QUESTION: Is the New International Version too dangerous to be used in our classrooms?

ANSWER: Yes! It is filled with mortal error, i.e., it teaches and supports false doctrine that can result in loss of the soul. It does this by avoiding the English equivalent of the original Greek words. Those responsible for the book simply substituted words and phrases (sometimes in the text, at other times in the marginal readings) to propagate Calvinism, including the ungodly doctrine of salvation by faith alone! In Romans 10:9-10, they teach that one is saved simply by believing and saying, “Jesus is Lord.” It uses the phrase “sinful nature” (twenty-five times) for the Greek word sarx, which in the King James Version is accurately translated as “flesh” (For example, see Romans 8:1). An obvious attempt to further the “fatal doctrine” of original sin. It also implies that man sins by nature; that he cannot refrain from sinning! Psalms 51:5 is a travesty in translation and clearly shows the denominational bias involved. In this place they transfer the sin of the mother to the child to promote their error!

(Time will not permit a review of the many other errors involved in the ungodly NIV. For a more in depth study of this and other versions, I would recommend contacting brother Robert Taylor who preaches for the church in Ripley, Tennessee . His work in this field is scholarly, yet easy to follow and understand). Be cautious of those who use the argument in support of the NIV that the ASV, KJV, and NKJV also contain error. It is true that there are a few mistranslations and copyists’ errors. However, these are insignificant and do not teach “fatal error.”

To conclude: an eldership blunders greatly in promoting the use of any inaccurate translation either in the classroom or the pulpit. Most often it is brought in under the guise of “needing” a modern language translation. Why not use an accurate modern language translation, such as the NKJV? Why jeopardize the souls of the flock by feeding them fatal error? It makes no sense at all, unless (1) the eldership does not care enough to investigate the matter or (2) they are sympathetic toward the false doctrine taught. In either case, their right to serve is, at best, questionable!

Copied from 5-2-2012; content unchanged.

Top of Page