Deliberate mistranslations in the NIV Bible

The title of my thread comes from a website and is not a personal statement by me of any kind. I don't know the thoughts or motivations of the NIV team.

I will admit that I do not like it and believe that these people sought to hide much while making the Bible more modern in language and easier to read. The best place to hide deceit is in a good cause, and I believe that this is the case here.

But that is just guessing and my opinion. I agree with the statement that is the OP title, but it is not mine.

And the following samples are not my work, and I will supply the link to the website for informational purposes so you can see and think about it and make educated decisions of your own. As well as give you something to think about when choosing what Bible to use. The NIV is the most common so it's appropriate to question is it reliable?

Tanninim, are mythological dragon like sea monsters of Hebrew/Canaanite tradition involved in creation myths.

NIV renders it merely "creatures of the sea".
destroying the meaning completely and depriving readers of the original spirit of the myth. Genesis 1:21

Rather than choose for you the best examples I am just going to give you the whole thing covering Genesis through Revelation and let you decide.

Deliberate mistranslations in the NIV

Blessings to all.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

With so many English versions to choose from for differing reasons ,some might just choose this one . I think it comes with a warning that says must supply your own salt ,but is useless if you took the blue pill . just saying

a reply to: the2ofusr1


The link recommends either of 2 Bible's, one of which I have read personally and agree that it is the absolute best English translation ever along with many people.

The original 1963 Jerusalem Bible

Oxford annotated Bible

The Jerusalem Bible was the first to use the Dead Sea Scrolls in translation and the most memorable difference I can think of is that the coat of many colors of Joseph was originally just a long sleeved coat.

It has the most extensive amount of footnotes and introductions that are impressive, biographies of the books nearly.

Dogma was all but ignored and honesty and the preserving of the integrity of the original version were the priority and catalyst of its creation.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

I discovered a huge bad translation in the NIV; the NIV is junk, and it only served as an effort to to de-Catholicize the Bible’s theology.

It worked, and unfortunately, the Catholic hierarchy is so butt dumb, they've adopted it.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

That was a ridiculous video designed to make people who like to learn seem like the true sheep and the sheep as somehow better because they believe everything they are told.

It was a pro conformity piece of propaganda.

Reducing life to a two pill metaphor is not profound or new. The Matrix was stupid, government is corrupt and we are constantly being fed lies about Palestinians while the occupation of their country is approved because we don't know that Zionism is the mother of all terrorist organizations and that anti Muslim propaganda effectively turned the naive and stupid against a people who have not harmed them and are victims of a vast conspiracy to take Palestine and expel the Arabs to build the Temple on the mount.

a reply to: TonyS

The only thing is that the NRSV is the best common Bible today and is Catholic.

They actually do make the best Bibles, IMO.

Other than that I have no respect for the Papacy.

And agree , the NIV is junk.

of the 18 missing verses in the version....all....all relate to the sacrifice of Jesus.....someone is up to no good....I'll ask the church chat lady who may be the culprit.....

a reply to: LenatasataneL

I'm deeply suspicious of any version post-1966, Catholic or otherwise. After Vatican II, the Catholic bible revisionists compromised the translation to make it more ecumenically compatible with the Protestant texts.

If you want to do a look back, I'd suggest the Challoner Rheims Version of the Douay-Rheims Bible. Unfortunately, you either have to be an extraordinarily diligent student of over the age of 55 to understand it.

No matter how you slice this problem, the best bible to read would be one written in the very same dialect of Ancient Greek that the original bible was written in. Any other bible is going to be inherently flawed because of translation errors at a minimum.

So then, god is incapable of preserving his "word" intact.

a reply to: TonyS

I'm happy with my NRSV with Apocrypha and 1963 Jerusalem Bible. They are essentially the same and I know enough to know that the NRSV is reliable, other Catholic Bible's I don't bother with.

In addition, 55 is not a magic age that if you study the correct information will then allow you to properly understand a Bible.

Jews say that Talmud must be studied until 40 years old and with "a full belly" before you can understand Zohar and I get it just fine at my age and have not read more than a few Talmud tales.

And I have read every word of the Jerusalem Bible and have understood and increased in knowledge, as far as I concerned, almost every way I had hoped and a thousand times as much.

But I am unfamiliar with whichever Bible you meant, I will check it out and thanks for the tip.

☀🌑🌓🌕🌑🌓🌗🌑🌚⚙⚖🗿↗↙↕↔↔✡📛✝☪🐲🗽

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yea, this stuff is all over the Internet............most of it I don't trust.
biblehub.com...

I prefer the pre-1966 Jerusalem bible versions.

