i am new to God and just bought a NIV bible because i can understand it. I looked for a "teenager" level bible. I don't have any background in religion at all but i have no idea what happened to me 3 weeks ago but i just "had" to buy a bible and learn about God and Jesus. I hope this is ok. I mean I know nothing. I know God reached out to me or I woke up and finally heard him I don't know. But I HAVE TO LEARN! i feel it.
I luv you all one this thread... I asked chatGPT which Bible is very good for children, Bible says " Unless you take His words as a child". So I was excited. I have only the audio Bible NIV dramatized version.😊❤
The NIV is my preference because of it's accuracy and readability. I think it is most suitable for beginners and especially readers whose first language is not English. My special thanks to the Translators
I became discipled as a new Christian on the NIV. It served a purpose for bringing me into the fold. I gradually went to the NASB then to the KJV. I was trained to believe the Critical Text. However with much prayer & struggle I felt a witness in my spirit to stick with the KJV. However, I would never want to be stumbling block to a new believer. God is Sovereign & He can work thru any translation. I think that translations all have degrees of purity and have to be discerned & studied with God's help & mercy.
The KJV is a fine translation. Just be careful with some of the words that don’t have the same meaning they did back then. Such as: Chapiter, Dam, Exactors, Felloes, etc.
While I have standardized on the ESV I still have my 1984 NIV. I consult it occasionally and at times a passage will come to life for me . The Holy Spirit works through all faithful translations as you say.
Your story shows that what the translators of the KJV said about translations is true. They said that even the "meanest"(weakest) translation of the Bible not only contained the word of God, but that it is the word of God. I grew up with the KJV, and still prefer it, but I love the ESV, and I have a 1978 and a 1984 NIV, and I agree that they are the word of God as well.
Glad I watched to the end to hear your personal story. You have strong opinions but you remain kind and wise. Humility is an important leadership quality.
I use the NASB and the ESV but do love the King James and the NKJ especially when reading the Psalms. Thank you for sharing Sir! Truly enjoyed this video and hearing your story.
I recieved a NLT bible for my 11th birthday that served me well the past 10 years. It was an excellent introductory easy to read/understand translation. As I got older and transitioned into high school I started using KJV more often but the NLT was still very comfortable and familiar to me. Now that bible well worn and filled with notes is falling apart to the point of no longer being usable and it just stays on my shelf to be revisited for nostalgia. I just got a Zippered Schuyler NKJV for Christmas and it’s my daily reader from now on. The perfect go between in my opinion. I love it!
if you work with 2 languages for a long time... you will see that word for word isn't possible nor it is a good way to translate. You should work as a interpreter to see how far you can word for word anything if at all.
Matt, thanks for your honesty about the NIV. I accepted Christ as well with it as my primary translation back in 1986. And I too have been disappointed with the fact that when the 2011 version came out, they stopped selling the 1984 version. I still read the 1984 version, and fortunately have many 1984 Bibles. That said, my children, who have accepted Christ, have done so with the 2011 NIV. I read a number of different translations, especially the 95 NASB, but not being a pastor, I'm not as critical about criticisms of different translations. In fact, not accounting for translations that are paraphrased in exaggerated ways, I call these arguments "Translation Wars". And frankly think they are hurting, rather than helping young Christians especially. If you have accepted Christ, have a relationship with Christ, listen to the Holy Spirit, and try to live a life in reverence for Christ, then the important thing is to read the Bible, whichever reliable translation it is. Have a great week and God Bless you!! Thank you for your channel, which has been a blessing for so many!!
I have a little zipper NIV84 I carry everywhere and use for casual reading and evangelism. I study the ESV, and I've found a rare few blatant and obvious translation errors in the NIV (specifically in the Pentateuch) but overall it has served me really well for both getting a rapid, broad overview of passages before studying them in a formal translation and breaking things down for new believers/unbelievers in an accessible way
I became a Christian in 1985. I also read the 1984 NIV translation and still do. I really don’t understand why they took it out of print and off of some websites. Doesn’t seem right to me.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the NIV and its use of gender inclusiveness. I share many of the points you have given. Most of my peers use the NIV 84 as their primary bible and it has been an influence in my reading. When I first read the NIV 2011, I was taken aback by the blatant use of "brothers and sisters." My view on that point has moderated. The ESV has become a primary translation for me as has the NASB. Thank you as well for sharing your conversion experience.
I’ve been a hardline formal-equivalence-only guy for awhile, but I’ve come around to the CSB as the most readably accurate translation (of the critical text). I think their optimal equivalence philosophy was implemented remarkably well.
This is precious. Thank you for sharing with us. I use the NET Bible for daily reading because it is so easy to understand, but the translators also use "ancestors" 277 times and "fathers" 96 times. To be honest, I never really took too much notice of it, but I will now 😄 I hope you and your family have a very Merry Christmas and Blessed 2023.
On December 28, 1999, I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. I was reading the NIV 84. I still enjoy reading the NIV 84 for devotional purposes. But tend to lean more toward the KJV, NKJV, and NASB. I feel like the CSB reads a lot the NIV 84. I really do not like NIV 2011. You can go to a used bookstore and find some old copies of the NIV 84. Good video.
I really appreciate the discussion. Gender is a complex issue and likely always has been. As an English speaker who also teaches English, and has studied linguistics and learned other languages, it seems a lesser important detail in the context of the overall message. Some languages will genderize pronouns strongly in favor of the masculine form, and others will neutralize gender even more than English. I really appreciate the thoughtful commentary as I'm pondering which translaton to shift to as a main reader - greatly appreciate your open approach to the topic.
I had a similar “life saving” experience with a small Catholic book called “My Daily Bread”. Catholic haters just take a deep breath, it gets better. Anyway, at age 17, locked behind an atheist curtain in a progressive college town, it literally filled me with the Holy Spirit. My grandmother handed it to me and I initially looked at it with disdain. So I took it to my bedroom and looked at it- ready to pitch it into the trash. But I was curious. What’s in this book?? And why should I care?? So I read the first page. Then the second page. Hmm, interesting. So I read the next 50 pages and could NOT.PUT.IT.DOWN. I was like an empty sponge soaking up vast wisdom straight from the angels. Then I started applying my new knowledge to my life and incredible things started happening. End of Part 1. Part 2…
You might want to obtain a copy of the Geneva Study Bible, Tolle Lege press does a copy. Textus Receptus based with study notes from Geneva. It is because of the study notes that King James ordered the new edition. However, Geneva seems to be heavily used in the colonies. I keep meaning to add one to my collection, my paternal lineage is Puritans in New England and Congregational Protestant.
Can I ask why you seem to be so fixated on the Tyndale translation? I mean yes, he used Hebrew and Greek manuscripts for sure, but he also relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate? And he did not have access to nearly the number of manuscripts that later editions did. I mean we have access to a lot more early manuscripts than Tyndale did 700 years ago? Which to me, makes the later translations better than earlier. I mean even the KJV relied heavily on Tyndale, right? I mean 90% of Tyndale's work is in the KJV. And the Bishops Bible. Why do earlier translations based on less manuscript evidence hold so much sway with you? Just curious.
Oh, my! I grew up on the NIV. ("Grew up" as a Christian. I didn't get saved until I was 18.) I still have my NIV Study. I just checked it & copyright says 1985, and earlier copyright dates before that. I hope it's okay. I never noticed anything weird about it. I did switch to the ESV about 8-10 years ago because the new church I was attending used it. But I'll never get rid of this one. It has all my early notes of when God was first working in my life. I also have the NIV I had before that, which was a paperback that was bought for me by a friend after she saw the only Bible I had was the Jehovah's Witnesses NWT. I was clueless! I used that thing to death. Even though I've always taken great care of all of my books, this poor thing did fall apart. It's in a case and put away. That was my first Bible, ever. It also has highlights and notes. I feel about these two like you do about your little hardback. I remember (vaguely) hearing about the gender inclusive language of the TNiV. But I didn't know it was that bad, or the rest of the story! I'm glad I kept my Study! That is shameful. Thanks for sharing some of your personal testimony. If you had shared it before, I must have missed it.
