PDA

View Full Version : Misconception about the NIV



poochie
Nov 3rd 2008, 02:14 AM
An individual posted here a week or two ago and said that one of his issues with the NIV was because it was missing or paraphrased Jesus's "verily verily" statements to "I tell you the truth." I did a study on this and discovered that the ESV/NASB translate Jesus's "verily" to "truly" the NKJV to "Most assuredly" and the NIV to "I tell you the truth."

I then asked a fellow Grad student whom has taken five semesters of Greek and he told me that the NIV/NKJV are not taking away anything from the original languages of these translations.

On another note I discovered a NIV hate website which bashes the translation because some verses are missing (Matthew 12:47, Matthew 17:21, Mark 9:44, Luke 22:44, Romans 16:24,etc..) I also looked at the ESV and noticed that all these verses are also missing. Then I remembered what I was taught in my Textual Criticism course and that the most reliable and best Manuscript evidence does not support nor contain the verses above, and why the NIV & ESV remove them from their texts.

The KJV/NKJV may contain them, nor will they add a section header indicating that these verses are not in the best available manuscripts (Mk 16:9ff,etc). But the NIV/ESV are more reliable translations.

Literalist-Luke
Nov 3rd 2008, 03:09 AM
I'm with you, the NIV is more reliable. I'm not familiar with the ESV, so I can't speak to that one. And this is not to take anything away from the KJV. For those who like it, you're doing just fine with it. It did a wonderful job for many years.

poochie
Nov 3rd 2008, 10:24 AM
I memorize all in the KJV here and at this time I am working on more than 20 verses not including those I memorized for the previous exams which will be cumulative. But I am about half way. But all in all I am very blessed to memorize from the KJV.

I am also very blessed to own a ESV and like this translation.

However the issue I have with the KJV is that (at least the 2 copies I own) lack the following.

1. Section headers
2. Poetry indented
3. Section headers indicating that (Mk 19:9ff is not in many original MSS evidences)
4. OT Quotations + some of Jesus words indented
5. Etc..

There are others things I forgot, but it really helps reading the NIV and coming to Matt 5 and getting the indented words of Jesus rather than some big chunk of text. This is such a blessing.



I'm with you, the NIV is more reliable. I'm not familiar with the ESV, so I can't speak to that one. And this is not to take anything away from the KJV. For those who like it, you're doing just fine with it. It did a wonderful job for many years.

Emanate
Nov 3rd 2008, 05:10 PM
However the issue I have with the KJV is that (at least the 2 copies I own) lack the following.

1. Section headers
2. Poetry indented
3. Section headers indicating that (Mk 19:9ff is not in many original MSS evidences)
4. OT Quotations + some of Jesus words indented
5. Etc..

You will get a kick out of this. My problem with the NIV are the section headers. I have found they sometimes wrongly divide sections, which kind of lightens the meaning in some passages.

3 and 4 are good points, though they are by no means a complete list of references.

thepenitent
Nov 3rd 2008, 05:18 PM
An individual posted here a week or two ago and said that one of his issues with the NIV was because it was missing or paraphrased Jesus's "verily verily" statements to "I tell you the truth." I did a study on this and discovered that the ESV/NASB translate Jesus's "verily" to "truly" the NKJV to "Most assuredly" and the NIV to "I tell you the truth."

I then asked a fellow Grad student whom has taken five semesters of Greek and he told me that the NIV/NKJV are not taking away anything from the original languages of these translations.

On another note I discovered a NIV hate website which bashes the translation because some verses are missing (Matthew 12:47, Matthew 17:21, Mark 9:44, Luke 22:44, Romans 16:24,etc..) I also looked at the ESV and noticed that all these verses are also missing. Then I remembered what I was taught in my Textual Criticism course and that the most reliable and best Manuscript evidence does not support nor contain the verses above, and why the NIV & ESV remove them from their texts.

The KJV/NKJV may contain them, nor will they add a section header indicating that these verses are not in the best available manuscripts (Mk 16:9ff,etc). But the NIV/ESV are more reliable translations.

I am "the individual" you refer to and I must respectfully disagree with the Greek student you consulted. The repitition of "Verily, verily" or "Truly, truly" is the exact quotation from the original transcript. (See: UBS 3.0 or NA27) - the repitition is there. This repitition and alliteration is a very common structural literary technique in Biblical Jewish writing to emphasize a point. For me, it is a very effective technique as it viscerally draws my attention to the matter being addressed. The NIV trades the repitition for "I tell you the truth." I believe something is lost. I speak only for me but I love the poetic structure of ancient Greek and Hebrew and prefer translations which keep it.

I'm not saying one is "more accurate" than the other. I'm merely saying that one speaks to me personally on a deeper level.

poochie
Nov 3rd 2008, 07:29 PM
Well as indicated the NKJV also translates like the NIV here and does not use repetition. So its not only the NIV.


I am "the individual" you refer to and I must respectfully disagree with the Greek student you consulted. The repitition of "Verily, verily" or "Truly, truly" is the exact quotation from the original transcript. (See: UBS 3.0 or NA27) - the repitition is there. This repitition and alliteration is a very common structural literary technique in Biblical Jewish writing to emphasize a point. For me, it is a very effective technique as it viscerally draws my attention to the matter being addressed. The NIV trades the repitition for "I tell you the truth." I believe something is lost. I speak only for me but I love the poetic structure of ancient Greek and Hebrew and prefer translations which keep it.

I'm not saying one is "more accurate" than the other. I'm merely saying that one speaks to me personally on a deeper level.