ÿþ<html> <head> <LINK REL=StyleSheet HREF="mycss.css" TYPE="text/css" MEDIA=screen> <title>The KJV vs. the NIV vs. the original Greek</title> </head> <body> <center><h1>The KJV vs. the NIV vs. the original Greek</h1></center> <p>For Christmas of 2004 my wife asked what I would like as a gift. The only thing I really wanted was a replacement for my Greek New Testament, published by the United Bible Societies. The copy I have now was partially chewed up by the family dog back in 1993; The front over is gone, the introductory pages are all torn, and, of greatest concern to me, chapters one through eleven and chapter sixteen of Matthew are incomplete. (I let the dog live.)</p> <p>The local Bible bookstore did not stock this book, and so the wife decided to get me a gift certificate, and let me pick something out on my own. I settled on <i>the Interlinear KJV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English</i>. On the left page of every pair of facing pages, the left column contains the King James version (KJV) of the text, the right column contains the New International Version (NIV), and the right page contains the Nestle edition of the Greek, interlineated with the English equivalent (translated by Alfred Marshall). I could have placed an order through the store for something else, but being interested in instant gratification, I decided to take what was there. Another family dog has since chewed some of the spine of this book, too, but the pages are intact. (I also have a copy of Zondervan's interlinear of the entire Bible, and its cover was chewed by yet another family dog. I swear I am not making this up.)</p> <p>Like many people who are familiar with both the KJV and the NIV, I was struck by the many passages which are rendered differently in the two versions. Being presented with such an excellent reference, I decided to make a verse-by-verse comparison of the two versions; where there was a significant difference in meaning, I had easy recourse to the original, and could see which was more faithful to the original.</p> <p>By the time I was finished with the first chapter of Matthew, I had a fairly clear idea of the strengths and weaknesses of each version:</p> <p>The KJV does contain a number of archaisms, and the most well-known of these&mdash;the second person singular forms&mdash;are an obstacle to some readers. While it does take getting used to, these forms do at times allow a greater precision than does modern English, which has no number in the second person (although the Southern American <i>y'all</i>, and similar constructions in other regions, do a fairly good job of addressing this difficulty). There are several passages where the number of the second person plays a vital role in properly understanding the text.</p> <p>Less obvious, but at times more obstructive to a proper understanding of the text, are the changes of meaning that have taken place in the English language since the time of the KJV's development. For instance, <i>prince</i> did not originally connote a necessary blood descent from a reigning monarch, but since that time it has acquired that meaning (mainly due to the plethora of fairy tales in which the prince is the son of a king).</p> <p>The trouble with the NIV is its greater tendency to paraphrase, and where the paraphrasing has led to insertions that have no direct basis in the original languages, the NIV, as often as not, gives no indication that this has taken place, whereas the KJV at least puts the additions in italicized text so that the reader can decide for himself what the better meaning is. The NIV's paraphrasings (and other departures from the literal meaning of the original) are the primary cause of the criticism the version has received, although it must be pointed out that many of the NIV's paraphrasings occur in passages which the KJV renders with a paraphrasing of its own, albeit a different one; it is hard to get through a single chapter of the New Testament without finding at least one passage which both the KJV and NIV needlessly paraphrase.</p> <p>The case for paraphrasing is greatly weakened by the view, which this writer holds, that there is no substitute for first-hand knowledge of Scripture. The man who throws all trust on another for his Biblical knowledge is, in a very literal sense, choosing not to think about his eternal fate, but is delegating that thinking to an unqualified person. The translator should tell us what the original writer wrote, and not what he thinks the original writer meant by what he wrote. It is better to read an idiom directly translated, and have knowledge of what that idiom means, than to be in the dark about the original. There is also the prospect of secondary translation (where a work is translated from its original into another language, and from that second into a third, the second translator being unable to work from the original); and when this happens the intermediate source needs to be as faithful to the original as possible.