Here's what the King James translators thought of the most inferior of Bible translations, in their Translators to the Readers Preface: "Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest (mediocre) translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God. No cause therefore why the Word translated should be denied to be the Word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." They thought that, in spite of the imperfections and mediocre nature of certain Bible translations, they were still the Word of God. I don't believe they would have been totally against the NIV, but would have recognised it as the Word of God, in the sense that, people can get saved from it and that it does have all the doctrines of the faith that you would find in the KJV.
"brothers" or "brethren" should NOT be translated "brothers and sisters." Because that is not what the text says or what it intends. I know people think so; even some greek lexica have this, but it is wrong. Because God works through the men in the church. He preaches and teaches *through the men. At home and at church. So He addresses the men and the men relate and explain the word to their families. We're so broken and messed up I don't think people will understand what I just said. The twelve tribes of Israel were all headed by men. Men led their clans and their families. This is the way. Women have their prominence different from men. Cities and towns are called e.g. Daughter Zion. Ironically, men and the majority of people have zero issues with entire cities being labeled with feminine terms. Like you said, the NIV is OK with adding more instaces of "mother" and "sister" while taking away "father" & "son." However, if I communicate things like what I wrote in the first paragraph I am chastised as wrong. Man not woman is the glory of God. The Word of God says this; not man. 1 Cor 11:1-16; especially vss. 3, 7.
Matt, sorry to have to be a bearer of bad news, but the NIV isn't the word of God. The King James Bible alone (for English speakers) is the word of God. I'm sure that many people have some kind of testimony about becoming a Christian because of a given non-KJB version, but a faithful understanding of 1 Peter 1:23 from the KJV teaches that one must have incorruptible seed to be born again. KJV is incorruptible. The NIV is corruptible seed. You might ask, "What about English speakers before the King James Bible was first published?". That's a great question. What I know is that I wouldn't want to live in such a pre-KJB era. I'll praise God if he was gracious to pre-KJB English professing Christians, and I'll also praise him if he put them under condemnation. Right now, I'm going to praise God for giving us a perfect and incorruptible Bible in English.
@projectcould, you're a liar! NIV IS THE WORD OF GOD! KJV we don't talk that way & use those words & the NIV uses a order manuscript than the KJV & KJV added scriptures! You're a liar to talk blasphemy about the Bible like that! I wouldn't have been a Christian if wasn't for the NIV Bible!
@@bjbanisin6513 God magnified his word above his name. And if the KJV is the word of God in opposition to the NIV, then what you just said is ignorant.
I’m confused,…what is wrong with more gender-inclusive language? Is it wrong to show that women were present in that day and age? What is the actual issue with this? Help! Thanks! ☺️
I just wanted to offer some pushback, and you can consider me a (relatively) unbiased source. The ESV is my preferred translation, but I am a Bible study leader in a parachurch organization and I am required to use the NIV as my base translation (I can break from it as I see fit from the Greek and Hebrew, etc.). I didn’t like it at first because I to prefer the translation philosophy of the ESV. However, it has grown on me because of how easy it is to understand. I think as Bible nerds we can easily lose our perspective on the fact that the English of a formal equivalence translation is more difficult than the NIV’s; as such I’ve actually shifted and begun doing our family Bible readings from the NIV rather than the ESV, because I have small children at home and it is easier for them to understand. Our church uses the ESV as its base translation so they still get that from church and Sunday school. And then would like to offer some pushback on the gender inclusive language as well, because it’s often portrayed that it’s all watered down and there’s no gender exclusion at all. This is not the case. I have not researched this extensively to be clear, but I have found that in every case where it is specifically talking to a masculine source, such as fathers and specifically not to women, or referring to the ministry, it will use explicitly masculine terms. I feel that this is often overlooked, but it’s important to point out. It seems to me that the NIV is faithful to be gender exclusive when it matters, but also wanting the audience to understand that women are not excluded from a command where it is addressed to adelphoi. It totally makes sense to not like that as a preference thing. I just wanted to clarify because in our day and age, when you start throwing around the term “gender inclusive” people quickly get a very specific idea and start thinking that the NIV is presenting God as a woman or something. It does no such thing. And as a firm complementarian who prefers the ESV to the NIV, I have not found a location yet where the NIV’s use of gender inclusive language was unfaithful to the actual text of scripture. That’s not to say it does not exist, only to say that in my experience teaching from it extensively for the last several years while preferring the ESV personally, I have not encountered a single instance where it was the case. Love the channel, and SDG.
@@JohnHCarlin From what I understand, the CSB uses brothers and sisters in places where the original was talking to men and women. There are places where brothers means everyone, not just men. I would have an issue with translators using brothers and sisters in places where the original was just talking to men or to women.
I was sad to see Matthew’s testimonial bogged down by a poorly developed critique of the revised NIV. His opinion seems to be based on “more woman = bad, more man = good” rather than any cited examples of where the translation is wrong. In fact, the only examples cited by him are correctly translated to address both men and women. I think his comments about the NIV swaying too feminine (using simple wholesale figures)reveals a prejudice.
I fully agree, at least as my experience has been with the 1984 NIV since 1991.(I have not read the 2011.) The NIV uses male language where it is clear that the term needs to be male. It is gender-correct when men and women are intended.
@@marksball Yep, I usually like Matt's vids, but this one was disappointing. It was almost as if he felt like he had to offer all sorts of "qualifiers" before saying anything positive about the NIV. 95% criticism followed by 5% "this bible saved me." That is a shame. And I agree, plucking numbers from a Concordance is a terrible way to make a theological argument. The NIV is not trying to be a politically correct gender-inclusive bible, it is attempting to be gender-accurate. Literal is not always the most accurate. The NIV is certainly not perfect, but it is a wonderful translation that fills a void left by many other translations....like the ESV.
I have a 1984 NIV that I bought from the American Bible Society for me and my husband. The teacher in our Sunday School class(also a Pastor) , was one of the people who worked on this translation. It’s not a fancy Bible , but it’s special to me since it was ours. My husband went to be with Lord in 2012. But I do prefer the the NKJV. I grew up with the KJV, but have always had problems with understanding it. Thank you for this video. I will be holding on to this old 1984 version.
JG,....Wrong! If anyone belongs to Jesus they will be reading the KJV as that is the only version anyone needs. Those who turn to other versions do so because they cannot understand Gods word.
@@shadowbannedforspeakingtru1436Scripture please that supports your rediculous comment?. What did people use before 1611? What about people who do not speak English. Why is it that the false teachers of the KJV only cult. Do not speak KJV English in everyday language? Because they are hypocrites full of double standards. They have confined Almighty God to some archaic imperfect uninspired translation called the KJV. Even though the heavens and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him. Meanwhile God is using and blessing the excellent modern more accurate translations to bring many to Christ. KJV onlyism an indefensible unbilical man made tradition that should be treated for the heresy it is.
Wrong, it's whatever translation brings you closer to Jesus Christ, the NIV was the first bible that I actually read completely through in a year, and I drew closer to the Lord because of that !
@@shadowbannedforspeakingtru1436 Scripture please that supports your rediculous comment? What did people use before 1611? Seems like God has sent the KJV only cult great delusions. Because of the unbilical indefensible KJV only cult. A man made tradition with no scriptural support.
