The New International Version (2)

What about the NIV? Is it a reliable translation of the Word of God? Is it such a version of the Bible that we could give it first place?

Last time we discussed the first part of Mt. 5:32, but not the last part. We will consider that first along with the last part of Mt. 19:9 and Luke 16:18. The last part of these three texts deals with the "put away" party. The NIV renders these verses as "..anyone who marries a woman so divorced commits adultery" (Mt. 5:32), omits this statement in Mt. 19:9, and in Lk. 16:18 reads: "...and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery." These are not as clear and precise as they need to be.

In the Majority Text, the essentials of the statements are the same, but they take different forms: Mt. 5:32, whosoever should marry one having been put away commits adultery, Mt. 19:9, one marrying one having been put away commits adultery, Lk. 16:18 and every one marrying one having been put away from a husband commits adultery.

To me the proper translation of the Majority Text, and I believe other Greek Texts, would put more emphasis, and clarity, on the fact that the Holy Spirit condemns marriage to one who has been put away. In contrast, when Luke 16:18 is translated as the NIV does ("...and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery") it could include a woman who divorces her husband for fornication for she is a divorced woman isn't she?

Next we turn to the NIV's treatment of Luke 1:34: "How can this be,' Mary asked the angel, 'since I am a virgin?" The Majority Text reads more like this: "But Mary said to the angel, 'How shall this be, because I know not a man?" The NIV is more like a commentary than a good translation.

In John 3:16 the NIV reads, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life." Monogenes "...denotes the only son of God or one who in the sense in which he himself is the son of God has no brethren." (Thayer, p. 417). He is the only being so begotten. Why not then continue to render monogenes as "only begotten," for He is the only one so begotten. Also, the mood of the verbs "perish" and "have" is the subjunctive mood. Concerning the subjunctive mood we quote several authorities:

1. "I have ventured in my Short Grammar to call the subjunctive and optative the modes of doubtful statement, while the indicative is the mode of positive assertion and the imperative that of commanding statement." Grammar, Robertson, pp. 927,928.

2. "It is the mood of doubt, of hesitation, of proposal...." Grammar, Robertson, p. 928.

3. "The subjunctive mode is a mode of doubtful statement, of hesitating affirmation, of contingency." Beginner's Greek Grammar, W. H. Davis, p. 74.

4. "The Subjunctive Mood expresses a thought or wish rather than a fact." A Short Syntax of New Testament Greek (Fifth Edition), H. P. V. Nunn, p. 61.

How did the NIV deal with the verbs in question? "..shall not perish but have evelasting life." That is a positive statement which should have been translated: "might not perish but might have everlasting life." The passage teaches that the one believing in Christ might not perish, but does not guarantee that the one who believes will not perish. Also, that the one believing in Christ might have everlasting life, but is no guarantee that the one believing in Christ will have everlasting life. Why is that so? Because the believer is the one who has the right to become a child of God (John 1:11,12). One does not become something he already is. So the NIV's treatment of John 3:16 is not good.

In the NIV John 8:24 says, "I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins." In this rendition there is an addition to the text, although it is put in brackets in an effort to note its addition. However, such explanations are the purpose of commentaries rather than translations.

The NIV renders John 14:30, "I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no effect on me..." The Majority Text reads: "I shall not speak much longer with you, for the prince of the world comes, and has nothing in me." Once more the NIV is more like a commentary than a translation.