Niv Bible

[HappyJackWagon]

Does anyone have experience with the NIV bible?

I was visiting another church a few weeks back while on vacation and they used both the NIV and the King James Versions so I downloaded the NIV so I could follow along with their scripture reading.

Yesterday while I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class the instructor had someone read a few versus in Ezekial and I couldn't understand what was being said so I pulled up the New International Version (NIV) and followed along. It seemed so much more clear. The teacher continued for about 5 minutes explaining and asking questions about what the KJV was trying to say, when it would have been very obvious had we just read the KIV to begin with.

I also compared a few other verses we read and the message was very similar but again the language was easier to understand.

In short, the NIV helped me to understand the lesson material, yet at the same time I felt guilty for not sticking to the KJV and I didn't want to be called on to read because I was referring to the different version and didn't think it would go over well if I read from the NIV.

Is it wrong to refer to different bible translations than the KJV, which to me has a language barrier that makes it hard to access the meaning.

How do you think average members would react to someone reading from the NIV instead of the KJV?

[Kenngo1969]

You're going to Hell!

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Does anyone have experience with the NIV bible?

I was visiting another church a few weeks back while on vacation and they used both the NIV and the King James Versions so I downloaded the NIV so I could follow along with their scripture reading.

Yesterday while I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class the instructor had someone read a few versus in Ezekial and I couldn't understand what was being said so I pulled up the New International Version (NIV) and followed along. It seemed so much more clear. The teacher continued for about 5 minutes explaining and asking questions about what the KJV was trying to say, when it would have been very obvious had we just read the KIV to begin with.

I also compared a few other verses we read and the message was very similar but again the language was easier to understand.

In short, the NIV helped me to understand the lesson material, yet at the same time I felt guilty for not sticking to the KJV and I didn't want to be called on to read because I was referring to the different version and didn't think it would go over well if I read from the NIV.

Is it wrong to refer to different bible translations than the KJV, which to me has a language barrier that makes it hard to access the meaning.

How do you think average members would react to someone reading from the NIV instead of the KJV?

 

 

From a 1992 First Presidency Statement:

Many versions of the Bible are available today. Unfortunately, no original manuscripts of any portion of the Bible are available for comparison to determine the most accurate version. However, the Lord has revealed clearly the doctrines of the gospel in these latter-days. The most reliable way to measure the accuracy of any biblical passage is not by comparing different texts, but by comparison with the Book of Mormon and modern-day revelations.

While other Bible versions may be easier to read than the King James Version, in doctrinal matters latter-day revelation supports the King James Version in preference to other English translations. All of the Presidents of the Church, beginning with the Prophet Joseph Smith, have supported the King James Version by encouraging its continued use in the Church. In light of all the above, it is the English language Bible used by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1992/08/news-of-the-church/first-presidency-statement-on-the-king-james-version-of-the-bible?lang=eng

 

Also here for something more recent:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2011/08/400-years-of-the-king-james-bible?lang=eng&query=king+james+version

 

Young Joseph Smith sought guidance in his King James Bible and found it in James 1:5, which says, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, … and it shall be given him.” He believed. As he prayed in a grove of trees, God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, appeared to him. (See JS—H 1:1–20.)

Today, English-speaking Church members use the Latter-day Saint edition of the King James Version of the Bible. Based on the doctrinal clarity of latter-day revelation given to the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than recent versions.

Edited December 8, 2014 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Tacenda]

Does anyone have experience with the NIV bible?

I was visiting another church a few weeks back while on vacation and they used both the NIV and the King James Versions so I downloaded the NIV so I could follow along with their scripture reading.

Yesterday while I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class the instructor had someone read a few versus in Ezekial and I couldn't understand what was being said so I pulled up the New International Version (NIV) and followed along. It seemed so much more clear. The teacher continued for about 5 minutes explaining and asking questions about what the KJV was trying to say, when it would have been very obvious had we just read the KIV to begin with.