@@Sam-tk6us ,...Again, if anyone is actually a Christian, they will use the KJV. There is NO reason to use any other version. The reason you and all those like you do not understand this is because you are not Christians. Your Christianity is a fraud. Again, those who turn to other versions do so because they cannot understand the Bible. You all fail to understand that "Christianity" is made up of two completely different Christianity's. One of God and the few God has chosen, and the other, the counterfeit (antichrist) christianity of the Godless world/church and of those many God has not chosen. Those fake christians that God has not chosen are those who use all of the Godless worlds versions of Gods word. You all dont just have the wrong version of the Bible, everything you believe and hold to is Biblically incorrect. Your whole christianity is a manmade fraud. There is no such thing as a KJV only cult, you all just want (need) to believe this to defend/justify your fake christianity. Just because someone uses a KJV in no way whatsoever means they are a Christian. The entire church is all 100% apostate regardless of what translation they use. There are no Christians in anything called or known as the church. The few actual Christians that exist are all outside of the church. Repent, get away from the 100% apostate church read a KJV Bible and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
My first Bible was Nueva Vesión Internacional 1999 (Spanish). And I had good memories, but I end up with a more literal versión like Nueva Biblia de las Americas (or Biblia Latinoamericana para Hoy, I have the one with the old name) Lockman Foundation. I don't like gender neutral languange neither, so thanks for the video, thankfully in Spanish is not that bad.
I was born again while reading the Living Bible ( paraphrase) Changed my life forever and that was 30 years ago. Still in love with Jesus. So … not irrelevant.
I didn’t use to touch the NIV. But, I did find an NIV84 at a bookstore once and picked it up. It’s actually nice to consult but for VBV preaching I don’t think I’d use it. I’m a NKJV / NASB95 guy.
Thank you Pastor Matt. I am a new believer as of February 2022 and my first and only Bible so far has been the NIV, but I have recently been reading and loving the NKJV online. So, that fact, combined with this video……and I am ordering myself an NKJV today. All year long I have been referring to my NIV Study Bible as my “training wheels Bible”. It has served me well and I feel I have really learned a lot and matured this year, but it’s time to take the next step in my journey with our Lord. As with you, the NIV will always hold a special place in my heart since it was part of my first step towards God, but the points you made in this don’t sit well with me either. Thank you for this video. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
I started with the NIV as well and it was very helpful. I also switched to the NJKV about 2 years after my conversion because the church I was going to used it and I was wanting to switch to a more literal translation. The NKJV has deepened my walk and understanding of scripture so much. One really helpful reason why is because the footnotes and cross references. The NKJV notes are really good.
I have the same story but my first love was the AMP bible. Without it I wouldn't understand a lot of things, especially in the old testament. Now I ordered the LSB which is the updated more literal, more accurate nasb 1995
I've been using the NIV since, 1989. The NIV translation philosophy was to target modern English to an 8th grader level. I'm personal used to hearing "man" as the whole of mankind (άνθρωποι in Greek), but that language is changing, as the language changes and an 8th grader may not understand that usage of the word as mankind, or worse think its biased only to boys (yes I've heard of young teen girls saying this), because they don't use that phrasing. None of the core teachings of repentance, obedience, faithfulness have changed, it's just easier for todays 8th graders from all around the world, including those speaking English as a second language to understand.
I had the NIV in college in the late 70s. So probably when it first came out. It was easy to read and gave me a greater understanding of God's big picture. That was more important to me than the details of the words. That's just me. Thank you for you testimony and work.
Pretty much any Bible will save your life. We're so fortunate as English speakers to have such an array to choose from. They're everywhere. Literally in every hotel room. There's not a famine for the Bible, but the hearing and understanding of the Gospel. Now, Wycliffe Translators have their work cut out for them, and they are nearly alone in their task of translating the scriptures into every known tongue on planet Earth.
@@nicholasgeorge7825 was he? So You were there. He told you he was? Interesting-And even if he was. It has nothing to do with him being the king at the time that the Bible was translated. So you sound really foolish. And there’s no any English translation- there’s one bible! 😒✌🏾✌🏾✌🏾
Such good insight on Bible translations. I have been intrigued by the "which translation is the better" saga, and I have been reading up on a few books etc. I came to the conclusion that the Lord meets everyone where they are in this world. For some people, the KJV is a lot to take on and may cause a person to give up before they even begin. But to others, picking up the NIV or other translations is just the right level of complexity to hold him in God's word. The more a person studies, the more they will grow. I am a KJV person myself, but I believe that picking up the Bible and reading it is an excellent start and better than nothing. The Holy Spirit will lead the study process and growth.
Wow and yes- I had a 1998 chuck swindol niv bible and though it was limited in scope- God used this translation to walk me away from sever depression and into the light of salvation.
Thank you Matthew for bringing light to the corrupt translation of the newer NIV translations. We are blessed that God has preserved His Word and the devil cannot erase or get rid of it. Thanks for taking us back to your Christian babe years. God has blessed you much and we are blessed to have your mature Christian council and preaching from God’s Word. God is faithful! Love your book Souls btw! Do animals have souls that live on after death?
Thanks! I just started using a NIV Halley’s study Bible to augment my Great Adventure Bible RSV-2CE for my Bible-in-a-Year Challenge. A group of us are about to start again Jan 1. I think the key is to become familiar and use as many different versions as we dare. Compare the verses as we gain scriptural competence.
After I was saved in 1995 the first translation I used was the NKJV. That’s what my church used. It’s funny to think now but I didn’t know anything about translations at the time so I thought that this was the only translation. I didn’t understand why it was called the New King James Version. So I was like wait so there was an old King James Version. So I got into KJV but once I discovered NASB I was in love. It’s my go to translation but I will always have a place in my heart for NKJV
We still use the 1984 NIV as our pew bible in our church and they're looking well worn now. I really don't want to replace them with the 2011 NIV for the reasons you stated. We also looked into the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), which marketed itself as a 2011 NIV alternative when it came out because they explicitly did't want to use 'gender inclusive' language. Unfortunately, the HCSB also uses Yahweh in the OT instead of LORD, which makes the connections between LORD and Lord in the New Testament much less obvious. Then they introduced the Christian Standard Bible to replace the HCSB, but the CSB also uses gender inclusive language. So, we'll stick with our 1984 NIVs for now and I guess eventually we'll replace them with the ESV.
In 2006 i was reborn on the NIV '84 & its close to my heart. You have 3 Bibles I have 5 1. NLT 2. NIV 3. CSB 4. KJV 5. NKJV. I'm not really a KJV Christian I may read it sometimes but not my everyday Bible NLT is. With the KJV that we don't talk that way no more & I won't preach from the KJV & I have a ESV study Bible but never really got into it.
Interestingly, there is a Majority Text based translation out there: the WEB translation (World English Bible.) Unfortunately, while its availability in electronic format is plenteous, the physical formats that it is available in are limited, low quality and expensive given the quality.
@@ussconductor5433 I just checked their website after reading your comment. It does actually look rather nice! Wish they had some photos of the interior as well, but definitely an edition I want to purchase in the future to investigate.
@@SolitaireZeta mine just came in the mail 3 days ago. If you’re on Facebook several of us have posted interior pics. Let me know if you have any questions about it.
@@ussconductor5433 I'm not on Facebook, but sure, I'd be interested in things like the font size, internal layout (i.e. single vs double column, position of the references) and the overall quality of the paper.
@@SolitaireZeta double column divided by solid black vertical line. GSM is 30, font size is 8, red letter with color illustrations and maps. Footnotes located at bottom. Verse numbers and footnotes in blue. White paper- bound in the Netherlands. No gilt on edges, single red ribbon book marker. Does that help? Printing is a bit light. Binding is sewn not glued, so possible to do a rebind if so desired.
