© 11 Colin Melbourne
Part 5 of 5
Conclusion
Image courtesy of Biblica
The most serious failure of the NIV 2011, one which precludes any sincere Christian from using it, is the insidious corruption of God’s word.
There are many cases where; words, phrases, and verses, which were relegated to footnotes in the NIV 1984, have now been completely obliterated, with not even a footnote quoting them.
The reader is no longer given the option of deciding between alternatives. We must have complete faith in the translators’ wisdom and sound spiritual judgment.
Examples of whole verses removed from the NIV:
Key:
’84 = NIV 1984
’11 = NIV 2011
fn. = footnote
Mtt. 18:11. Removed from main text in ’84, and printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11 and the fn. doesn’t even quote the scripture, instead referring readers to Lk. 19:10.
Mtt. 23:14. Removed in ’84, and printed as a tiny fn. Also removed in ’11 which doesn’t even quote the verse in the fn., merely saying, “Some manuscripts include here words similar to Mark 12:40 and Luke 20:47”.
Mk. 7:16. Removed in ’84 and ’11, printed in 84 as a tiny fn. ’11 doesn’t quote it at all, the fn. merely referring the reader to Mk. 4:23.
Mk. 9:44. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely referring the reader to verse 48.
Mk. 9:46. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely referring the reader to verse 48.
Mk. 11:26. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely saying, “Some manuscripts include here words similar to Mtt. 6:15”.
Mk. 15:28. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely saying, “Some manuscripts include here words similar to Luke 22:37”.
Lk. 17:36. Removed in ’84 and printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely saying, “Some manuscripts include here words similar to Mtt. 24:46”.
Lk. 23:17. Removed in ’84 and printed as a tiny fn. Removed in ’11, which doesn’t even quote it, the fn. merely saying, “Some manuscripts include here words similar to Mtt. 27:15 and Mark 15:6”.
Jn. 5:4. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Acts 8:37. Removed in ’84, printed as a tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Acts 15:34. Removed in ’84, quoted in tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Acts 24:7. Removed in ’84, quoted in tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Acts 28:29. Removed in ’84, quoted in tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Rom. 16:24. Removed in ’84, quoted in tiny fn. Same in ’11.
Spuriously Annexed Passages:
Mk. 16:9-20. Separated in ’84 with bracketed note “The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20”. Separated and reduced to a footnote-sized italic font in ’11, the bracketed note increased in size. ’11 also has a fn. with an alternative spurious ending to Mark’s Gospel.
Jn. 7:53-8:11. Separated in ’84 with bracketed note, “The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11”. Separated and reduced to a footnote-sized italic font in ’11, the bracketed note increased in size. ’11 and mentions that some manuscripts include these verses in other places in the Gospels.
Bible Phrases Omitted
In addition, there are hundreds of phrases removed from the main text, and footnoted. Here’s a few examples;
Mtt. 6:13. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
Lk. 4:8. and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan.
Lk. 4:18. to heal the brokenhearted.
Lk. 9:56. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.
Lk. 11:2. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
1 Jn. 5:7,8. in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth.
In the old 1984 NIV it was easy to spot the CBT’s errors, and highlight the footnote reading to use in study and preaching.
Now, you must accept the CBT are correct.
New Christians would never know of the many omissions by reading the NIV 2011.
Buried in Footnotes: Then Deleted
Since the original 1978 NIV, the trend has now become clear: First retain the traditional word in the main text, but cast doubt upon it by justifying an alternative in a footnote.
Then in the 1984 edition many of the footnoted alternatives usurped the traditional rendering, the footnote version was promoted to the main text, and the traditional text dropped to the footnote.
Two decades later, in many places the translators have deleted the footnoted traditional reading.