I also compared a few other verses we read and the message was very similar but again the language was easier to understand.

In short, the NIV helped me to understand the lesson material, yet at the same time I felt guilty for not sticking to the KJV and I didn't want to be called on to read because I was referring to the different version and didn't think it would go over well if I read from the NIV.

Is it wrong to refer to different bible translations than the KJV, which to me has a language barrier that makes it hard to access the meaning.

How do you think average members would react to someone reading from the NIV instead of the KJV?

This happened to me in my Primary class I help in. I was using my phone vs. paper scriptures and didn't have the lds.org KJV pulled up, just the NIV because I've had problems putting scripture apps on my phone. Usually I always pull up KJV on lds.org but for some reason didn't that time. When I was reading along in the NIV, it was so clear. The class was confused at what the KJV said and also the NIV seemed different than what the teacher said about it. I wanted to explain it for him because it was clear as day. I also was afraid it was my turn to read for the Special Needs boy I help and hurry and got the KJV pulled up on my phone. Edited December 8, 2014 by Tacenda

[HappyJackWagon]

It seems like our language has evolved quite a bit since the KJV was produced and even since the days of the early 19th century with the early saints. There have been many new translations and I find it doubtful that church leaders have compared all of the new translations to know that KJV is still the best. In the early church it was virtually the only translation.

In the verses I read the teacher validated what was already clear in the NIV. I realize that many people use different versions for different study purposes but I don't think that would be acceptable in church.

[mnn727]

Its way past time for the Church to adopt a more modern English version of scripture

 

Some people will complain if you quote a modern version -- ask me how I know. Yup, I quoted a few verses out of a modern version and had one member go tot he Bishop (who was cool with it, he just asked that I quote the KJV in class and use whatever I want for personal study)

[Guest]

Does anyone have experience with the NIV bible?I was visiting another church a few weeks back while on vacation and they used both the NIV and the King James Versions so I downloaded the NIV so I could follow along with their scripture reading.Yesterday while I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class the instructor had someone read a few versus in Ezekial and I couldn't understand what was being said so I pulled up the New International Version (NIV) and followed along. It seemed so much more clear. The teacher continued for about 5 minutes explaining and asking questions about what the KJV was trying to say, when it would have been very obvious had we just read the KIV to begin with.I also compared a few other verses we read and the message was very similar but again the language was easier to understand.In short, the NIV helped me to understand the lesson material, yet at the same time I felt guilty for not sticking to the KJV and I didn't want to be called on to read because I was referring to the different version and didn't think it would go over well if I read from the NIV.Is it wrong to refer to different bible translations than the KJV, which to me has a language barrier that makes it hard to access the meaning.How do you think average members would react to someone reading from the NIV instead of the KJV?

You be right in some cases...but I am in love with the poetic aspects of the KJV, and that it requires greater study. This effort brings great rewards; "Seek and Ye shall find, knock and it will be opened unto you". The KJV is air to my lungs.

[Kenngo1969]

 

What're you doing using the NIV, you Jack Wagon??!!

 

P.S.: All in fun, HappyJack; all in fun!

Edited December 9, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[sdc999]

 

 

 

 I also was afraid it was my turn to read for the Special Needs boy I help and hurry and got the KJV pulled up on my phone.

 

 

"Guilty"  "Afraid"    that speaks volumes.   Why should anyone feel guilty or afraid of sharing the gospel?  There are many different ways of sharing.    I know of people who actually go back and look at the greek meanings of words used.  Are they wrong?     

This past weekend, I had to attend a meeting for a study abroad program for my daughter.  One parent was beyond worried that the kids from the college would be interacting with kids from the "other" college where one last year went to the ER with alcohol poisoning.   Gasp!  "Should our kids be around those other kids?"    My daughter spoke up and said, "Well, Jesus does love Everyone."  