</p> <p>Further complicating the situation is the sectarian bias that tinctures the renderings here and there. While there is no pervasive bias, from time to time there is a phrasing that serves a doctrine not served by a more faithful rendering of the original. This is nowhere more apparent than in the rendering of the Greek verb <font face="Symbol">baptizw</font>; in both versions it is rendered as <i>baptize</i>. Although it is taught in some places that in the KJV this was a transliteration intended to blur the specific mode of baptism (the original means "dip" or "immerse"), the word <i>baptize</i> had been in the English language for over three centuries prior to the publication of the KJV, and at the time of the KJV it meant immersion and only immersion. But words change in meaning over time, and while the word <i>immerse</i> means what it always has, the word <i>baptise</i> has become generalized in meaning, and now stands for any religious application of water, just as virtually every denomination has departed from the baptismal practices of the First Century.</p> <p>The KJV is favored by many for the greater beauty of its language. In part this is because what was originally the common language of the people in the early seventeenth century has now become a language that English-speaking people hear and read only in association with the Christian faith. As a result, the language of King James "sounds holy" to English-speaking ears. The other part of the beauty is its greater reliance on that portion of the English vocabulary that comes from the Anglo-Saxon; the use of Graeco-Latin derivations in science, technology and commerce has caused loan words from Greek and Latin to have a clinical dryness to English-speaking people. A final contribution to the KJV's greater beauty is its greater tendency to use a specific concrete term instead of a generic, more abstract term, such as <i>bread</i> instead of <i>food</i>; the former practice gives the reader a sensory picture that is more esthetically pleasing.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Phrases of frequent comment</h2></center> <p>There are certain phrases which pop up so commonly and which are rendered consistently by each version, although not necessarily consistent with each other. I have listed them here, and reference will be made in the main body of the comparison as need be:</i><ul> <li><b>Instrumental ´¹±.</b> The original ´¹±, when used to denote the mortal instrument through which a prophecy is spoken, is rendered <i>by</i> in the KJV and <i>through</i> in the NIV. The KJV rendering is meant to be in an instrumental sense, but to modern ears the KJV rendering can sound as if it denoted authorship, which for prophecies is inappropriate. <li><b>"Meat" vs. "food".</b> The word <i>meat</i> was more general in meaning in the time of King James, and referred to any kind of food. Since the term has acquired a stricter definition, a proper rendering of a more general term in the original (such as ²Áɼ±, ²ÁÉùÂ, or ÄÁ¿Æ·) requires a general term (such as <i>food</i>). <li><b>•Á·¼¿Â.</b> This Greek word, which means an empty or deserted place, is rendered as <i>wilderness</i> in the KJV and <i>desert</i> in the NIV. The original term does not necessitate a waterless place, so the NIV rendering is less accurate. <li><b> ¹ÀÄÉ.</b> This Greek verb's primary meaning is "fall," but in the context of worship it can bean "bow down." The KJV tends to use the more literal <i>fall</i>, whereas the NIV tends towards the contextual rendering of <i>bow down</i>. <li><b>£±Á¾.</b> The Greek noun is generally rendered literally as <i>flesh</i> in the KJV and as <i>sinful nature</i> in the NIV. The wisdom of the NIV rendering is dubious at best. The phrase <i>sinful nature</i> tends to drag in ideas of Original Sin and Hereditary Depravity, mutes the personal responsibility of the sinner, mutes the important need to distinguish between the spiritual and the physical, and blurs the fact that the struggles subsumed by this term involve the consequences of our dwelling in physical bodies. <li><b>¦¿½µÅÉ.</b> This Greek verb is generally rendered as <i>kill</i> in the KJV and as <i>murder</i> in the NIV. <li><b>‘¼·½ »µ³É.</b> This Greek phrase is rendered <i>verily I say</i> in the KJV and <i>I tell the truth</i> in the NIV. <li><b>£º±½´±»¹¶É</b> is generally rendered as <i>offend</i> in the KJV and <i>cause to sin</i> in the NIV. <li><b>‘À¿»Åñ¹</b> is rendered as <i>put away</i> in the KJV, but when it is a wife that is being put away, the NIV renders it as <i>divorce</i>, which is what it certainly means in that context. <li><b>¤µ»É½·Â</b> is rendered as <i>publican</i> in the KJV and <i>tax-collector</i> in the NIV; the KJV rendering is merely archaic. <li><b>¤µ»µ¹¿Â</b> is rendered <i>perfect</i> in both versions. It must be remembered that this means &quot;complete,&quot; &quot;fully-grown,&quot; or &quot;finished&quot; in the original, and that the word <i>perfect</i> meant the same thing in the time of the KJV translators, but now <i>perfect</i> has shifted in meaning to include flawlessness, which is not the intent of the original word. <li><b>ŽÀ¿ºÁ¹Ä·Â</b> literally means "actor," but is transliterated in both versions to <i>hypocrite</i>. <li><b>¨ÅÇ·</b> is the word from which we derive words like <i>psychology</i> and <i>psychiatry</i>. It can mean either <i>soul</i> or <i>life</i>; in the latter case it refers to a specific person's life, and not life in general (which is usually given as ¶É· in the original). <li><b>œµÁ¹¼½É</b> is rendered as <i>take thought</i> in the KJV and as <i>worry</i> in the NIV. </ul> <p>Where any one of these common phrases appears, reference to this section will be made.