I love people who say a version is based on the TR, as I ask, "Which one?" and at that they usually can't answer my question because they erroneously think there is only one! I had one guy years ago that did answer my question, he said, "The one that the KJV is based on......" :)
The NIV renewed my passion for Bible reading and study back in 1973 when the NT was completed. And it remains my primary translation, being a great combination of accuracy and understandability. My study has caused me to prefer the critical text. For many years I have noted that English is becoming more gender inclusive. I would never begin a Sunday morning message, "Good morning, brothers." The inclusive language is helpful and accurate since in many cases both men and women are being addressed. I do believe in comparing translations and have many in Logos software. I also like to change the translation each time reading through the Bible. Thanks for your thoughts on Bible translations.
well KJV without a doubt I know Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. some others have debate over that.one verse is in Phil.2:6,7 had Robert Morris preaching Jesus was not God in the flesh when he walk with us,only after.thats heresy
Did you have Dr. Helgesen for a New Testament professor at Malone? You said you read through the 1984 NIV 12 times. Didn’t it mess with your scripture memory to switch over to another translation? I’ve been reading the 1984 NIV since 1985, I’ve got so much of it internalized that it’s difficult for me to switch even if I wanted to.
Thanks for all your information in this view Matt. I hope you have a blessed Christmas. The NIV info was the best I have every heard. Do you or anyone, know if those word choice issues are in the Newest NIV study bible or just the TNIV. I was thinking about buying an NIV for a reading challenge. would love your thoughts and info Thanks for all you do.
It was a very Elderly (Printed in the 1830's) Authorised Version (Oxford KJV, (A little Church History for anyone who read this and may not know why it was called AV and not KJV: the 1830's was back, obviously, when most of the CofE still believed the Bible, and had yet not Apostatized into first Arminianism (there was some Arminians on the Fringe Sidings, but they were not the Mainline like they are now), then Papal Ecumenicalism, then Egalitarianism, and then Finally into blessing Arsenokoitai, and following Wesleyan "Holiness" Voodun Pentecostalism (false tongues, false prophecies, sinless perfectionism etc), and into the Cult it, Tragically, has now become, and the KJV was the only Version that was, at the Time, Permitted for use in the Church as per the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, hence "Authorised" Version rather than "KJV" for its Official Title, now you know!) that has been in My Family for Generations that God, in His love and mercy, used to bring me to Christ and to Salvation. I still have it, but, Sadly, it is falling apart and needs rebinding, so I have replaced it with a Cambridge KJV, a 2021 Print. The Holy Text is the exact Same thankfully, but, sadly, it does not have the Oxford Study notes or the Cross-References of the old 1830's version.
Try looking at the ridiculous translation of "rust " in Matthew 6:20 in the New NIV as vermin . come on the new NIV changes words just to get the amount of change required for s new copyright n money making opportunities ! Tell it like it is n don't sugar coat it
Woody Allen told the story of how, as he left home, his mother gave him a bullet. He placed the bullet in his top breast pocket. Years later, a crazed evangelist threw a Bible out of a window. That Bible would, he claimed, have pierced his heart if it were not for that bullet.
I personally find myself always returning to the NIV. While I have tried to train myself to pick up my KJV, NKJV, ESV and NASB… and became annoyed with the politics around the ditching of the NIV 84 for the 2011 version… I have found that I can gloss over the ‘gender neutral’ wording, in favour of the actual readability of the over all language of the text. Thankfully I still have my old NIV (84) Thompsons… but have finally purchased a 2011 version within the past month, after using it within my electronic library for the past year: along side of all my other translations of course.
I love my NIV because like many others, it brought me to God. I’m attached to my NIV but I’m not so sure it’s the actual translation, I think it’s the actual Bible because of my sentimental and spiritual attachment to it. I have both the 1984 and the newer version but am starting to transition to the ESV, my other version of choice.
Is like to hear a better reason than the number of times a word is used or your annoyance at politically correct. It isn't very helpful in terms of whether a translation is legit or not. This to me shows both your political and gender biases. The question is, regarding gender language, is the use of, say, "ancestors" more accurate than "fathers"? An example is, I understand that in Genesis, the translation of God created "humankind" is more accurate than man. Others have addressed this in the comments and they are much appreciated.
I have always loved the RSV. I use it every day and love it very much. It uses words like shall and behold. It is my favorite because it is a mix of nice modern English, but it holds some of the older words from the KJV.
@@rob9528 here’s the thing Robert - nobody cares what YOU like. this isn’t about you Robert ! You’re not God. You’re not important. The Bible that you don’t like. You see Robert it was here before you were born. And see Robert it was being read before you were born. And it will still be here, and be being read when the worms are eating your corpse, and you’re long forgotten. You don’t know what words people use! You’re NOT GOD! Doth thou understandeth that Robert?
i am new to God and just bought a NIV bible because i can understand it. I looked for a "teenager" level bible. I don't have any background in religion at all but i have no idea what happened to me 3 weeks ago but i just "had" to buy a bible and learn about God and Jesus. I hope this is ok. I mean I know nothing. I know God reached out to me or I woke up and finally heard him I don't know. But I HAVE TO LEARN! i feel it.
I hope you have been enjoying and learning since you posted this comment. The NIV should be a good match for you. Has it been helpful? :)
I hope you've been able to read it!
I just bought the NIV i am getting it in a few hours
I luv you all one this thread... I asked chatGPT which Bible is very good for children, Bible says " Unless you take His words as a child". So I was excited. I have only the audio Bible NIV dramatized version.😊❤
The NIV is my preference because of it's accuracy and readability. I think it is most suitable for beginners and especially readers whose first language is not English. My special thanks to the Translators
I never considered it being a good translation for readers who aren't native english speakers. Thanks for that point.
The NIV Version of three bible is demonic and perverts Christ in all ramifications . The NIV is not a bible , it is a book from hell
I became discipled as a new Christian on the NIV. It served a purpose for bringing me into the fold. I gradually went to the NASB then to the KJV. I was trained to believe the Critical Text. However with much prayer & struggle I felt a witness in my spirit to stick with the KJV. However, I would never want to be stumbling block to a new believer. God is Sovereign & He can work thru any translation. I think that translations all have degrees of purity and have to be discerned & studied with God's help & mercy.
The KJV is a fine translation.
Just be careful with some of the words that don’t have the same meaning they did back then.
Such as: Chapiter, Dam, Exactors, Felloes, etc.
While I have standardized on the ESV I still have my 1984 NIV. I consult it occasionally and at times a passage will come to life for me . The Holy Spirit works through all faithful translations as you say.
Your story shows that what the translators of the KJV said about translations is true. They said that even the "meanest"(weakest) translation of the Bible not only contained the word of God, but that it is the word of God. I grew up with the KJV, and still prefer it, but I love the ESV, and I have a 1978 and a 1984 NIV, and I agree that they are the word of God as well.
Yes they are all God's word.
Glad I watched to the end to hear your personal story. You have strong opinions but you remain kind and wise. Humility is an important leadership quality.
I use the NASB and the ESV but do love the King James and the NKJ especially when reading the Psalms.
Thank you for sharing Sir! Truly enjoyed this video and hearing your story.
Watching from Accra Ghana
I recieved a NLT bible for my 11th birthday that served me well the past 10 years. It was an excellent introductory easy to read/understand translation. As I got older and transitioned into high school I started using KJV more often but the NLT was still very comfortable and familiar to me. Now that bible well worn and filled with notes is falling apart to the point of no longer being usable and it just stays on my shelf to be revisited for nostalgia. I just got a Zippered Schuyler NKJV for Christmas and it’s my daily reader from now on. The perfect go between in my opinion. I love it!
Jesus saved my life on the cross over two thousand years ago.
if you work with 2 languages for a long time... you will see that word for word isn't possible nor it is a good way to translate. You should work as a interpreter to see how far you can word for word anything if at all.
Matt, thanks for your honesty about the NIV. I accepted Christ as well with it as my primary translation back in 1986. And I too have been disappointed with the fact that when the 2011 version came out, they stopped selling the 1984 version.
I still read the 1984 version, and fortunately have many 1984 Bibles.
