New International Version

Dordrecht · #1 02-25-2012, 12:43 PM

According to Wikipedia.org, the New International Bible (NIV) is the most popular Bible version today.
What Zondervan Publishers won't DARE tell you is that they are OWNED by Harper Collins,
who also publishes The Satanic Bible and The Joy of Gay Sex.

Doesn't it seem odd to anyone with a brain and a love for Christ that the world's largest Bible publisher (Zondervan) is owned by the same company, HarperCollins, that publishes The Satanic Bible and The Joy of Gay Sex."

I found the above statement somewhere while looking for scriptures on the internet. Is this true??

bbyrd009 · #2 02-25-2012, 12:52 PM

Amen! Not a bit odd to me, and the NIV, imo, is DOA.

Amanah · #3 02-25-2012, 01:05 PM

I'm reading the ESV now on recommendation of someone on this forum, and I'm enjoying it, I have the Study Bible, and also the One Year Bible, in the ESV version.

bbyrd009 · #4 02-25-2012, 01:29 PM

I like ESV, it often seems to produce a more...fluid? interpretation.
Not to hijack, but I'd be curious of any opinions about the Companion Bible?

Praxeas · #5 02-25-2012, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dordrecht

According to Wikipedia.org, the New International Bible (NIV) is the most popular Bible version today.
What Zondervan Publishers won't DARE tell you is that they are OWNED by Harper Collins,
who also publishes The Satanic Bible and The Joy of Gay Sex.

Doesn't it seem odd to anyone with a brain and a love for Christ that the world's largest Bible publisher (Zondervan) is owned by the same company, HarperCollins, that publishes The Satanic Bible and The Joy of Gay Sex."

I found the above statement somewhere while looking for scriptures on the internet. Is this true??

Here is my problem with what you posted

1) you just make a statement but don't back this up with references
2) Zondervan published the NIV not Harper Collins
3) Harper Collins is owned by another group. This is called a conglomerate and usually results from one larger group buying out another. HC may have bought out Zon longer after the NIV was published.
4)Publishing does not mean producing. A publisher takes the work someone else did and "publishes" it
5) Conglomerates are about MONEY. If you owned a company that sold stuff to every facet of society, you are making a LOT of money. That explains why this company publishes all these works. It does not prove the NIV is corrupt. It just proves capitalism is alive and well

Dordrecht · #6 02-25-2012, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Here is my problem with what you posted

1) you just make a statement but don't back this up with references
2) Zondervan published the NIV not Harper Collins
3) Harper Collins is owned by another group. This is called a conglomerate and usually results from one larger group buying out another. HC may have bought out Zon longer after the NIV was published.
4)Publishing does not mean producing. A publisher takes the work someone else did and "publishes" it
5) Conglomerates are about MONEY. If you owned a company that sold stuff to every facet of society, you are making a LOT of money. That explains why this company publishes all these works. It does not prove the NIV is corrupt. It just proves capitalism is alive and well

No I did not back it up.
I said "According to Wikipedia.org".
And we all know that anyone, anywhere can create a page on Wkipedia.
So, yes, it was not posted as being a FACT.
Now....on the other hand, can YOU back up YOUR post with references?

And btw, I always thought Zondervan was a Christian company?
But of course I can't back that up with FACT.

Quote:

It does not prove the NIV is corrupt.

Is that a fact????

forgivenson · #7 02-25-2012, 04:20 PM

I do not think there is anything wrong with Zondervan. However, I personally do not really care for the NIV. I attended a Bible College last year, and unfortunately, our study of Paul's prison epistles...was based on a commentary series from the NIV. I usually prefer the good old KJV, NKJB and sometimes NASB. I have found that the NKJ and NASB will give me a better understanding sometimes of things I have read over and over with only partial understanding in the KJ. Although...I think my understanding of the KJ is pretty good.
But....what I have found with the NIV.....and the 'commentary'......is that: If I am not reading the NIV....I do not need the commmentary. The NIV in my opinion removes/hides the intended meaning. It may as well be written in latin and go back to the dark ages when only the priests were able to read and understand scripture and the common people were to blindly accept thier interpretation...and very often 'manipulations' of the people.

houston · #8 02-25-2012, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dordrecht

No I did not back it up.
I said "According to Wikipedia.org".
And we all know that anyone, anywhere can create a page on Wkipedia.
So, yes, it was not posted as being a FACT.
Now....on the other hand, can YOU back up YOUR post with references?

And btw, I always thought Zondervan was a Christian company?
But of course I can't back that up with FACT.

Is that a fact????

I remeber many people freaking out ovah the NIV. It's corrupt, satanic, etc.

Most were of the KJV ONLY crowd.

There were several concerns over words that were removed or replaced with other words.

I believe Jason Dulle wrote an article putting to rest the concerns that were raised.

Jay · #9 02-25-2012, 06:13 PM

Another problem with the NIV is the move to a gender neutral bible. In doing this, they have abandoned the position of translating the Bible as close as possible in English from the original manuscripts. I would not touch the NIV now with a ten foot rod.

Dordrecht · #10 02-25-2012, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

Another problem with the NIV is the move to a gender neutral bible. In doing this, they have abandoned the position of translating the Bible as close as possible in English from the original manuscripts. I would not touch the NIV now with a ten foot rod.

Same here. I agree.