</p> <p>One area in which both the KJV and the NIV frequently depart from the original language is in the rendering of Greek participles. Generally, if the subject is doing two related actions at once, one being done in the process of doing the other, the Greek habit is to put the subordinate action into a participial form, whereas the habit in English is to use a verb for both actions. In some cases rendering the original as an English participle would result in a very awkward phrasing, and at other times it wouldn't. A large portion of the non-literal renderings consist of rendering Greek participles as English verbs, and except where the meaning is substantially changed, I won't mention them.</p> <p>The KJV and the NIV handle weights, measures, and monetary units differently. The KJV either transliterates the units in question, or it substitutes the nearest English equivalent, without any attempt to convert units that are not actually equal; thus the KJV will read <i>penny</i> when rendering the original term for a small copper coin. The NIV translators generally tried to calculate the actual amount involved in terms of modern units of measure, and renders that amount.</p> <p>The KJV and the NIV do not draw from the same original manuscripts, and at times this drives whatever differences may exist between the two versions. Discerning which manuscript should have been used is beyond the scope of this work. I have a copy of the Nestle Text (it is part of the KJV-NIV parallel), and the Received Text in my <i>hundgefressen</i> copy of Zondervan's Interlinear. These two differ in many particulars&mdash;although dialectual variances in Koine Greek probably had a lot to do with this&mdash;and where that difference is reflected in a difference between the KJV and the NIV, I have attributed it to the source variance.</p> <hr> <center><h2>One Final Note before we Begin</h2></center> <p>This is a work in progress. Although I did start with the beginning of Matthew and worked my way forward to the end of Matthew 6, I have since been going over the verses that are most frequently quoted from the pulpit at my congregation.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Another Final Note before we Begin</h2></center> <p>Please don't attempt to enlist me into the KJV Uber Alles corps. I do prefer the KJV to the NIV, but I even more greatly prefer to resort to the original Greek.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Matthew</h2><h3>Chapter 1</h3></center> <h4>Verse 1</h4> <p>The difference here is between <i>book</i> (KJV) and <i>record</i> (NIV). The original Greek here is ²¹²»¹¿Â, which is literally a scroll; however, since scrolls back then served the same purpose as books do nowadays, the KJV's rendering is not substantively different; both ²¹²»¹¿Â and <i>book</i> refer to the physical form of a written work. The NIV, on the other hand, refers to the purpose of the written work.</p> <h4>Verses 2-16</h4> <p>The KJV adheres more closely to the original, and unlike in verse one, the difference here is significant. The original verb µ³µ½½·Ãµ½ is rendered as <i>begat</i> in the KJV and <i>was the father of</i> in the NIV. This is no small difference. The KJV rendering, as does the original, declares not only that David is the father of Solomon, but that he is Solomon's <i>biological</i> father as well. This emphasis is lost in the NIV.</p> <p>This is important because this helps explain the differences between the lines of descent recorded here and in Luke. While it is commonly inferred that Luke gives the lineage of Jesus' earthly mother, the original does not necessitate this; it can also be argued that Luke does not specify biological descent, but legal descent (through Levirate marriage).</p> <p>In verses three and five the NIV resorts to another paraphrase in order to mention the mothers of some of the men in the line of descent. The KJV renders in a manner more faithful to the original, in saying that the son in question was begotten on such-and-such a woman, whereas the NIV states that the woman "was the mother of" the person in the line. Again, the KJV emphasizes the biological relationship, whereas this precision is lost in the NIV.</p> <h4>Verse 6</h4> <p>It is appropriate here to emphasize that Bathsheba was Uriah's lawful wife, because David had not acquired her by lawful means. The best rendering would have been <i>on her who was Uriah's</i>. The NIV again brings in "whose mother was Uriah's wife," which commits the imprecision of meaning discussed above.</p> <h4>Verse 18</h4> <p>The original uses a Greek idiom to represent pregnancy (µ½ ³±ÃÄÁ¹ µÇÉ, literally, "to have in stomach"), and the KJV uses a different idiom. The NIV uses a direct term.</p> <h4>Verse 19</h4> <p>The rendering of ´¹º±¹¿Â as <i>a just man</i> (KJV) or <i>a righteous man</i> (NIV) inserts <i>man</i> without any particular need. While it is true that an adjective in the masculine can stand for a man having that attribute, this could have been rendered as <i>righteous</i> without taking away any meaning. In the same way, ´µ¹³¼±Ä¹Ã±¹ could have been rendered as <i>shame</i> or <i>disgrace</i> instead of the extensive paraphrasings used in both versions.