There are quite a few verses that are not included in the NIV (New International Version) that are included in the King James Version of 1611. But this is also true of other newer translations (New American Standard Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and the English Standard Version). Why are there differences between these translations and the KJV? It all boils down to the MANUSCRIPTS used by the translators. The KJV was based on manuscripts called the “Textus Receptus” but after 1611 other manuscripts were discovered, most notably the “Dead Sea Scrolls.” These manuscripts were thought to be older and closer to the ORIGINAL SCRIPTURES and thus more accurate. Many of the newer translations used them, including the translators of the NIV. Some of the passages which are omitted in these are John 5:4, Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, and part of 1 John 5:7-8. Before we say another word, it is vital to see that though there are differences in translation, they do NOT affect any of the major Bible doctrines. The truth about the nature and character of God, the Person and Work of Christ, Heaven and Hell, the way of salvation through faith in Christ and His finished work on the cross to pay for our sins, the Second Coming of Christ, and all other Bible doctrines have been preserved by the Author of the Bible, the Holy Spirit (see 2 Peter 1:21 with 1 Corinthians 2:12-13).

To illustrate this, let’s read 1 John 5:7-8 from the KJV and the NIV. The KJV reads, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” The NIV says, “For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.” The NIV omits verse 7 and the words “in earth” in verse 8. Again, the KJV translators used the Textus Receptus which had those words in them so it’s natural to ask, “Why were those words in those manuscripts?” Many believe the scribes ADDED those words to support their view of the Holy Trinty, for verse 7 DOES speak of the Father, the Word (God the Son), and the Holy Ghost. If this was the reason it wasn’t necessary, for we have many verses throughout the New Testament that teach the truth that “God is one God who at the same time subsists in three Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Matthew 28:19, which is found in ALL TRANSLATIONS, reads “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

What is my opinion of the NIV? Though I rarely use this newer translation (I prefer the NKJV or the NASB over the NIV), it is still a fair translation in many respects. Yet sometimes the translators veered away from strictly translating “word for word” from the manuscripts used and resorted to words that give their “interpretation.” We call this method “paraphrasing” (instead of “translating”). There are some translations that employ paraphrasing throughout their so-called “translation.” Two notable Paraphrase Bibles are “Good News for Modern Man” and “The Living Bible.” I would most definitely stay clear of these. They seek to use language that appeals to modern vocabulary and even “political correctness.” They may be “easy to read,” but they can lead you down a road of serious errors that contradict the vital Bible doctrines of Scripture. Every devout student of Scripture should want a “true translation” (which is taking the manuscript used and giving us a “word for word” translation from the Hebrew or Greek text into the language that we can read and speak). Then we can let the Holy Spirit give us the true meaning (i.e. interpretation) of the passage. “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love Him. But God has revealed them to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God” (1 Corinthians 2:9-10).  (DO)  (688.5)