The point is:  There is always someone who wants to point out the imperfections.  Call them on it and show them what a shallow jerk they are.  

Never feel Guilty or Afraid unless you like being intimidated by others.

[mfbukowski]

Let's get real.

 

The bottom line is that no one knows what the Bible "originally said" due to a lack of manuscripts.  We accept the bible "in so far as it has been translated correctly".

 

The KJV has been stated repeatedly by our prophets to be the standard of what is "correct enough" to be designated as "scripture".  For all practical purposes, since it is approved by prophets, it IS the Bible because we have nothing better according to the prophets.

 

If you need a translation of the "translation", go for it, but you CAN expect flak from folks who do not need a translation of the translation and can read the KJV just fine.  Use what you want at home, and use the KJV at church if you are teaching.

 

Since every single person needs a testimony of every single teaching anyway, and select what they believe or don't believe, use the source that works for you and believe what the spirit tells you to believe.   As long as you can pass a temple recommend interview, nobody cares what translation puts the gospel together for you.

[omni]

"I quoted a few verses out of a modern version and had one member go tot he Bishop"

Wow.

Edited December 9, 2014 by omni

[mfbukowski]

It seems like our language has evolved quite a bit since the KJV was produced and even since the days of the early 19th century with the early saints. There have been many new translations and I find it doubtful that church leaders have compared all of the new translations to know that KJV is still the best. In the early church it was virtually the only translation.

In the verses I read the teacher validated what was already clear in the NIV. I realize that many people use different versions for different study purposes but I don't think that would be acceptable in church.

The key here is that there is no standard to determine the "best".

 

The KJV IS now the Bible for LDS because it has been defined as such which is all that really matters

[sdc999]

   As long as you can pass a temple recommend interview, nobody cares what translation puts the gospel together for you.

Yes they do.  As has been expressed by a few here.  

[sdc999]

"I quoted a few verses out of a modern version and had one member go tot he Bishop"

Wow.

The question is:   How did the bishop respond?

[Judd]

The question is: How did the bishop respond?

.

... was cool with it, he just asked that I quote the KJV in class and use whatever I want for personal study)

Edited December 9, 2014 by Judd

[Flyonthewall]

It just seems to me that "plain english" translations are dumbed down, and lose nuances. Of course I don't use "plain english" versions so could not really say with any conviction.

There is also the issue of biases that creep into the translation.

Anyone have any input on which newer translations that have a definite bias with the translation?

[rodheadlee]

If you're using a different bible during class you just won't be on the same page as everyone else. Study with whatever you want, use the Church approved scriptures for church. Are you using the apps on a phone or Ipad? I'm still on hardcopy and a quad is heavy if you have the easy reader print for old eyes. Is it practical to have both versions open at the same time? I've been considering going paperless but I don't know what to buy. We don't have smart phones. I don't want to spend much money on it right now.

Edited December 9, 2014 by rodheadlee

[mfbukowski]

It just seems to me that "plain english" translations are dumbed down, and lose nuances. Of course I don't use "plain english" versions so could not really say with any conviction.

There is also the issue of biases that creep into the translation.

Anyone have any input on which newer translations that have a definite bias with the translation?

When one gets used to the KJV, one learns the style of English, and there is no problem.  People who are used to Shakespeare for example are.... used to Shakespeare.

 

I would say that the Catholic translations and the JW's translations are probably biased, but there are no translations which are NOT biased.  A translation is always seen from the human perspective of the translator, and translators are enculturated (read "brainwashed") automatically by the circumstances of their birth.

[mfbukowski]

If you're using a different bible during class you just won't be on the same page as everyone else. Study with whatever you want, use the Church approved scriptures for church. Are you using the apps on a phone or Ipad? I'm still on hardcopy and a quad is heavy if you have the easy reader print for old eyes. Is it practical to have both versions open at the same time? I've been considering going paperless but I don't know what to buy. We don't have smart phones. I don't want to spend much money on it right now.