Here’s some examples; First the vital Scripture confirming the Incarnation, Jn. 1:14 NIV 1984;
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
400 Years of the KJV
<< Blood-bought, Tried and Tested: Treat yourself to a King James Bible and discover why it has endured and overcome all pretenders
The unique phrase “Only Begotten” (used in the KJV) has been relegated to a footnote, replaced by “One and Only” in the main text.
Now see what they’ve done in the NIV 2011;
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The substituted phrase, “one and only” is now lower case, and the footnote giving the alternative “Only Begotten” has been completely removed. There’s no footnote at all.
Christ is Censored and Gagged in John 3:16
A further example is John 3:16, where, in the NIV 1984, “only begotten Son” (note the lower case) is demoted to a footnote, and replaced in the main text by “one and only Son”. The NIV 2011 retains “one and only Son” and completely removes the footnoted “only begotten Son”.
New NIV claims that Jesus did NOT say John 3:16 at all!
Compounding this recklessness, the quotation marks in that precious passage are closed at verse Jn. 3:15. Thereby removing Jn. 3:16-21 from the lips of Christ, and imputing them to the Apostle John!
And all these years you thought the LORD Jesus Christ spoke the words of John 3:16-21.
How grateful you must be to the CBT for correcting you, and showing the words were actually the commentary of John. (Forgive my sarcasm, but observe how stiff-necked and shameless the CBT has become.)
Similarly, by deft adjustment of quotation marks, the NIV 2011 takes the words of John 3:31-36 out of John the Baptist’s mouth, and ascribes them to the pen of the Apostle John.
Secretly Introducing Heresy
I find such abuse staggering beyond belief.
I’ve seen many reviews of the NIV 2011, but none has noticed or mentioned this mauling of the third chapter of John’s Gospel. Why haven’t other Christians pointed it out? Here’s why…
It is the classic strategy of corruption by small steps. If change is too rapid, people rebel, and refuse it. But by very gradual subtle distortion they hope the gullible will not notice.
Let us recall the warning of the Apostle in 2 Pe. 2:1 KJV;
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
The Resurrection and Commission
The last twelve verses of Mark’s Gospel were cast in doubt in the NIV 1984, by placing a short line above them in the text, together with a small bracketed note claiming they were not in the earliest manuscripts.
Pure nonsense, of course, as even a baby Christian listening to the Holy Spirit could have told the CBT.
Not to mention the mountain of manuscript proof of their validity, as irrefutably confirmed over 120 years ago by Oxford University Professor of Divinity, and matchless Bible scholar, John W. Burgon, later Dean of Chichester.
So the CBT’s line and note were easy to ignore. However, in the 2011 edition, they have gone much further.
First, the delineation is now full length across Mark’s Gospel. Strongly implying that Mark’s Gospel ends at Mk. 16:8.
Second, the small bracketed note is now a similar size and typeface to the main text, increasing the prominence of its false assertion.
Third, the typeface of the last twelve verses of Mark has been reduced to a tiny italic font, making twelve whole verses of scripture look like a footnote.
A new footnote has appeared offering an alternative, though clearly false, proto-Catholic ending to Mark’s Gospel.
It is not difficult to foresee the next step: Subsequent revisions will ultimately delete all mention of Mark 16:9-20.
Conclusion
It is patently clear that the spirit motivating the CBT is not the Holy Spirit, but a deceiving spirit perverting God’s word.
The CBT have not followed the Holy Spirit, instead they have been seduced and led astray by an antiChrist spirit of the world.
As a long-time NIV 1984 user it is easy to perceive the trend, and the outcome will be disastrous for any believer using the NIV 2011 as their Holy Bible. Therefore, I strongly urge you to avoid it.
Review of the new NIV 2011: Part 1 of 5.
© 11 Colin Melbourne
You may also be interested in reading;
What’s Wrong with Modern Bibles?
What’s wrong with the NKJV and KJV 2016?
Which is The Best English Bible to Use?
<< Read The Attack Chick tract: See the behind-the-scenes struggle to destroy the King James Bible, and how God preserved it.