</p> <h4>Verse 20</h4> <p>The KJV rendering <i>But while he thought on these things</i> is a literal rendering of the original, whereas the NIV's replacing <i>while</i> with <i>after</i> departs from the meaning of the original. Neither does the Greek verb À±Á±»±²µ¹½ require that the thing taken be taken home; hence the NIV's insertion of <i>home</i> is not warranted by the original.</p> <h4>Verse 23</h4> <p>The note on verse 18 applies here, except that the NIV, instead of using the same direct term as it does in verse 18, uses the same phrasing as does the KJV.</p> <h4>Verse 24</h4> <p>The comment for verse 20 applies here as well.</p> <h4>Verse 25</h4> <p>Here an idiom referring to sexual relations in the original is translated literally in the KJV, but is rendered with a somewhat less indirect idiom in the NIV. The inclusion of <i>firstborn</i> in the KJV, and its absence from the NIV, is due to a difference between the manuscripts on which the different versions are based.</p> <p>"[H]e called his name JESUS" (KJV) is a literal rendering of the original, whereas the NIV is a rephrasing.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 2</h3></center> <h4>Verse 1</h4> <p>The term ¼±³¹ in the original is rendered as <i>wise men</i> in the KJV and is transliterated <i>Magi</i> in the NIV with a footnote referring to the traditional rendering. The original term is the same that is used to denote Elymas' profession in verses six and eight of Acts 13.</p> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p>The KJV rendering <i>saying</i> is literal, whereas the NIV rendering <i>asking</i> is a contextual reinterpretation.</p> <h4>Verse 4</h4> <p>The NIV has a footnote for <i>Christ</i>, giving <i>Messiah</i> as an alternate rendering. The original is ÇÁ¹ÃÄ¿Â, and there does not appear to be any original support for the footnote.</p> <h4>Verse 5</h4> <p>The note on the instrumental ´¹± applies here. Additionally, the NIV rendering of this into the active voice is not appropriate for prophecies.</p> <h4>Verse 6</h4> <p>The same root is rendered as <i>princes</i> and <i>Governor</i> in the KJV, which words have modern connotations that are not inherent in the original; the NIV rendering of <i>ruler</i> is more precise. Furthermore, À¿¹¼±½µ¹ is rendered as <i>rule</i> in the KJV, whereas the NIV rendering of <i>shepherd</i> is more faithful to the original.</p> <h4>Verse 8</h4> <p>The original µ¾µÄ±Ã±Äµ ±ºÁ¹²¿Â (lit. "question carefully") is rendered as "search diligently" in the KJV and "make a careful search" in the NIV. µÀ±½ ´µ µÅÁ·Äµ is rendered as "and when ye have found <i>him</i>" in the KJV, which aside from adding the object, is a literal rendering; the NIV's "[a]s soon as you find him" is less literal. ±À±³³µ¹»±Äµ ¼¿¹ is rendered as "bring me word again" in the KJV, and by a more literal "report to me" in the NIV.</p> <h4>Verse 9</h4> <p>The NIV inserts <i>the place</i> when stating where the star stopped.</p> <h4>Verse 10</h4> <p>The KJV rendering "they rejoiced with exceeding great joy" is literal, while the NIV rendering is a blander rephrasing.</p> <h4>Verse 11</h4> <p>The original says that the Magi came "into" the house (orig. µ¹Â Ä·½ ¿¹º±½), and not merely "to" the house as the NIV renders it.</p> <h4>Verse 12</h4> <p>The KJV inserts an unnecessary "own."</p> <h4>Verse 13</h4> <p>The NIV's rendering "until I tell you" is literal, whereas the KJV's rendering "until I bring thee word" is a rephrasing.</p> <h4>Verse 16</h4> <p>The Greek verb rendered as "mocked" in the KJV and "outwitted" in the NIV usually means the former, but can have the latter meaning as well. "[S]ent forth, and slew" (KJV) is more literal than "gave orders to kill" (NIV).</p> <h4>Verse 18</h4> <p>"[B]ecause they are not" (KJV) is literal, while "because they are no more" (NIV) is a rephrasing.</p> <h4>Verse 22</h4> <p>"[I]n the room of his father" (KJV) is a less literal rendering of the original (probably due to a shift in the meaning of <i>room</i>), whereas "in place of his father" (NIV) is literal.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 3</h3></center> <h4>Verse 1</h4> <p>The note on µÁ·¼¿Â applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p>The original ·³³¹ºµ½ is rendered <i>is at hand</i> (KJV) and <i>is near</i> (NIV), when <i>has come near</i> would be a much better rendering.</p> <h4>Verse 3</h4> <p>The note on the instrumental ´¹± applies here.</p> "[M]ake his paths straight" (KJV) is a more faithful rendering than "make straight paths for him."</p> <h4>Verse 4</h4> <p>The note on "meat" vs. "food" applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 5</h4> <p>The KJV's "[t]hen went out to him all Jerusalem" is a direct rendering. The NIV rendering is less figurative, but surely this is a figure of speech that the reader can understand. Furthermore, the KJV rendering implies, as does the original, that John's work was attended by the bulk of the population from the three regions named, whereas the NIV rendering only affirms that his support was spread out all over the three regions.</p> <h4>Verse 7</h4> <p><i>Offspring</i> is a more literal rendering of the original ³µ½½·¼±Ä± than either <i>generation</i> (KJV) or <i>brood</i> (NIV). <i>[T]he wrath to come</i> (KJV) is a slight rephrasing of the original, whereas <i>the coming wrath</i> (NIV) is literal.</p> <h4>Verse 8</h4> <p>The original ±¾¹¿½ Ä·Â ¼µÄ±½¿¹±Â ("worthy of repentence") is rendered by the archaic, but accurate <i>meet for repentance</i> in the KJV, but by the less literal and wordier <i>in keeping with repentance</i> in the NIV.