What do you think of this article? NIV Perversion?


What do you think? :shrug:

I don’t even need to click on the link to tell you that jesus-is-savior.com is a website that I wouldn’t trust to tell me what color the sky is. Do yourself a favor and stay away from them.

They’ve got loads of virulently anti-Catholic propoganda on that site.

I’m all for not throwing the baby out with the bathwater and for trying to find the nugget of truth being held onto by even those I disagree with. But I find it very difficult to extend that latitude to that website.

Suffice it to say, I wouldn’t take anything they say at face value. I’m more apt to think that whatever they say is most likely completely false.

There is little doubt that the NIV is a very dumbed-down, agenda-driven translation of the scriptures. Now, this site may have a lot of things wrong, but like a stopped clock, they may be right twice a day.

Hi Crisp,

It’s me again. Your questions keep jumping at me. I have a lot of trouble understanding old English, and that’s what the KJV is written in. I’m an old guy. In my younger days Catholics weren’t allowed to ask why, and I mean why for anything. If you did, a Nun might smack your hands with a ruler, or you might be told to say 50 Hail Mary’s and 25 Our Father’s while kneeling on a hard floor with your back perfectly straight and your hand together pointing up to Heaven. So no one asked why. That was considered doubting God, which was considered a grave sin. Thank God those days are past. But since I understood little to nothing about God, I became almost an atheist at 18.

About 10 years later God started calling me. I made Him prove Himself to me, which He did. I wanted to read the Bible and my Mother owned a very nice Catholic Bible from 1950. It’s written in old English so I couldn’t understand it. I felt lost within lost. Woe was me. What was I to do?

One night while doing a good deed in a mall, a man handed me a small booklet. (I think that man was an angel, but that’s another story) The booklet was The Gospel According to John. I opened it and wow, it wasn’t old English and I could understand it. This was about 1979. I read it all, and wanted more. In the back was a phone number to call to order the whole Bible. I did so. I read the whole thing, cover to cover. I still have it. It was the NIV which was a brand new translation back then. You can’t get it anymore.

I have now found out the NIV has gone through 3 or 4 revisions since the one I read. The 1984 revision is ok, but anything later is not too accurate. But I compared my original NIV to a KJV and a New King James Bible and mine is accurate. It does have a lot of foot notes explaining why a different word than in KJV was used, when that was done.

But I don’t like these new NIV Bibles. You’d have to keep comparing them to a KJV or a New KJV.

There’s a website with many Bible translations, in English, and other languages too. You can make up to 6 come up side by side to compare. You can also have the website read it out loud for you. I’m giving you a link to that site. There are some folks that believe the KJV is the only reliable Bible. I must disagree. The 1984 NIV is also reliable.

I think you are a young person Crisp. When you find a Bible translation you can comprehend, and trust, try and find one and buy it. We are in perilous times. There is a very rich gay man who is pushing hard to get homosexuality taken out of the Bible as a sin. Sooner or later he will win. Or he is going to have a whole new translation done where homosexuality will no longer be a sin. This man is rich and powerful enough to do this. That’s why I said to buy a Bible printed on paper with ink.

Here is the link to the Bible website I use most often. The search engine isn’t that great, so I have another site with a better search engine. If you want it just ask.



Bible Gateway! Definitely my favorite Bible site I’ve seen. Others claim to have Catholic translations, like the DRB or RSVCE, but I’ve only ever seen deuterocanon on their site. (Of course, an explicitly Catholic would have it, but none seem to have free apps or are as searchable)

Www.jesus-is-savior.com=www.chick.com. Just my :twocents:. :):p:gopray:

All I will say is when you have to have a link on your home page to an article explaining why “this is NOT a hate site!” you (the publisher of the site, not the OP) pretty much lose your credibility with me.

The only caveat is to get a complete, rather than an edited bible. 73 books God has revealed to man. 66 books is what man has revealed to man.

Okay, now for a review/rebuttal of their claims.

Luke 2:33. Plenty of translations call Joseph his father. Even Catholic translations like the RSVCE do. All they’re getting at is that Joseph was Mary’s husband and thus an earthly father figure to Jesus.

Romans 1:18-32. Umm… It’s a dynamic translation. No harm intended.

Mark 1:2-3. Whoopdeedoo. There’s a mistake. There’s a difference between a lie and a mistranslation.

1 Corinthians 9:6. SSA is not a sin. Acting on it is. “Homosexual offenders” means those who sin by committing homosexual acts.

Isaiah 14:12. Lucifer means “morning star.” It’d be like replacing Michael with
Who is like God?"

Revelation 6:8. Guess what? Hades is the word used in the original Greek!

Lord’s Prayer. The Matthew version is intact, just without the thous :(. As for Luke, the only translation I sampled that actually included those clauses was the KJV (I also looked at the DRB, the NIV, the RSVCE, and the NAB). The footnotes acknowledge that some manuscripts include them.

“Taketh away” Different manuscripts. Also, I heard once that the “For thine is the kingdom…” line wasn’t a part of the Bible AT ALL at first. Supposedly it was an illumination, the decorative extras the bored monk copyists added.

