Just so we are all straight on this, did you know that you have a curse pronounced upon you? That’s right! If you have ever thought in your heart that the Apocrypha may not be inspired, then you are cursed to be damned to hell! I mean—this is serious stuff, folks. Didn’t you hear? The Council of Trent in 1546 AD pronounced a curse on all who refused to believe in the divine inspiration of every single added book, and they weren’t kidding. You will see later that the NIV continues this same curse, in effect. Amazing. http://www.av1611.org/kjv/fight.html#fight14

Another more important aspect yet is this one. When you open the Bible in the right spirit, to be corrected, and to learn, and with a determination to understand it with God’s Spirit, God promises to reveal His word to you and to all who seek Him. But if you sit there with a NKJV or an NIV, or an NASB version, or a Good News from Egypt, God would be deceiving you by opening your mind to that! It’s either His word, or it is not. So you’ll sit there on your own, all by yourself for years, decades, and maybe your entire life, because He will reveal absolutely nothing to you in all of your efforts if they are misdirected.

10. New International Version (NIV, 1978)

One of the most used Bibles today is the NIV. In all of the Egyptian texts you will discover that the same things are omitted. Here is an excellent example of a few of the thousands of verses which have been literally perverted by the New International Version. http://www.biblebelievers.com/Floyd_Jones/Jones_Ripped1.html

3. It is estimated that the NKJV makes over 100,000 translation changes, which comes to over eighty changes per page and about three changes per verse! A great number of these changes bring the NKJV in line with the readings of such Alexandrian perversions as the NIV and the RSV. Where changes are not made in the text, subtle footnotes often give credence to the Westcott and Hort Greek Text.

(Note: We are “divisive men,” to them. As a matter of fact, everyone who disagrees with their “infallible heresy” are divisive men. Anyone who believes they are able to read and understand the word of God themselves are “divisive men.” Remember the 1546 BC Council of Trent curse upon anyone who refused to accept the Septuagint and entire Vulgate version of Egyptian scripture? Well, here it is still in force, in your own NKJV and such arguments also appear in the NIV, etc. )

Jerome utilized the translational method which we call today, “Dynamic Equivalency.” That means, “close enough for government work.” Another way of putting it is, “roughly translated…” or as liberals say, “It’s the thought that counts.”It is also how the NKJV and NIV are translated, too. It literally means, “Here’s the jist of it” and then the translator rephrases it in his own words. Whenever you see “equivalent to” or “concept inspiration,” or “revision,” suspect it. No translation is perfect, it just has to begin with something which is perfect and then provide you with an Exhaustive Dictionary Concordance. Now we can have, “Exactly the SAME AS.”

The New Versions attempt to "CORRECT" The Hebrew Text in at Least 19 different ways, in thousands of places. The NIV uses all nineteen of these, by the way. In effect, the new version "translators/paraphrasers" might say, "Oh, I don't want to take this Hebrew word here. I want to take the Septuagint (LXX) reading instead." But the Septuagint (LXX) version for the most part is worse than a Living Version. It is the Old Testament written in Greek. It is rotten. Its text is corrupt. Even the ISBE article, (the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) on the Septuagint (LXX) states that it has a very tattered and inferior Greek text. Remember, the ISBE is no friend of the King James Bible's text. (It’s authors are textual liberals, but even the ISBE admits The use of the Septuagint (LXX) by these new versions is a serious error. ed.)

Some, like the NIV, use "quotations from Jerome" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use Josephus, an unsaved Jew, to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use a "variant Hebrew Reading in the margin" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use "words in the consonantal text divided differently" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use quotations from Jerome, Aquila, the Samaritan Pentateuch, or Symmachus to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use the Hebrew Targums, Theodotion, or the "Juxta Hebraica of Jerome for the Psalms" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Why are they taking Jerome as a substitute for the Hebrew Word of God? Was he there? Still others use a "different set of Hebrew Vowels" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew text. Some use "an ancient Hebrew scribal tradition" to "CORRECT" the Hebrew. Some use the BIBLIA HEBRAICA of Kittel or Stuttgartensia to "CORRECT" the Hebrew. These are 19 of the different methods that other English versions have used to "CORRECT" the Masoretic Traditional Hebrew Old Testament text, thus changing the very Words of God!

This FALSE Greek text, with its approximate 10,000 alterations, was the basis for virtually all of the modern English versions and perversions, including the ERV, ASV, NIV, NASV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, TEV, JB, NEV, LV and the rest. (End of quote, Dr. Donald Waite. ed.)

“Dr. Barker is wrong on TWO COUNTS! (1) His "less than 2%" difference between any of the Greek manuscripts would be 2,810 Greek words (12.9 pages). The truth of the matter is that there is a 7% difference between the Westcott and Hort Greek text and the Textus Receptus that underlies the KJV. This would be 9,970 Greek words (45.9 pages). This is a most serious error. It is a blatant falsehood that is being promulgated by the chairman of the NIV translation committee. It would give false confidence to the pastor and members of this church that had just recently given up the KJV in favor of Dr. Barker's NIV. (2) The second serious error is Dr. Barker's statement relative to the fact that variations in manuscripts "won't change Christian doctrine one bit." In our book, we specify 158 such passages. Dr. Jack Moorman lists 356 such passages. These two falsehoods, from someone who should know better, are the major ones used to lull Bible believing Christians into deep slumber concerning the Bible version controversy that has been raging.”

The Bibles translated freely from the Latin Vulgate and other earlier copies or representing the cherry-picking efforts of translators who utilize dozens of versions to come to their own version are truly disasters. One very good example of this is a version called the NIV—New International Version. In its name we are to take heart because it’s “new.” That must mean the Bible is a “living book,” meaning it changes with the times. In the NIV, 64,576 words were removed from that Bible and others put in their place. Notably missing are words and whole sentences, even paragraphs proving the diety of Jesus Christ and the need to worship Him as God. http://www.av1611.org/niv.html . There are many dozens of translations which do this same thing of course, and many of these translations omit verses which are actually part of the original ancient Greek textus receptus. I’ll let you click on the link to see what I mean.

As part of the discussion on the NIV, which is probably the most popular of all the versions of the Bible, to date, we should also mention some of the most egregious departures from this perversion of the Bible, because you will then take these exceptions to heart when you read about how we know for sure they were actually in the original textus receptus. Here are some (but not all). MAT 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, MAR 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, LUK 23:17, JOH 5:4, ACT 8:37, 15:34, 24:7, 28:29, ROM 16:24. If you were to look up these 15 verses in the NIV you would not find them. That’s because they are not there. But why not? What was Westcott and Hort trying to prove by omitting them? They exist in every papyrus document containing these portions of scripture. Is there an “agenda?”

1858, Dec 30; Hort: "I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus.. Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS.; it is a blessing there are such early ones" (Life, Vol.I, p.211). Also Hort said: "The fact is, I do not see how God's justice can be satisfied without every man 's suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins. Westcott in 1847: "1 never read an account of a miracle but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability and discover some want of evidence in the account of it.” Westcott to Hort in a letter, 1860; “I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scripture overwhelming." Hort to Lightfoot in 1860: "If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the N. T., I fear I could not join you, even if you were willing to forget your fears about the origin of the Gospels.” http://www.amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/subpage516.html