Kindles are like $100 and you can get all the LDS apps on the Kindle Fire.  That's what I use- but you don't need a smartphone and service and data plans etc- just get a Kindle and you're done.

[Freedom]

I have found the NIV to be more of an interpretation of the text rather than a better rendering. It is filled with doctrines that are further away from the restored gospel. For example, Psalms 51:5 states "surely, I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" suggesting the notion of original sin. I have also found that it has become gender neutral when talking about God. 

[saemo]

Does anyone have experience with the NIV bible?

Comparatively, to the KJV, the NIV has missing verses that changes meaning and translations that change meaning, possibly to the point of contradiction.

Missouri State has a good description of Bible translations in relationship to use in scholarship.

http://courses.missouristate.edu/markgiven/rel102/bt.htm

Edited December 9, 2014 by saemo

[Antoni]

I think there is great merit in the KJV being the church standard. All being on "the same page" during classes is helpful.

 

I love the beauty of the KJV and I like the fact that its English makes me have to slow down as I read it. As so much of the KJV is based on Tyndale's translation I also feel an admiration reading a scripture that was written by someone that was martyred for their work.

 

Consider also the work the Church has done with the cross referencing of scriptures in our standard works and the similitude of BoM and D&C with KJV english and it is easy to see why church leaders decide that KJV is the version for LDS.

 

In personal study and in preparation for classes I use NRSV mainly because I like that it is similar to KJV and it is a more academic translation (it was the version I used at Bible college). It has certainly helped clarify passages for me and given me an insight into the text. Plus they do an "Anglised Edition" where all the spelling mistakes my beloved American translators added are corrected to proper English!  ("colour" is spelt like that for example, not "color" )

 

The NIV has never really done much for me personally but I know lots who love it (mainly evangelicals). One of my tutors at Bible Collge was a translator of the NIV he had many stories to tell of the politics and arguments the translators had. It really opened my eyes to what goes on with translation of biblical texts. (I'm sure KJV translators had similar experiences)

 

If a teacher is struggling with the KJV text during a class, I'm sorry to say that points to lack of preparation by the teacher, who perhaps should have done a bit more homework (including reading/researching what other translations etc say) prior to the class.

 

In defense of KJV my wife struggles with dyslexia but she reads KJV and loves it. I know she must find it hard yet I've never heard her complain or say anything detrimental to the KJV.

 

Many translations are available to look at online - so if KJV is hard for you, have a look at what is available and resonates with you. Do a bit of research on it so you can be aware of the biases (I'd stay well clear of ESV - as that is most biased out there - to be fair they make no secret of that though).

 

Another strength using KJV gives to those englsih speaking members of the Church is that is does give us a "common scriptural language" - that is very precious and I'd be wary of us going down a path that loses that.

 

Light, Love and Peace.

[Alan]

I find the NIV very good for the Old Testament.

In my experience there are a few problems with the NIV New Testament.

I currently have an NIV Gospel of John CD in the car (read by David Suchet). It's good, but as I say, there are a couple of problems.

 

My wife used to teach the GD class when it was the Old Testament year, and found the NIV very useful in her preparations.

 

On a wider point, I do think the days of the KJV are numbered.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Alan

[Ham Clam]

Have you read Philip Barlow's article in Dialogue as to why we use the KJV officially? It's an interesting story.

I personally use the NRSV.

 

Comparatively, to the KJV, the NIV has missing verses that changes meaning and translations that change meaning, possibly to the point of contradiction.

Missouri State has a good description of Bible translations in relationship to use in scholarship.

http://courses.missouristate.edu/markgiven/rel102/bt.htm

I'll be heading to Missouri State in a year or two. It would be interesting to take the 'History of the English Bible' class they have on the list.

[Doctrine 612]

The niv bible has many verses that change the teaching of christ,

Mark 9:29 they remove fasting.

Acts 8:37

And many others.