That said, my children, who have accepted Christ, have done so with the 2011 NIV.
I read a number of different translations, especially the 95 NASB, but not being a pastor, I'm not as critical about criticisms of different translations. In fact, not accounting for translations that are paraphrased in exaggerated ways, I call these arguments "Translation Wars". And frankly think they are hurting, rather than helping young Christians especially.
If you have accepted Christ, have a relationship with Christ, listen to the Holy Spirit, and try to live a life in reverence for Christ, then the important thing is to read the Bible, whichever reliable translation it is.
Have a great week and God Bless you!! Thank you for your channel, which has been a blessing for so many!!
I have a little zipper NIV84 I carry everywhere and use for casual reading and evangelism. I study the ESV, and I've found a rare few blatant and obvious translation errors in the NIV (specifically in the Pentateuch) but overall it has served me really well for both getting a rapid, broad overview of passages before studying them in a formal translation and breaking things down for new believers/unbelievers in an accessible way
What are the errors?
I became a Christian in 1985. I also read the 1984 NIV translation and still do. I really don’t understand why they took it out of print and off of some websites. Doesn’t seem right to me.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the NIV and its use of gender inclusiveness. I share many of the points you have given. Most of my peers use the NIV 84 as their primary bible and it has been an influence in my reading. When I first read the NIV 2011, I was taken aback by the blatant use of "brothers and sisters." My view on that point has moderated. The ESV has become a primary translation for me as has the NASB. Thank you as well for sharing your conversion experience.
For to me to live is CHRIST; HE is the joy of my life; if CHRIST were gone, my life would be death to me.
The King James Bible is the word of Almighty God.
Hmmnn....any info on the CSB? Much appreciated
The HCSB rejected gender inclusive language, the CSB is an update of the HCSB but it uses gender inclusive language.
Thank you for your testimony pastor.
I’ve been a hardline formal-equivalence-only guy for awhile, but I’ve come around to the CSB as the most readably accurate translation (of the critical text). I think their optimal equivalence philosophy was implemented remarkably well.
Who made that worn down NIV that you’re holding? Looks like a hardback.
This is precious. Thank you for sharing with us. I use the NET Bible for daily reading because it is so easy to understand, but the translators also use "ancestors" 277 times and "fathers" 96 times. To be honest, I never really took too much notice of it, but I will now 😄 I hope you and your family have a very Merry Christmas and Blessed 2023.
On December 28, 1999, I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. I was reading the NIV 84. I still enjoy reading the NIV 84 for devotional purposes. But tend to lean more toward the KJV, NKJV, and NASB. I feel like the CSB reads a lot the NIV 84. I really do not like NIV 2011. You can go to a used bookstore and find some old copies of the NIV 84. Good video.
I really appreciate the discussion. Gender is a complex issue and likely always has been. As an English speaker who also teaches English, and has studied linguistics and learned other languages, it seems a lesser important detail in the context of the overall message. Some languages will genderize pronouns strongly in favor of the masculine form, and others will neutralize gender even more than English. I really appreciate the thoughtful commentary as I'm pondering which translaton to shift to as a main reader - greatly appreciate your open approach to the topic.
I had a similar “life saving” experience with a small Catholic book called “My Daily Bread”. Catholic haters just take a deep breath, it gets better. Anyway, at age 17, locked behind an atheist curtain in a progressive college town, it literally filled me with the Holy Spirit. My grandmother handed it to me and I initially looked at it with disdain. So I took it to my bedroom and looked at it- ready to pitch it into the trash. But I was curious. What’s in this book?? And why should I care?? So I read the first page. Then the second page. Hmm, interesting. So I read the next 50 pages and could NOT.PUT.IT.DOWN. I was like an empty sponge soaking up vast wisdom straight from the angels. Then I started applying my new knowledge to my life and incredible things started happening. End of Part 1.
Part 2…
i have the 1984 niv text in the bible i have Matt
The ESV is not based on the Majority Text
You might want to obtain a copy of the Geneva Study Bible, Tolle Lege press does a copy. Textus Receptus based with study notes from Geneva. It is because of the study notes that King James ordered the new edition. However, Geneva seems to be heavily used in the colonies. I keep meaning to add one to my collection, my paternal lineage is Puritans in New England and Congregational Protestant.
I tried using the nkjv. I found the Christian standard easier for me. The NIV seems more words than other bibles. Maybe its how I'm perceiving it
Jesus saved me before I even read the word!
Can I ask why you seem to be so fixated on the Tyndale translation? I mean yes, he used Hebrew and Greek manuscripts for sure, but he also relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate? And he did not have access to nearly the number of manuscripts that later editions did. I mean we have access to a lot more early manuscripts than Tyndale did 700 years ago? Which to me, makes the later translations better than earlier. I mean even the KJV relied heavily on Tyndale, right? I mean 90% of Tyndale's work is in the KJV. And the Bishops Bible. Why do earlier translations based on less manuscript evidence hold so much sway with you? Just curious.
Aw… I was looking for some grand adventure story where the Bible stopped a bullet or something. Hehe.
Nit picking the best English translation.
Oh, my! I grew up on the NIV. ("Grew up" as a Christian. I didn't get saved until I was 18.) I still have my NIV Study. I just checked it & copyright says 1985, and earlier copyright dates before that. I hope it's okay. I never noticed anything weird about it. I did switch to the ESV about 8-10 years ago because the new church I was attending used it. But I'll never get rid of this one. It has all my early notes of when God was first working in my life. I also have the NIV I had before that, which was a paperback that was bought for me by a friend after she saw the only Bible I had was the Jehovah's Witnesses NWT. I was clueless! I used that thing to death. Even though I've always taken great care of all of my books, this poor thing did fall apart. It's in a case and put away. That was my first Bible, ever. It also has highlights and notes. I feel about these two like you do about your little hardback.
I remember (vaguely) hearing about the gender inclusive language of the TNiV. But I didn't know it was that bad, or the rest of the story! I'm glad I kept my Study! That is shameful.
Thanks for sharing some of your personal testimony. If you had shared it before, I must have missed it.
God uses less than optimal means (people and texts) to bring people to himself
It's a shame what has become of the NIV. Thankfully, the CSB is here!
Doesn't this Bible call Joseph Jesus's father?
I had the same experience with the Living Bible, but now I'm NKJV
Here's what the King James translators thought of the most inferior of Bible translations, in their Translators to the Readers Preface:
"Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that
the very meanest (mediocre) translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession,
(for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the Word of God,
nay, is the Word of God.
No cause therefore why the Word translated should be denied to be the Word, or forbidden to be
current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the
setting forth of it."
They thought that, in spite of the imperfections and mediocre nature of certain Bible translations, they were still the Word of God. I don't believe they would have been totally against the NIV, but would have recognised it as the Word of God, in the sense that, people can get saved from it and that it does have all the doctrines of the faith that you would find in the KJV.
The NIV has embraced a clear and deliberate social agenda.
"brothers" or "brethren" should NOT be translated "brothers and sisters." Because that is not what the text says or what it intends. I know people think so; even some greek lexica have this, but it is wrong. Because God works through the men in the church. He preaches and teaches *through the men. At home and at church. So He addresses the men and the men relate and explain the word to their families.
We're so broken and messed up I don't think people will understand what I just said. The twelve tribes of Israel were all headed by men. Men led their clans and their families. This is the way.
Women have their prominence different from men. Cities and towns are called e.g. Daughter Zion. Ironically, men and the majority of people have zero issues with entire cities being labeled with feminine terms. Like you said, the NIV is OK with adding more instaces of "mother" and "sister" while taking away "father" & "son."
However, if I communicate things like what I wrote in the first paragraph I am chastised as wrong.
Man not woman is the glory of God. The Word of God says this; not man. 1 Cor 11:1-16; especially vss. 3, 7.
