Topic(s): Bible Infallibility

Todd Clippard

First, no translation of the scriptures is without problems in some places. Translation is not an exact science. However, this does not mean no translation can be trusted. I always recommend consulting a variety of mainstream translations, and also some of the older, less popular ones (if possible) to learn the exact meaning of a text.

The NIV is the most popular version on the market today, but that doesn't mean it is the best. The "translators" of the NIV got it wrong nearly from the start. The idea of producing a more readable, natural translation of the Scriptures is a noble gesture. However, instead of translating what the text actually says, the NIV committee chose the path known as "dynamic equivalent (DE)." DE attempts to translate what the writer was thinking as opposed to what he actually wrote. This is pure folly.

Having said that, the NIV is quite good in most of its Old Testament renderings. I like the way it describes Nadab and Abihu's fire as "unauthorized" in Leviticus 10:2. However, the Calvinistic bias of the translation committee often make its way into the text. The NIV's rendering of Psalm 51:5 is a good example of this.

In this passage, the NKJV reads, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me." However, the NIV, reflecting the Calvinistic bias of hereditary depravity, reads, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

While the KJV and NKJV renderings allow for a number of explanations other than hereditary depravity (which is absolutely anti-scriptural, cf Ezekial 18:20; James 1:12-16), the NIV leaves no room for explanation.

In other places, the text contradicts itself in the same verse. Romans 10:10 is a good example of this - "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." The verse teaches justification at the point of faith, and turns around and teaches salvation at the point of confession.

In other places, the NIV contradicts itself. In Matthew 5:17, it has Jesus saying He did not come to abolish the law. However, in Ephesians 2:11-16, it says he came to abolished the law (v 15).

A noted Bible scholar among churches of Christ was asked, "Is the NIV a more accurate translation of the Greek text than the Septuagint was of the Hebrew text?" Without hesitation, the man answered in the affirmative. Despite its many failings and shortcomings, Jesus still quoted from the Septuagint.

I have studied with and converted people who used the NIV as their translation of choice. The NIV can be used to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, with so many modern translations that are superior to it on the market (e.g., the NKJV, NASB, and ESV), I don't know why one would want to use the NIV as his version of choice in his teaching and preaching.