“The KJV is easier to understand.” Umm… Not everyone can read Shakespearean English as plainly as if it were Modern English. Yes, it scores better on reading level tests, but those only account for word length. “Vex cwm fly zing jabs Kurd Qoph.” scores 115, about as much as the Cat in the Hat which scores 118. Now yes, I realize I’m comparing an entire book to a single sentence. But the point is that you can skew the results by using a lot of fancy monosyllabic words instead of simple polysyllabic ones.

Apparently the author of jesus-is-savior.com thinks Chick tracts are heretical because they teach that a person has to be willing to turn from sin to be saved.

[quote=jesus-is-savior.com]MOST of the gospel tracts I have read lately are garbage. I can’t believe how corrupt and misleading so many tracts are. What are we handing to people? Does a person have to promise not to sin anymore to be saved? Does a person have to be sorry for their sins to be saved? Does a person have to be willing to turn from their sins to be saved? The answer is No, No, No!

That is just astounding to me that someone could actually believe that. I pray that people are not deceived by such a false representation of the Truth, but I’m sure that people are every day. It makes my heart hurt.

When I first read the Bible, many moons ago :D, it took me 3 years to finish it. I wasn’t in a rush, and I jumped around a lot. I mostly read it on the train, to and from work. I’d open it to where I had left off, but if I felt a nudging to go read another place, I did. I later learned that was the Holy Spirit leading me to read something I needed to know for that day. Or sometimes I read an article and it referenced certain scriptures, so I went to read them. But what amazed me was the Bible seemed to come alive. Our course, that was once again the Holy Spirit because He’s part of the one and only living God.

Btw, that phrase “Living God” used to confuse me a little. I realized what it meant while watching the old “10 Commandments” movie. Back then people worshiped lifeless statures, like the Pharaoh did. After God brought all the plagues on Egypt, Pharaoh let the Jews go. But then he went after them, and he saw God block his chariots while at the same time God opened the Red Sea to let the Jews go through. Pharaoh then stood and watched with shock and horror as God closed the Red Sea and drowned all of Pharaoh’s men. So, in the movie at least, when Pharaoh returns he realizes the God of Moses is God, and all his stature gods could do nothing. Thus the phrase the 1 and only Living God. But people also worshiped another kind of false gods that could do things. These are the fallen angels, also known as devils. They made a lot of problems for our God, and they continue to do so.

I think the day of the final showdown is getting close. But that’s another topic.

Originally Posted by jesus-is-savior.com
MOST of the gospel tracts I have read lately are garbage. I can’t believe how corrupt and misleading so many tracts are. What are we handing to people? Does a person have to promise not to sin anymore to be saved? Does a person have to be sorry for their sins to be saved? Does a person have to be willing to turn from their sins to be saved? The answer is No, No, No!

Did this come the site jesus-is-savior.com?

This is wrong. The answer is Yes,yes,yes. We may never achieve perfection from sin, but we are supposed to be trying, every day and every night. This is one of the #1 reasons I’m walking away from protestantism. They don’t believe what we do matters, and of course it does. It’s said throughout the Bible. Not that you get saved by good works, you get saved by faith and trust in Jesus. But once you do that, you’re expected to try your hardest to stop sinning.

I can’t believe these people say they read the Bible and they follow the Bible, but they tell new converts they can do anything they please because they are automatically forgiven. No. That’s false. The Bible certainly doesn’t say that.**

Yes, it came from the article I linked just above that quote. Unfortunately they also have an article titled “Why Catholics are Going to Hell” and in another article titled “The Pope is the Vicar of Hell” they claim, “The Pope is the vicar of Hell, which is where Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II are presently burning, and Pope Benedict XVI is headed.” That is just sick and twisted. It is no wonder that more and more people are turning away from Christianity when they see something like this as a representation of those who call themselves “Christian.” It just reinforces what the point in my first post in this thread that if you have to have a disclaimer on your homepage defending why “this is NOT a hate site!” then in Jeff Foxworthy voice you might be a hate site.:rolleyes:

The bottom line is that the NIV, NASB, NKJV and all non-Catholic bibles are incomplete and are interpreted according to an agenda as well as apart from the Apostolic Tradition. Stick with a good Catholic bible. You will still find some argument there - particularly in the US.

Get all 73 books. The less scripture you settle for, the more you have to make up about what is missing.

Okay, now that’s a bit harsh. Remember, the original KJV included deuterocanon. However, you did remind me of the perfect retort to make about the page:

I think they removed a lot more than 65000 words in the NIV :rolleyes:

Notice that the main offenders all have “New” in their titles? What is “new” about the content of scripture? As well, man-made canons are still man-made canons, and interpretations made without the Apostolic Traditions are bound to go wrong, otherwise you and I could make our own version. Many have - read Luke 1:1.

I note that even the KJV Deuterocanon (if you can find one with it) is missing chapters 13 and 14 of Daniel and is missing part of the Book of Esther. Why is any of this important? Well, because a huge portion of the world’s Christians no longer appeal to the Saints, or pray for the dead. To me, that is reason enough.

New International (per)version


The fanatical devotion some Fundamentalists have toward the KJV always puzzled me, even back when I was one.:confused:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.