</p> <h4>Verse 9</h4> <p>The NIV rendering inserts <i>can</i> without particular need.</p> <h4>Verse 11</h4> <p>The Greek preposition µ½ is consistently translated as <i>with</i> in both versions, although the NIV does contain a footnote stating that <i>in</i>, which is the usual meaning of the original preposition, is an acceptable alternative.</p> <h4>Verse 15</h4> <p>The NIV's <i>for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness</i> brings in a needlessly complex verb construction; <i>for us to fulfill all righteousness this way</i> is tighter. <i>Then he suffered him</i> (KJV) is an archaic but direct rendering of the original, whereas <i>[t]hen John consented</i> is a paraphrase.</p> <h4>Verse 16</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>[t]his is my beloved Son</i> is a more literal rendering than the NIV's <i>[t]his is my Son, whom I love</i>.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 4</h3></center> <h4>Verse 9</h4> <p>The note on the Greek verb À¹ÀÄÉ applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 12</h4> <p><i>[C]ast into prison</i> and <i>put in prison</i> are paraphrases of the original À±Áµ´¿¸·; <i>arrested</i> would have been a better rendering.</p> <h4>Verse 14</h4> <p>The note on the instrumental ´¹± applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 20</h4> <p>Both versions insert an unnecessary <i>their</i>, when a literal <i>the</i> would have served perfectly well.</p> <h4>Verse 23</h4> <p>The KJV's repetition of <i>all</i> reflects the wording of the original.</p> <h4> Verse 24</h4> <p>The NIV's <i>news</i>, a more neutral term, is a more faithful rendering of ±º¿· than the KJV's <i>fame</i>, which has a positive sound to modern ears.</p> <p>The original õ»·½¹±¶¿¼µ½¿Å (literally "moon-struck") is rendered as <i>lunatic</i> in the KJV and as <i>having seizures</i> in the KJV.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 5</h3></center> <h4>Verse 1</h4> <p>The original suggests that the disciples came to Jesus when He sat, or while He sat. This is somewhat emphasized in the KJV and not emphasized at all in the NIV.</p> <h4>Verses 3-11</h4> <p>The original ¼±º±Á¹¿Â, which means "fortunate," is rendered as <i>blessed</i> in both versions. <i>Blessed</i> has different senses in modern English, and in this case the meaning aligned with the original is of course the best interpretation. The other differences in wording reflect the changes in language.</p> <h4>Verse 12</h4> <p>The original ±³±»»¹±Ã¸·, which is in the middle voice, is rendered as <i>be exceeding glad</i> in the KJV and as <i>be glad</i> in the NIV; the former rendering is closer to the meaning of the original.</p> <h4>Verse 13</h4> <p>The original ¼ÉÁ±½¸·, which literally means "to become foolish," is rendered as <i>have lost his savour</i> (KJV) and <i>loses its saltiness</i> (NIV); "becomes weak" would have been a better rendering.</p> <h4>Verse 14</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>set on a hill</i> is more literal than the NIV's <i>on a hill</i>.</p> <h4>Verse 15</h4> <p>The original »Åǽ¿Â is rendered by <i>candle</i> in the KJV and <i>lamp</i> in the NIV; the latter is the meaning of the original, and the word translated as <i>candlestand</i> in the KJV really means <i>lampstand</i> as well.</p> <p>The original ¼¿´¹¿Â represents a measuring bowl of about eight dry quarts; it can be either a basket or a bowl, so both renderings are equally precise.</p> <h4>Verse 16</h4> <p>The original ´¿¾±ÃÉù½ is rendered <i>glorify</i> (KJV) and as <i>praise</i> (NIV); the former rendering is more precise.</p> <h4>Verse 17</h4> <p>The original º±Ä±»Åñ¹ is rendered <i>destroy</i> in the KJV and <i>abolish</i> in the NIV; the former is more precise. Additionally, the NIV needlessly inserts <i>them</i> as the objects of <i>to abolish</i> and <i>to fulfill</i>.</p> <h4>Verse 18</h4> <p>The original µÉ ±½ À±½Ä± ³µ½·Ä±¹ is rendered <i>until all be fulfilled</i> (KJV) and <i>until everything is accomplished</i> (NIV); <i>until all has happened</i> is the most literal rendering.</p> <h4>Verse 21</h4> <p>The original Ä¿¹Â ±ÁDZ¹¿¹Â is rendered <i>by them of old time</i> (KJV) and <i>to the people long ago</i> (NIV); <i>to the ancients</i> is simple enough and comes nearest to the original.</p> <p>The note on the variant renderings of Æ¿½µÅÉ applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 22</h4> <p>The phrase <i>without a cause</i> is absent from the NIV because the latter is based on manuscripts for which the original term µ¹º· is absent.</p> The KJV's <i>in danger of</i> and the NIV's <i>subject to/answerable to</i> are both to be understood in the same sense.</p> <h4>Verse 23</h4> <p><i>[B]ring</i> (KJV) and <i>offering</i> (NIV) are renderings of the original ÀÁ¿ÃƵÁ·Â, which literally means "bring to," although "offer" is an acceptable alternate interpretation.</p> <h4>Verse 25</h4> <p><i>[W]ho is taking you to court</i> (NIV) is an insertion meant to be explanatory of the preceding <i>adversary</i>.</p> <h4>Verse 26</h4> <p>The comment on ±¼·½ »µ³É applies here.</p> <p>Additionally, the original uses a double negative for emphasis, which is rendered as <i>by no means</i> in the KJV, but which is not made in the NIV. <h4>Verse 27</h4> <p>The presence of <i>by them of old time</i> in the KJV, and its absence in the NIV, reflect textual differences in the original.