For the old testament, there's the Septuagint, which is also available over the internet, although how accurate the translations are is up for grabs, unless of course, you're an archaic Greek scholar.

I've been told by those that claim to know that the problem with the Greek v. the "Vulgate" (old Latin) translations is simply that the Greek language is far more nuanced with larger vocabulary than the Latin language. So something was lost in translation when Jerome translated the Greek verses into Latin.

I wasn't there, so I can't say for certain although it sounds reasonable to me that the Greeks would have been far more sophisticated than the Roman Latin speakers. It doesn't take a lot of sophistication to say things like, "Kill the Huns"; "Off with their heads"; "Crucify all of them"; "Plunder that City"; "Throw the Christians to the Lions"; "Let the Games Begin"; "Sacrifice a Virgin to the gods!"; "Pompei is burning"; "Nero fiddles while Rome Burns"; "An Arch, build another Arch!"

Pretty basic simple stuff and it continued after the Romans had lost their Empire such that when a Pope was asked by an official of the Inquisition, "The Jews won't convert, what do we do with them?" The Pope replied, "Kill them All, Let God sort them out"! (It's my understanding the Pope said that because he wasn't really paying attention and was reading a book by Julius Ceaser and that he never looked up, he just read the next line in the book out loud to dismiss the Spanish Envoy who'd asked the question).

Doesn't get much simpler than that!

a reply to: TonyS

Have you ever seen the Dali version?

I have 2 Jerusalem Bibles maroon with the Jerusalem Crusader cross on the front.

One I found and the other I bought mint condition in the box for $70. It is the best ever IMO.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Lena- Hi, I read Your thread and to fulfill the quid pro quo requirements of an intraweb message board I leave You the following:

www.nkusa.org...

www.nkusa.org...

www.truetorahjews.org...

Shalom

a reply to: JimNasium

So, I did something for you and you are returning the favor?

Cool. Thank you.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Yes, deliberate, and sometimes the goal is to change the meaning. The newer NIV translations are worse than the older. Very commonly used, and very inaccurate. If someone wants a good translation, that's a poor choice.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

Uhhhhhhhh . . . no.

They edited out the many verses documenting the fact that Christ had half-siblings.

I personally like the NLT and the Amplified . . . and for current linguistic flavor . . . THE MESSAGE.

My memory is in KJV as that's what I was reared with. However, I'm NOT KJV only as it also has plenty of errors.

Every translation is part paraphrase because no two languages are identical in word meanings and metaphors.

So I often find the wail about "It's just a paraphrase" to be more than a little disingenuous and silly.

There's human bias etc. in every translation.

We don't have a complete set of verified ORIGINAL autographs. We have essentially the whole thing via tons of fragments from within a few decades of the events but we don't have the original autographs.

a reply to: JimNasium

In terms of the Jews not returning "on their own" . . .

Nonsense.

1. They COULD NOT return on their own apart from God's engineering it and supernaturally protecting them thereafter as has been demonstrated in every war they've been in since 1948. I think it was the 6 day war when Egyptian tank commanders saw a vast array of Heaven's Angelic hosts arrayed against them and in behalf of the Israeli's. It stopped them in their tracks.

2. Yes, there will be a more wholesale returning to Israel also engineered by The Messiah in due course on the not distant horizon. And, evidently, even more of a returning after Armageddon.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: LenatasataneL

With so many English versions to choose from for differing reasons ,some might just choose this one . I think it comes with a warning that says must supply your own salt ,but is useless if you took the blue pill . just saying

There are two main reasons I check in fairly regularly besides the obvious just plain entertainment that comes from browsing the forums and threads.

#1. The genuinely valuable and educational posts put up by fellow members. Ats is a veritable buffet of information on topics that already interest me as well as introductions to new material I've not come across before.

#2. The dry humor and wit of so many intelligent and diverse fellow members.

You've not only provided my first belly laugh of the day, but I also subscribed to the little grey fella's YT channel! Kinda reminds me of Marvin in the BBC serial of Hitchhiker's Guide.

-----------------------

In order to stay on topic...

I learned from working on a certain minister's computer and overhearing the arguments between him and my employer/professor that the "translations" problem is a rabbit hole that I won't be jumping into. I've wracked my brain trying to remember the different reference programs I installed but can't remember the names. He had Hebrew, Greek, etc. programs that he wanted to use to cross reference passages from the Bible. The arguments got pretty heated and I don't think my boss ever agreed with him a single time.

I was stuck in the middle trying to get all these programs to coexist on a Wyse x286, DOS 3.0 and running a memory management program called Carousel.

a reply to: LenatasataneL


Remember, a little bit of leven destroyers the whole batch.