revelation. This is just evil and wrong.

See Parallel Version for Revelation 13:1 here...

Revelation 13:1

See, if you know anything about Bible language, standing on something means that you "own it"; And the devil wants to own you. In the King James, John is standing on the seashore. Yet in many Bible versions the dragon (i.e. the devil) is standing on the seashore.

Why is this a problem?

Lets look at...

Genesis 22:17

"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;"'

​

Did you catch that? God says to Abraham that He will multiply his seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore where he will then possess the gate of his enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom). The apostle John who wrote Revelation was Jewish and he was the promised seed of Genesis 22 standing on the seashore in Revelation 13. It was not the dragon or the devil standing on the seashore.

For certain Modern Versions eliminate the part of the passage in Revelation 13:1 that says that John is standing on the seashore (When he refers to himself as "I").

You may also want to check out this link here, too.

The N. I. V. INFECTION

i agree on the NIV. Is readability more important than the truth ?

i like the .NASB and the ESV

 

[KohenMatt]

I was saved through the NIV. Know why? Because the Holy Spirit taught me, and the Holy Spirit can teach truth through ANY translation.

When we focus on the differences between the translations and which is more accurate, blah blah blah, we're using our brains, instead of trusting the Holy Spirit to teach us.

The Spirit teaches us truth, not a translation.


That being said, this thread is best left to an already existing one for the reasons tintin said.

 

[Vernon]

This contention over translations explains why "sola scriptura" is a false position. It is Jesus Christ alone.

Just a thought.

 

[Bookends]

Hey, look. If this was the only instance or example of this in the Bible, I would say maybe you might be right. But there is a repeat pattern of this over and over and over again of the devil placing his name in Modern Versions. Coming up with excuses to ignore all of them is just not wanting to see it.

You are the one who is insinuating that "morning star" or "Lucifier" in Isaiah is either "Christ" or "Satan", but if you read the passage carefully and in context, it is referring to the current king of Babylon in Isaiah's day. No where is Satan called Lucifer in the bible, that is a notion that Christians incorrectly place on the name, IMO..

"morning star" and "Lucifer" mean the same thing, it is referring to a king. In Isaiah it is referring to an earthly king and in Revelation it is referring to our heavenly king, Christ.
"

 

[Bookends]

First, there are just as many extreme religionists in the Anti-KJV-Only Camp than there are in the KJV-Only camp. Pointing to folks who have extreme views who believe in the KJV is not being openly honest about KJV-Onlyists. Second, Will Kinney has pointed out that he is being hypocritical in his views, too. You can check that out here:

Acts 10:11;Isa.19:10fish - Another King James Bible Believer

Third, James White is a Calvinist (Reformed), which means He is against the Biblical View of Conditional Salvation.

What you really mean is he is against your view of conditional salvation. Just because he's a Calvinist doesn't mean he's wrong about everything. I love my Calvinist brothers just as much as my Arminian brothers and non-Calvinist.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

'lucifer' is not even his real name...the hebrew name is 'heylel' which does mean 'morning star'...'lucifer' on the other hand is just a holdover from the latin that was continued in the king james version for no good reason...

also i should point out that there is a difference between satan's title...'morning star'...and jesus' title...'bright morning star'... you would only confuse these two if you are prone to confusion already...