</p> <h4>Verse 29 &amp; 30</h4> <p>The note on ú±½´±»¹¶É applies here. <p>The original ­½ Äɽ ¼µ»É½ ÿŠis rendered more closely as <i>one of thy members</i> in the KJV and <i>one part of your body</i> in the NIV. <p>The original underlying <i>hell</i> in both versions is ³µµ½½±. <h4>Verse 31</h4> <p>The note on ±À»Åñ¹ applies here. <h4>Verse 32</h4> <p>The note on ±À»Åñ¹ applies here.</p> <p>The original À±ÁµºÄ¿Â »¿³¿Å À¿Á½µ¹±Â is rendered as <i>saving for the cause of fornication</i> in the KJV and as <i>except for marital unfaithfulness</i> in the NIV. The KJV rendering directly represents the original meaning, which is that of a objectively-defined physical act; the NIV rendering turns this into a broad and subjectively-defined category of behaviors.</p> <h4>Verse 33</h4> <p><i>[F]orswear</i> (KJV) is an old word which means &quot;to break an oath.&quot; <p>The KJV rendering <i>but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths</i> reflects the word order in the original; the NIV ordering of <i>but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord</i>. The KJV rendering reflects a higher standard of behavior, because it holds the listener to all oaths, not just those made to the Lord. <i>[P]erform</i> and <i>keep</i> are the respective renderings of ±À¿´Éõ¹Â, which literally means &quot;repay&quot;.</p> <h4>Verse 35</h4> <p>The phrase rendered <i>his footstool</i> in both versions literally means &quot;his feet's footstool.&quot; <h4>Verse 45</h4> <p>The original ÌÀ¿Â ³µ½·Ã¸e ͹¿¹ Ä¿Å À±ÄÁ¿Å ͼɽ Ä¿Å µ½ ¿ÅÁ±½¿¹Â (literally, &quot;that you may become sons of your father which is in heaven&quot;) is rendered <i>[t]hat ye may be children of your father in heaven</i> (KJV) and <i>that you may be sons of your father in heaven</i> (NIV); the distinction of <i>becoming</i> something is lost in both versions.</p> <h4>Verse 46</h4> <p>The note on ĵ»É½·Â applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 48</h4> <p>The note on ĵ»µ¹¿Â applies here. <center><h3>Chapter 6</h3></center> <h4>Verse 1</h4> <p>The term <i>alms</i> in the KJV and the phrase <i>acts of righteousness</i> in the NIV reflect differences in the source texts; the KJV original has µ»·¼¿ÃŽ·Â, whereas the NIV is based on ´¹º±¹¿ÃŽ·Â.</p> <p>The original phrase µ¹ ´µ ¼· ³µ (lit: &quot;if you do not&quot;) refers to the instruction to "take care" at the beginning of the verse; it is rendered <i>otherwise</i>in the KJV and as <i>if you do</i> in the NIV, so that it refers instead to the prohibited activity later in the verse, probably to avoid misinterpretation.</p> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p><i>[S]ound a trumpet</i> (KJV) is literal, but <i>announce it with trumpets</i> (NIV) is an elaboration of this.</p> <p><i>[T]hat they may have glory of men</i> (KJV) and <i>to be honored by men</i> (NIV) are renderings of ÌÀÉ ´¿¾±Ã¸Éù½ ÍÀ¿ Äɽ ±½¸ÁÉÀɽ (lit., "so that they may be glorified by men").</p> <p><i>They have their reward</i> (KJV) and <i>they have received their reward in full</i> (NIV) are both renderings of ±ÀµÇ¿Åù½ Ä¿½ ¼¹Ã¸¿½ ±ÅÄɽ, lit., "they are fully receiving their reward."</p> <h4>Verse 4</h4> <p><i>[O]penly</i> (KJV), and its absence in the NIV, are the result of a difference in the source texts.</p> <h4>Verse 5</h4> <p>The third note on verse 2 applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 6</h4> <p>The note on verse 4 applies here as well.</p> <h4>Verse 7</h4> <p><i>[U]se not vain repetitions</i> (KJV) and <i>do not keep on babbling</i> (NIV) are from the original ¼· ²±Äı»¿³·Ã·Äµ, which literally means "do not repeat meaninglessly."</p> <p><i>[M]any words</i> (NIV) is a literal rendering of the original À¿»Å»¿³¹±, while the KJV rendering is not quite literal.</p> <h4>Verse 9</h4> <p>The original ÌÅÄÉ ¿Å½ ÀÁ¿ÃµÅǵøµ ͼµ¹Â (lit. "therefore, you pray this way") is a direct command, and is rendered as such in the KJV; the NIV rendering is merely suggestive.</p> <h4>Verse 13</h4> <p>If I were working on a simplified English version, I'd use <i>rescue</i> instead of <i>deliver</i> to render ÁÅñ¹.</p> <p><i>[F]rom evil</i> (KJV) and <i>from the evil one</i> (NIV) are equally plausible renderings of the original ±À¿ Ä¿Å À¿½·Á¿Å (lit., "away from the evil"). This is one of those cases where it is best to meditate on both possible meanings...</p> <p>The KJV's inclusion of <i>for thine is the kingdom and the power, and the glory, forever, Amen</i> and its absence in the NIV reflect a difference in the source texts.</p> <h4>Verse 14</h4> <p><i>[F]orgive men their trespasses</i> (KJV) is a literal rendering of ±Æ·Äµ Ä¿¹Â ±½¸ÁÉÀ¿¹Â ı À±Á±ÀÄɼ±Ä± ±ÅÄɽ, but the NIV's <i>forgive men when they sin against you</i> is a paraphrase.</p> <h4>Verse 15</h4> <p><i>[T]heir trespasses</i> (KJV), and its absence in the NIV, reflect a difference in the source texts.</p> <h4>Verse 16</h4> <p>The note on ÍÀ¿ºÁ¹Ä·Â applies here.</p> <p><i>[S]ad</i> (KJV) and <i>somber</i> (NIV) are renderings of úŸÁÉÀ¿Â (lit., "gloomy").</p> <p>The third note from verse 2 applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 18</h4> <p>The original phrase ÌÀ¿Â ¼· Ʊ½·Â Ä¿¹Â ±½¸ÁÉÀ¿¹Â ½·ÃĵÅɽ (lit., "that you not appear fasting to men") is rendered by the essentially literal <i>that thou appear not unto men to fast</i> in the KJV and by the rather approximate <i>so that it will not be obvious to men that you are fasting</i> in the NIV.