The New International Version (3)

Thank you for studying with us. The NIV has become very popular, but popularity does not guarantee reliability. With this study, we conclude our investigation of this modern version.

John 20:30 (NIV) says, "...miraculous signs...." The Majority Text and the KJV have the word "signs." "Miraculous" is an unnecessary addition and again puts the NIV in the category of a commentary.

In Acts 2:4 (NIV), "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." "...as the Spirit gave them utterance" (KJV) is far superior to "...enabled them." According to Mr. Thayer the word translated "utterance" is used of elevated speech such as the apostles engaged in on the day of Pentecost. So once again, the NIV proves itself inferior.

In Acts 2:38 (NIV) "...so that your sins may be forgiven" expresses purpose: "so that" equals "in order to." In Romans 5:20 (NIV), does "...so that..." express purpose? In the place of "so that" the KJV has "that." In the Majority Text, the construction is "hina with the subjunctive," which expresses either purpose or result, depending on the context. If "so that" in Acts 2:38 expresses purpose in the NIV, does it also express purpose in Rom. 5:20? "That" is often the translation of "hina with the subjunctive": "..that the scripture might be fulfilled..." (John 19:24, KJV). Did the soldiers do what they did in order to fulfill prophecy or was the fulfillment of prophecy the "result" of what they did? The soldiers may not have even known about the prophecy, so "result" is the correct concept. Considering such verses as Ex. 20:20, it seems reasonable that "result," not "purpose" is the meaning in Rom. 5:20.

In Romans 8:3-9 (NIV), "sinful nature" is the translation of the word "flesh" (sarx). This is probably the most "blatant blunder" of the NIV, the religious bias of Calvinism. Even the words "sinful flesh" (Rom. 8:3) of the KJV do not teach the Calvinistic concept of Total Depravity with the result that man inherited a "sinful nature." "Sinful flesh" indicates only that the body of man is used as an instrument in committing sin. The flesh, or body of man, does not have a mind of its own. It functions according to the dictates of the mind. The Bible does not teach the concept that the "spirit of man" serves God, but the body serves sin. If that were so, it would mean that the body had a mind of its own (cf. Rom. 7:25 in the NIV).

Gal. 3:27 (NIV) reads, "for all of you who were united with Christ in baptism have been clothed with Christ." This changes the force of the original: "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The verse plainly teaches that one is baptized "into" Christ. This helps in establishing the "purpose or design" of baptism. Once again, the NIV proves itself to be very, very inferior.

I Cor. 13:10 (NIV): "but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears." "Perfection" translates "to teleion," which is neuter gender and means "that which is perfect," or "the perfect thing." It cannot mean the perfect one, referring to Christ. To do so it would have to be in the masculine gender. Actually that which is "perfect" is contrasted with that which is "in part" (ek merous). That which was in part was "miraculous." In contrast, when the perfect (complete) revelation came, they would no longer need confirming miracles. "Perfection" in the NIV is ambiguous. What did the translators have in mind?

Hebrews 11:1 (NIV) states, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Closer to the original is "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Finally, the NIV casts doubt on the inspiration of Mark 16:9-20.