The KJV saved my life.
Matt, sorry to have to be a bearer of bad news, but the NIV isn't the word of God. The King James Bible alone (for English speakers) is the word of God. I'm sure that many people have some kind of testimony about becoming a Christian because of a given non-KJB version, but a faithful understanding of 1 Peter 1:23 from the KJV teaches that one must have incorruptible seed to be born again. KJV is incorruptible. The NIV is corruptible seed.
You might ask, "What about English speakers before the King James Bible was first published?". That's a great question. What I know is that I wouldn't want to live in such a pre-KJB era. I'll praise God if he was gracious to pre-KJB English professing Christians, and I'll also praise him if he put them under condemnation. Right now, I'm going to praise God for giving us a perfect and incorruptible Bible in English.
What nonsense. The Bible wasn't written in English!
@projectcould, you're a liar! NIV IS THE WORD OF GOD! KJV we don't talk that way & use those words & the NIV uses a order manuscript than the KJV & KJV added scriptures! You're a liar to talk blasphemy about the Bible like that! I wouldn't have been a Christian if wasn't for the NIV Bible!
@@bjbanisin6513 God magnified his word above his name. And if the KJV is the word of God in opposition to the NIV, then what you just said is ignorant.
@@Yesica1993 Well, God always knew English and could speak it from eternity past. English is God’s, just as all languages are.
One third of Christians never read the Bible.I’d be thrilled if they read an NIV or any translation for that matter
I’m confused,…what is wrong with more gender-inclusive language? Is it wrong to show that women were present in that day and age? What is the actual issue with this? Help! Thanks! ☺️
In short the holy text isn’t Gender inclusive
I prefer to use a text as close to the Hebrew and Greek as possible
I just wanted to offer some pushback, and you can consider me a (relatively) unbiased source. The ESV is my preferred translation, but I am a Bible study leader in a parachurch organization and I am required to use the NIV as my base translation (I can break from it as I see fit from the Greek and Hebrew, etc.). I didn’t like it at first because I to prefer the translation philosophy of the ESV. However, it has grown on me because of how easy it is to understand. I think as Bible nerds we can easily lose our perspective on the fact that the English of a formal equivalence translation is more difficult than the NIV’s; as such I’ve actually shifted and begun doing our family Bible readings from the NIV rather than the ESV, because I have small children at home and it is easier for them to understand. Our church uses the ESV as its base translation so they still get that from church and Sunday school. And then would like to offer some pushback on the gender inclusive language as well, because it’s often portrayed that it’s all watered down and there’s no gender exclusion at all. This is not the case. I have not researched this extensively to be clear, but I have found that in every case where it is specifically talking to a masculine source, such as fathers and specifically not to women, or referring to the ministry, it will use explicitly masculine terms. I feel that this is often overlooked, but it’s important to point out. It seems to me that the NIV is faithful to be gender exclusive when it matters, but also wanting the audience to understand that women are not excluded from a command where it is addressed to adelphoi. It totally makes sense to not like that as a preference thing. I just wanted to clarify because in our day and age, when you start throwing around the term “gender inclusive” people quickly get a very specific idea and start thinking that the NIV is presenting God as a woman or something. It does no such thing. And as a firm complementarian who prefers the ESV to the NIV, I have not found a location yet where the NIV’s use of gender inclusive language was unfaithful to the actual text of scripture. That’s not to say it does not exist, only to say that in my experience teaching from it extensively for the last several years while preferring the ESV personally, I have not encountered a single instance where it was the case. Love the channel, and SDG.
Very interesting. I will have to research this further as well. I am also curious about the CSB and it's use of 'brothers and sisters'.
@@JohnHCarlin From what I understand, the CSB uses brothers and sisters in places where the original was talking to men and women. There are places where brothers means everyone, not just men. I would have an issue with translators using brothers and sisters in places where the original was just talking to men or to women.
I was sad to see Matthew’s testimonial bogged down by a poorly developed critique of the revised NIV. His opinion seems to be based on “more woman = bad, more man = good” rather than any cited examples of where the translation is wrong. In fact, the only examples cited by him are correctly translated to address both men and women. I think his comments about the NIV swaying too feminine (using simple wholesale figures)reveals a prejudice.
I fully agree, at least as my experience has been with the 1984 NIV since 1991.(I have not read the 2011.) The NIV uses male language where it is clear that the term needs to be male. It is gender-correct when men and women are intended.
@@marksball Yep, I usually like Matt's vids, but this one was disappointing. It was almost as if he felt like he had to offer all sorts of "qualifiers" before saying anything positive about the NIV. 95% criticism followed by 5% "this bible saved me."
That is a shame. And I agree, plucking numbers from a Concordance is a terrible way to make a theological argument. The NIV is not trying to be a politically correct gender-inclusive bible, it is attempting to be gender-accurate. Literal is not always the most accurate. The NIV is certainly not perfect, but it is a wonderful translation that fills a void left by many other translations....like the ESV.
I have a 1984 NIV that I bought from the American Bible Society for me and my husband. The teacher in our Sunday School class(also a Pastor) , was one of the people who worked on this translation. It’s not a fancy Bible , but it’s special to me since it was ours. My husband went to be with Lord in 2012. But I do prefer the the NKJV. I grew up with the KJV, but have always had problems with understanding it. Thank you for this video. I will be holding on to this old 1984 version.
The best translation is the one you read. God will take it from there.
JG,....Wrong! If anyone belongs to Jesus they will be reading the KJV as that is the only version anyone needs. Those who turn to other versions do so because they cannot understand Gods word.
@@shadowbannedforspeakingtru1436Scripture please that supports your rediculous comment?. What did people use before 1611? What about people who do not speak English. Why is it that the false teachers of the KJV only cult. Do not speak KJV English in everyday language? Because they are hypocrites full of double standards. They have confined Almighty God to some archaic imperfect uninspired translation called the KJV. Even though the heavens and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him. Meanwhile God is using and blessing the excellent modern more accurate translations to bring many to Christ. KJV onlyism an indefensible unbilical man made tradition that should be treated for the heresy it is.
Wrong, it's whatever translation brings you closer to Jesus Christ, the NIV was the first bible that I actually read completely through in a year, and I drew closer to the Lord because of that !
@@shadowbannedforspeakingtru1436 Scripture please that supports your rediculous comment? What did people use before 1611? Seems like God has sent the KJV only cult great delusions. Because of the unbilical indefensible KJV only cult. A man made tradition with no scriptural support.
@@Sam-tk6us ,...Again, if anyone is actually a Christian, they will use the KJV. There is NO reason to use any other version. The reason you and all those like you do not understand this is because you are not Christians. Your Christianity is a fraud.
Again, those who turn to other versions do so because they cannot understand the Bible. You all fail to understand that "Christianity" is made up of two completely different Christianity's. One of God and the few God has chosen, and the other, the counterfeit (antichrist) christianity of the Godless world/church and of those many God has not chosen.
Those fake christians that God has not chosen are those who use all of the Godless worlds versions of Gods word. You all dont just have the wrong version of the Bible, everything you believe and hold to is Biblically incorrect. Your whole christianity is a manmade fraud.
There is no such thing as a KJV only cult, you all just want (need) to believe this to defend/justify your fake christianity. Just because someone uses a KJV in no way whatsoever means they are a Christian. The entire church is all 100% apostate regardless of what translation they use. There are no Christians in anything called or known as the church. The few actual Christians that exist are all outside of the church.
Repent, get away from the 100% apostate church read a KJV Bible and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
My first Bible was Nueva Vesión Internacional 1999 (Spanish). And I had good memories, but I end up with a more literal versión like Nueva Biblia de las Americas (or Biblia Latinoamericana para Hoy, I have the one with the old name) Lockman Foundation. I don't like gender neutral languange neither, so thanks for the video, thankfully in Spanish is not that bad.