</p> <p><i>[O]penly</i> (KJV), and its absence in the NIV, reflect a difference in the source texts.</p> <h4>Verses 19 and 20</h4> <p><i>[C]orrupt</i> (KJV) and <i>destroy</i> (NIV) are renderings of the original ±Æ±½¹¶É (lit. "to deface").</p> <h4>Verse 22</h4> <p><i>[S]ingle</i> (KJV) is a literal rendering of the original ¬À»¿ÅÂ, but in this context the term may mean <i>honest</i> (i.e., single-minded instead of double-minded). It is put in contrast with À¿½·Á¿Â in the next verse, so the NIV's rendering of <i>good</i> is acceptable.</p> <h4>Verse 23</h4> <p>The original ú¿Äµ¹½¿½ is translated "full of darkness" (both versions), but the more literal "dark" is sufficient.</p> <h4>Verse 25</h4> <p>The note on ¼µÁ¹¼½É applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 26</h4> <p>The original ¿ÅÇ Í¼µ¹Â ¼±»»¿½ ´¹±ÆµÁµÄµ ±ÅÄɽ (lit. "don't you excel more than they") is rendered <i>are ye not much better than they</i> (KJV) and <i>are you not much more valuable than they</i> (NIV).</p> <h4>Verse 27</h4> <p>The note on ¼µÁ¹¼½É applies here.</p> <p><i>[A]dd one cubit unto his stature</i> (KJV) is a literal rendering of the original ÀÁ¿Ã¸µ¹½±¹ µÀ¹ Ä·½ ®»¹º¹±½ ±ÅÄ¿Å À·ÇŽ ­½±, whereas the NIV rendering <i>add a single hour to his life</i> has no basis in either the Nestle Text or the Received Text; however, the NIV does list the meaning of the KJV as an alternate reading.</p> <h4>Verse 28</h4> <p>The note on ¼µÁ¹¼½É applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 30</h4> <p>The original Ä¿½ Ç¿ÁÄ¿½ Ä¿Å ±³Á¿Å ÷¼µÁ¿½ ¿½Ä± º±¹ ±ÅÁ¹¿½ µ¹Â º»¹²±½¿½ ²±»»¿¼µ½¿½ (lit., " the grass of the field, being today, and tomorrow into the oven is thrown"), is rendered as <i>the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven</i> (KJV) and as <i>the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire</i> (NIV). <h4>Verse 31</h4> <p>The note on ¼µÁ¹¼½É applies here.</p> <h4>Verse 33</h4> <p>The original ÀÁ¿Ãĵ¸·ÃµÄ±¹ is literally translated as <i>will be added</i> in the KJV, and by the contextual interpretation of <i>will be given</i> in the NIV.</p> <h4>Verse 34</h4> <p>The note on ¼µÁ¹¼½É applies here.</p> <p>The original º±º¹± is rendered literally as <i>evil</i> in the KJV and as <i>trouble</i> in the NIV.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 7</h3></center> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p><i>For with what judgement ye judge</i> (KJV) and <i>for in the same way you judge others</i> (NIV) are differing renderings of the original µ½ Î ³±Á ºÁ¹¼±Ä¹ ºÁ¹½µÄµ; the KJV rendering is closer to the original.</p> <p><i>[O]thers</i> (NIV) is an insertion.</p> <p><i>[A]gain</i> (KJV) is an insertion.</p> <h4>Verse 21</h4> <p>The NIV inserts <i>only</i> in the text here, but it doesn't change the meaning.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 13</h3></center> <h4>Verse 44</h4> <p><i>Again</i> (KJV), and its absence in the NIV, is based on a difference in the source texts.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Mark</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 7</h3></center> <h4>Verse 19</h4> <p>The original º±¸±Á¹¶É½ À±½Ä± ı ²Áɼ±Ä± is rendered by the archaic (but, for the times, accurate) <i>purging all meats</i> in the KJV, but by the extensive paraphrase of <i>In saying this, Jesus declared all foods &quot;clean&quot;</i> in the NIV. While the rendering <i>declaring all foods clean</i> is an acceptable rendering of the original, the NIV's verbiage attributing this to Jesus has no necessary support in the original. Furthermore, this participial phrase is located where the KJV's rendering would make the better sense (at the very end of the verse), whereas to support the NIV rendering, the phrase needs to be in the previous verse.</p> <p>The NIV rendering is probably driven by the perceived need to state that Christians are not subject to the dietary laws of the Mosaic covenant, but, for a couple of reasons, this is not the place to make that point.</p> <p>First, the freedom of Christians from the Law of Moses is too clearly stated in the rest of the New Testament for it to require that such an indirect statement here be rendered as fully supportive.</p> <p>Second, at the time Jesus spoke, the people to whom Jesus was speaking were still subject to the law of Moses, and would remain subject until Pentecost day; consequently, it would be premature to declare all foods clean.</p> <p>Therefore, for reasons of both grammar and consistency, the KJV rendering, appropriately modernized, is the better one.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Luke</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 14</h3></center> <h4>Verses 28 and 31</h4> <p>The KJV preserves the word order of the original in saying <i>which of you</i> (v. 28) and <i>what king</i> (v.31), and preserving them as questions, whereas the NIV makes a slight paraphrase, rendering them as <i>[s]uppose one of you</i> (v.28) and <i>suppose a king</i>, and turning them into commands.</p> <hr> <center><h2>John</h2><h3>Chapter 1</h3></center> <meta john 1:1 no comment> <h4>Verse 14</h4> <p><i>Dwelt</i> (KJV) and <i>made his dwelling</i> (NIV) are renderings of the original µÃº·½Éõ½, literally, to pitch a tent.