© 11 Colin Melbourne
Part 4 of 5
Rubbish In: Rubbish Out
In their Preface to the NIV 2011 the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) assures us that;
The first concern of the translators has continued to be the accuracy of the translation and its faithfulness to the intended meaning of the biblical writers. This has moved the translators to go beyond a formal word-for-word rendering of the original texts.
That sets alarm bells ringing in my spirit for several reasons;
The NIV relies heavily on the lineage of Corrupted Greek New Testaments concocted by the nineteenth century advocates of “Textual Criticism”.
Notably the learned scholars; Tischendorf, Tregelles, Lachmann, Westcott and Hort, et. al. culminating in the present day Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies Greek New Testaments.
Psst! Wanna buy a dirty manuscript?
The Text that the NIV translators followed for the New Testament is not God’s word in Greek, but A Mutilated Travesty of His word fabricated by heretics and cults from Alexandria in Northern Egypt.
Today the streets of Cairo are littered with hustlers hawking dirty postcards. In Tischendorf’s day oriental monks in Sinai monasteries helped gullible scholars “discover priceless ancient Bible manuscripts” in their dustbins.
No, God did not hide His word away for 1500 years with desert mountain idolaters. His word flourished throughout the world in every true Christian fellowship.
Inspired and Preserved By God
God’s written word has been preserved and handed down the centuries to us in the Traditional Text: The Textus Receptus; which the “Textual Critics” deprecate or ignore, whilst clinging to their idolized “Ancient Manuscripts”, notably the “old uncials”, represented chiefly in the Sinaiticus Codex and Vaticanus Codex. (See more details in The Sinaiticus Hoax).
Silk Purse from a Sow’s Ear?
The foundation of the CBT’s translation is not the word of God, therefore they cannot possibly produce an accurate translation of God’s word into English.
Edited and Re-written
It is no secret that the NIV is not a verbal formal-equivalent (word for word) translation, but rather an attempt at a dynamic-equivalent, thought for thought translation.
This is a deeply flawed approach to translating any serious work, let alone the eternal word of Almighty God. Instead of giving the reader what is written, the translators filter the scripture, and decide on its meaning. They then try to convey their understanding of the meaning, not the actual words God has inspired and written for us.
Christians want to know what God wrote through; Moses, Isaiah, David, John, Paul, Peter, and each of the Spirit-filled secretaries He used. We don’t want to know what a committee of lukewarm denominational academics and unsaved liberal theologians think God meant. They may get it right, or they may get it wrong.
It is the responsibility of a Bible translator to give us what God said, and then let the Holy Spirit personally reveal the meaning of His word to each believer. That’s why Christ died to give us His Spirit. We don’t need man’s opinion, because we have THE Teacher in residence teaching us.
Where Angels Fear to Tread
Notice this from the CBT’s Preface to the NIV 2011:
This has moved the translators to go beyond a formal word-for-word rendering of the original texts.
Compare that statement with their own translation of a warning in 1 Co. 4:6;
Do not go beyond what is written.
The NIV CBT went beyond what was written in their text, and that text was not even God’s original word.
Ephraim Clinging to Idols
Current advocates of textual criticism freely admit that Westcott and Hort’s theories have long been debunked. Kurt Aland, who assumed their mantle, claimed the theories of Westcott and Hort have now been left behind.
Westcott’s “Recension theory”, that his beloved Alexandrian Text was usurped by a “concocted Traditional Text” in the 4th century AD, was a pipe-dream. Recent discoveries of numerous papyri containing the Traditional Text, and pre-dating his supposed recension, have proved him flat-wrong.
Yet despite this, modern Bible scholars continue to follow their idols and ignore the evidence. They still use the corrupt Nestle-Aland and UBS Greek Texts, and persist in favouring the cult readings of Vaticanus and Sinaticus over the majority Traditional Text. (Also see The Septuagint Myth)
They hope we haven’t noticed.
We have.
They have not translated God’s word accurately, it is not good scholarship, and it is reprehensible to present this to the Body of Christ as The Holy Bible in English.
Next we expose; the subtle NIV footnote shuffle and deletion of verses, then see what they’ve done to John 3:16:
Problems and Corruption of the NIV 2011 Bible.
© 11 Colin Melbourne