I was born again while reading the Living Bible ( paraphrase) Changed my life forever and that was 30 years ago. Still in love with Jesus. So … not irrelevant.
NLT- now Lucifer’s translation. Rsv- revised satanic version. ESV- especially Satan’s version. Nasb- new American satanic Babylonian bible, Niv- non inspired version. Asv- always Satan’s version. Gnt- goats new translation. Gwt- goats wicked translation. Leb- Lucifer’s edition bible. Cev- corrupt English version. Lb- lying Babylonian. Message bible is just -the mess!
Great testimony, Pastor. I was saved half by the RSV then the NIV. Loved the testimony of you and your sister too!!! 🙏
I didn’t use to touch the NIV. But, I did find an NIV84 at a bookstore once and picked it up. It’s actually nice to consult but for VBV preaching I don’t think I’d use it. I’m a NKJV / NASB95 guy.
Thank you Pastor Matt. I am a new believer as of February 2022 and my first and only Bible so far has been the NIV, but I have recently been reading and loving the NKJV online. So, that fact, combined with this video……and I am ordering myself an NKJV today. All year long I have been referring to my NIV Study Bible as my “training wheels Bible”. It has served me well and I feel I have really learned a lot and matured this year, but it’s time to take the next step in my journey with our Lord. As with you, the NIV will always hold a special place in my heart since it was part of my first step towards God, but the points you made in this don’t sit well with me either. Thank you for this video. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
I started with the NIV as well and it was very helpful. I also switched to the NJKV about 2 years after my conversion because the church I was going to used it and I was wanting to switch to a more literal translation. The NKJV has deepened my walk and understanding of scripture so much. One really helpful reason why is because the footnotes and cross references. The NKJV notes are really good.
@@chrisjohnson9542 This is good to know. Thank you for the information and encouragement! 🙂
I have the same story but my first love was the AMP bible. Without it I wouldn't understand a lot of things, especially in the old testament. Now I ordered the LSB which is the updated more literal, more accurate nasb 1995
I also started with the NIV but have since moved on to the 1901 ASV
You’ll love the NKJV it’s a good one!
I've been using the NIV since, 1989. The NIV translation philosophy was to target modern English to an 8th grader level. I'm personal used to hearing "man" as the whole of mankind (άνθρωποι in Greek), but that language is changing, as the language changes and an 8th grader may not understand that usage of the word as mankind, or worse think its biased only to boys (yes I've heard of young teen girls saying this), because they don't use that phrasing. None of the core teachings of repentance, obedience, faithfulness have changed, it's just easier for todays 8th graders from all around the world, including those speaking English as a second language to understand.
I love the NIV - the perfect medium between literal and paraphrase versions
It certainly reads better than the other new translations, but those gender issues are shocking and unacceptable.
@@andrewjames8980 hey bro, genuine question. On the gender issues, which verses concern you most? God bless
I had the NIV in college in the late 70s. So probably when it first came out. It was easy to read and gave me a greater understanding of God's big picture. That was more important to me than the details of the words. That's just me. Thank you for you testimony and work.
Pretty much any Bible will save your life. We're so fortunate as English speakers to have such an array to choose from. They're everywhere. Literally in every hotel room. There's not a famine for the Bible, but the hearing and understanding of the Gospel.
Now, Wycliffe Translators have their work cut out for them, and they are nearly alone in their task of translating the scriptures into every known tongue on planet Earth.
Any bible 😒 really? I guess the queen James, and satanic Bible should be on everyone’s library 🤔
@@Proverbspsalms seriously? That's not what he means, I think everyone knows that.
@@chiwen5k Any bible 😒 really? I guess the queen James, and satanic Bible should be on everyone’s library 🤔
@@Proverbspsalms Any competent English translation. Don't play games. And James was a queen.
@@nicholasgeorge7825 was he? So You were there. He told you he was? Interesting-And even if he was. It has nothing to do with him being the king at the time that the Bible was translated. So you sound really foolish. And there’s no any English translation- there’s one bible! 😒✌🏾✌🏾✌🏾
Such good insight on Bible translations. I have been intrigued by the "which translation is the better" saga, and I have been reading up on a few books etc. I came to the conclusion that the Lord meets everyone where they are in this world. For some people, the KJV is a lot to take on and may cause a person to give up before they even begin. But to others, picking up the NIV or other translations is just the right level of complexity to hold him in God's word. The more a person studies, the more they will grow. I am a KJV person myself, but I believe that picking up the Bible and reading it is an excellent start and better than nothing. The Holy Spirit will lead the study process and growth.
I don't like the kjv at all.
Wow and yes- I had a 1998 chuck swindol niv bible and though it was limited in scope- God used this translation to walk me away from sever depression and into the light of salvation.
Thanks for sharing brother! What a precious story of God manifesting His glory through your redemption!
Thank you Matthew for bringing light to the corrupt translation of the newer NIV translations. We are blessed that God has preserved His Word and the devil cannot erase or get rid of it. Thanks for taking us back to your Christian babe years. God has blessed you much and we are blessed to have your mature Christian council and preaching from God’s Word. God is faithful! Love your book Souls btw! Do animals have souls that live on after death?
Thank you for your testimony! I wish you and your family a merry Christmas!
Excellent explanation of differences! Great video, thankyou for sharing.
Thanks! I just started using a NIV Halley’s study Bible to augment my Great Adventure Bible RSV-2CE for my Bible-in-a-Year Challenge. A group of us are about to start again Jan 1. I think the key is to become familiar and use as many different versions as we dare. Compare the verses as we gain scriptural competence.
After I was saved in 1995 the first translation I used was the NKJV. That’s what my church used. It’s funny to think now but I didn’t know anything about translations at the time so I thought that this was the only translation. I didn’t understand why it was called the New King James Version. So I was like wait so there was an old King James Version. So I got into KJV but once I discovered NASB I was in love. It’s my go to translation but I will always have a place in my heart for NKJV
NLT- now Lucifer’s translation. Rsv- revised satanic version. ESV- especially Satan’s version. Nasb- new American satanic Babylonian bible, Niv- non inspired version. Asv- always Satan’s version. Gnt- goats new translation. Gwt- goats wicked translation. Leb- Lucifer’s edition bible. Cev- corrupt English version. Lb- lying Babylonian. Message bible is just -the mess!
Thank for sharing Matthew have a blessed Christmas.
We still use the 1984 NIV as our pew bible in our church and they're looking well worn now. I really don't want to replace them with the 2011 NIV for the reasons you stated. We also looked into the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), which marketed itself as a 2011 NIV alternative when it came out because they explicitly did't want to use 'gender inclusive' language. Unfortunately, the HCSB also uses Yahweh in the OT instead of LORD, which makes the connections between LORD and Lord in the New Testament much less obvious. Then they introduced the Christian Standard Bible to replace the HCSB, but the CSB also uses gender inclusive language. So, we'll stick with our 1984 NIVs for now and I guess eventually we'll replace them with the ESV.
I was all about the CSB but now I have a NLT life application study Bible. I also love my NKJV. Of course I have a KJV and an ESV.
Thank you Matthew for this precious testimony!
Also love the part about the hymnbook, hymns are so special in worshipping and meeting with the Lord..
I think TONS of people got saved/started with the NIV 84 and for all the abuse it takes it still has a special place in many hearts.
KjV is the best but i also use CSB and NIV for devotional quick reading
Could do a video to help us understand the difference between the masoretic text, textus receptus and the majority text
In 2006 i was reborn on the NIV '84 & its close to my heart. You have 3 Bibles I have 5 1. NLT 2. NIV 3. CSB 4. KJV 5. NKJV. I'm not really a KJV Christian I may read it sometimes but not my everyday Bible NLT is. With the KJV that we don't talk that way no more & I won't preach from the KJV & I have a ESV study Bible but never really got into it.
Interestingly, there is a Majority Text based translation out there: the WEB translation (World English Bible.) Unfortunately, while its availability in electronic format is plenteous, the physical formats that it is available in are limited, low quality and expensive given the quality.
WEB just came out in a leather hardcover sewn edition on sale for $57.99
@@ussconductor5433 I just checked their website after reading your comment. It does actually look rather nice! Wish they had some photos of the interior as well, but definitely an edition I want to purchase in the future to investigate.
@@SolitaireZeta mine just came in the mail 3 days ago. If you’re on Facebook several of us have posted interior pics. Let me know if you have any questions about it.
@@ussconductor5433 I'm not on Facebook, but sure, I'd be interested in things like the font size, internal layout (i.e. single vs double column, position of the references) and the overall quality of the paper.
@@SolitaireZeta double column divided by solid black vertical line. GSM is 30, font size is 8, red letter with color illustrations and maps. Footnotes located at bottom. Verse numbers and footnotes in blue. White paper- bound in the Netherlands. No gilt on edges, single red ribbon book marker. Does that help? Printing is a bit light. Binding is sewn not glued, so possible to do a rebind if so desired.
You and I have a similar history in translations. Starting with the 1984 NIV, now ESV and NKJV… have a blessed Christmas Matthew!
Jeff.
I love people who say a version is based on the TR, as I ask, "Which one?" and at that they usually can't answer my question because they erroneously think there is only one! I had one guy years ago that did answer my question, he said, "The one that the KJV is based on......" :)
The NIV renewed my passion for Bible reading and study back in 1973 when the NT was completed. And it remains my primary translation, being a great combination of accuracy and understandability. My study has caused me to prefer the critical text.
For many years I have noted that English is becoming more gender inclusive. I would never begin a Sunday morning message, "Good morning, brothers." The inclusive language is helpful and accurate since in many cases both men and women are being addressed.
I do believe in comparing translations and have many in Logos software. I also like to change the translation each time reading through the Bible.
Thanks for your thoughts on Bible translations.
I love your conclusion I’m this video brother.
NIV will send millions to take the mark of the beast😮 NIV says on instead of in.
well KJV without a doubt I know Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. some others have debate over that.one verse is in Phil.2:6,7 had Robert Morris preaching Jesus was not God in the flesh when he walk with us,only after.thats heresy
Hey Preacher Matt , what are your thoughts on the NLT translation ? I've been reading it here lately and just wanted your input Thank you .
1611 time kjv only 😂 jkjkjk
Did you have Dr. Helgesen for a New Testament professor at Malone?
You said you read through the 1984 NIV 12 times. Didn’t it mess with your scripture memory to switch over to another translation? I’ve been reading the 1984 NIV since 1985, I’ve got so much of it internalized that it’s difficult for me to switch even if I wanted to.
Thanks for all your information in this view Matt. I hope you have a blessed Christmas. The NIV info was the best I have every heard. Do you or anyone, know if those word choice issues are in the Newest NIV study bible or just the TNIV. I was thinking about buying an NIV for a reading challenge. would love your thoughts and info Thanks for all you do.
It was a very Elderly (Printed in the 1830's) Authorised Version (Oxford KJV, (A little Church History for anyone who read this and may not know why it was called AV and not KJV: the 1830's was back, obviously, when most of the CofE still believed the Bible, and had yet not Apostatized into first Arminianism (there was some Arminians on the Fringe Sidings, but they were not the Mainline like they are now), then Papal Ecumenicalism, then Egalitarianism, and then Finally into blessing Arsenokoitai, and following Wesleyan "Holiness" Voodun Pentecostalism (false tongues, false prophecies, sinless perfectionism etc), and into the Cult it, Tragically, has now become, and the KJV was the only Version that was, at the Time, Permitted for use in the Church as per the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, hence "Authorised" Version rather than "KJV" for its Official Title, now you know!) that has been in My Family for Generations that God, in His love and mercy, used to bring me to Christ and to Salvation. I still have it, but, Sadly, it is falling apart and needs rebinding, so I have replaced it with a Cambridge KJV, a 2021 Print. The Holy Text is the exact Same thankfully, but, sadly, it does not have the Oxford Study notes or the Cross-References of the old 1830's version.
Try looking at the ridiculous translation of "rust " in Matthew 6:20 in the New NIV as vermin . come on the new NIV changes words just to get the amount of change required for s new copyright n money making opportunities ! Tell it like it is n don't sugar coat it
Woody Allen told the story of how, as he left home, his mother gave him a bullet. He placed the bullet in his top breast pocket. Years later, a crazed evangelist threw a Bible out of a window. That Bible would, he claimed, have pierced his heart if it were not for that bullet.
At around 9:40 you said that the NIV tends to truncate the masculinity down. For the sake of learning. I would like to see this.
I came to Jesus thru NLT and I wouldn't personally use it now but like you said God can make any translation work. Interesting video.
Bible didn't saved you. Jesus saved you sir!
Did the NIV Bible save your life or save your soul?
THE NEW NIV CHANGES THE WORDS TO BE GENDER NUETRAL INSTEAD OF USING HE, NIV USES HIM, THEY, THEM, THEIR
I got saved with the 1984 NiV…
I personally find myself always returning to the NIV.
While I have tried to train myself to pick up my KJV, NKJV, ESV and NASB… and became annoyed with the politics around the ditching of the NIV 84 for the 2011 version… I have found that I can gloss over the ‘gender neutral’ wording, in favour of the actual readability of the over all language of the text.
Thankfully I still have my old NIV (84) Thompsons… but have finally purchased a 2011 version within the past month, after using it within my electronic library for the past year: along side of all my other translations of course.
Which majority text?
Thank you for sharing - great review!
I love my NIV because like many others, it brought me to God. I’m attached to my NIV but I’m not so sure it’s the actual translation, I think it’s the actual Bible because of my sentimental and spiritual attachment to it. I have both the 1984 and the newer version but am starting to transition to the ESV, my other version of choice.
NLT- now Lucifer’s translation. Rsv- revised satanic version. ESV- especially Satan’s version. Nasb- new American satanic Babylonian bible, Niv- non inspired version. Asv- always Satan’s version. Gnt- goats new translation. Gwt- goats wicked translation. Leb- Lucifer’s edition bible. Cev- corrupt English version. Lb- lying Babylonian. Message bible is just -the mess!
The KJV saved mine.
Then you are not saved because salvation is only through Jesus
Is like to hear a better reason than the number of times a word is used or your annoyance at politically correct. It isn't very helpful in terms of whether a translation is legit or not. This to me shows both your political and gender biases.
The question is, regarding gender language, is the use of, say, "ancestors" more accurate than "fathers"? An example is, I understand that in Genesis, the translation of God created "humankind" is more accurate than man. Others have addressed this in the comments and they are much appreciated.
I have always loved the RSV. I use it every day and love it very much. It uses words like shall and behold. It is my favorite because it is a mix of nice modern English, but it holds some of the older words from the KJV.
NLT- now Lucifer’s translation. Rsv- revised satanic version. ESV- especially Satan’s version. Nasb- new American satanic Babylonian bible, Niv- non inspired version. Asv- always Satan’s version. Gnt- goats new translation. Gwt- goats wicked translation. Leb- Lucifer’s edition bible. Cev- corrupt English version. Message bible is just -the mess!
I don't like the kjv because of those words which nobody uses in real life.
@@rob9528 here’s the thing Robert - nobody cares what YOU like. this isn’t about you Robert ! You’re not God. You’re not important. The Bible that you don’t like. You see Robert it was here before you were born. And see Robert it was being read before you were born. And it will still be here, and be being read when the worms are eating your corpse, and you’re long forgotten. You don’t know what words people use! You’re NOT GOD! Doth thou understandeth that Robert?