</p> <h4>Verse 45</h4> <p>The original ̽ µ³Á±Èµ½ œÉË÷ µ½ ÄÉ ½¿¼É º±¹ ¿¯ ÀÁ¿Æ·Ä±¹ (lit., "of whom wrote Moses in the law, and the prophets") is a rather awkaward phrasing (although clearer in the original). The KJV's <i>of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write</i> attempts to maintain the word order, while the NIV rephrases it to a less awkward way with <i>the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote</i>.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 7</h3></center> <h4>Verses 45 and 46</h4> <p>The original term ÍÀ·ÁµÄ±¹ is rendered as <i>officers</i> in the KJV and as <i>temple guards</i> and <i>guards</i> in the NIV.</p> <p>In verse 46, the original ¿Å´µÀ¿Äµ µ»±»·Ãµ½ ¿ÍÄÉ ±½¸ÁÉÀ¿Â, Π¿ÍÄ¿Â »±»µ¹ Ì ±½¸ÁÉÀ¿Â is rendered <i>never spoke a man like this man</i> in the KJV and as <i>no one ever spoke the way this man does</i> in the NIV.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 8</h3></center> <h4>Verse 31</h4> <p><i>[C]ontinue in my word</i> (KJV) is a literal rendering of the original, while <i>hold to my teaching</i> (NIV) is a paraphrase.</i> <center><h3>Chapter 12</h3></center> <meta no comment on verse 20> <hr> <center><h2>Acts</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 8</h3></center> <h4>Verse 34</h4> <p><i>I pray thee</i> (KJV) and <i>tell me, please</i> (NIV) are renderings of the original ´µ¿¼±¹ ÿŠ(lit. "I ask you").</p> <p>The phrase ­ÄµÁ¿Å Ĺ½¿Â has a meaning for which both <i>another man</i> (KJV) and <i>someone else</i> (NIV) are both acceptable renderings.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 24</h3></center> <h4>Verse 25</h4> <p>The original µ³ºÁ±Äµ¹±Â is rendered as <i>temperance in the KJV</i> and as <i>self-control</i> in the NIV. The KJV rendering is archaic, and both are correct.</p> <p>The original Ä¿ ½Å½ µÇ¿½ À¿ÁµÅ¿Å (lit. "for the now having, go") is rendered by the slight paraphrase <i>go thy way for now</i> in the KJV, and by the even less precise paraphrase <i>that's enough for now! You may leave</i> in the NIV.</p> <hr> <center><h2>First Corinthians</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 1</h3></center> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>called to be saints</i> and the NIV's <i>called to be holy</i> are from the original º»·Ä¿¹Â ¬³¹¿¹Â, literally, "called holy people;" the NIV rendering is better, because the English word <i>saint</i> has connotations that are not inherent in the original.</p> <h4>Verse 10</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>that ye all speak the same thing</i> is a more literal rendering of the original ¯½± Ä¿ ±ÅÄ¿ »µ³·Äµ À±½ÄµÂ, whereas the NIV's rendering <i>that all of you agree with one another</i> paraphrases to a small degree.</p> <p>The KJV's <i>and that there be no divisions among you</i> is a literal rendering of the original º±¹ ¼· · µ½ ͼ¹½ Ãǹü±Ä±, whereas the NIV's <i>so that there may be no divisons among you</i> makes it less of a command and more of a goal to be worked for.</p> <p>The KJV's <i>but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment</i> maintains the repetition of <i>same</i> that is in the original, but the NIV rendering <i>and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought</i> does away with it.</p> <meta 1 cor 1:11 no comment> <meta 1 cor 1:12 no comment> <meta 1 cor 1:17-8> <h4>Verse 17</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>not with wisdom of words</i> is closer to the original ¿Åº µ½ ÿƹ± »¿³¿Å, which the NIV paraphrases as <i>not with words of human wisdom</i>.</p> <p>The KVJ's <i>lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect</i> comes closer to the original ¯½± ¼· ºµ½É¸· Ì ÃıÅÁ¿Â Ä¿Å §Á¹ÃÄ¿Å than does the NIV rendering <i>lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power</i>. <i>Be made useless</i> is probably the best English rendering of the original.</p> <h4>Verse 18</h4> <p>The KJV's <i>preaching</i> and the NIV's <i>message</i> are based on the original term »¿³¿Â, which could have been rendered literally as <i>word</i> without causing significant confusion.</p> <meta 1 cor 1:21 no comment> <center><h3>Chapter 16</h3></center> <h4>Verse 13</h3>The original ³Á·³¿Áµ¹Äµ is rendered as the literal <i>watch ye</i> in the KJV and as the somewhat wordier <i>be on your guard</i> in the NIV; ±½´Á¹¶µÃ¸µ is rendered in the KJV with the archaic <i>quit you like men</i> and as <i>be men of courage</i> in the NIV.</p> <hr> <center><h2>Second Timothy</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 4</h3></center> <h4>Verse 3</h4>The original ­±ÅÄ¿¹Â µÀ¹ÃÉÁµÅÿÅù½ ´¹´±Ãº±»¿Å º½·¸¿¼µ½¿¹ Ä·½ ±º¿·½ (lit., "to themselves they shall heap up teachers, tickling the ear") is rendered <i>they shall heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears</i> in the KJV and as <i>they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear</i> in the NIV. For some reason the translators have thought that the original was too difficult to render in English, so much so that they redirected the participle to modify a different noun altogether, but I'm not sure that this was necessary.</p> <hr><center><h2>James</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 1</h3></center> <h4>Verse 22</h4> <p>The original ³¹½µÃ¸µ ´µ À¿¹·Ä±¹ »¿³¿Å (lit., "but become doers of the word") is rendered <i>but be ye doers of the word</i> in the KJV, and at the beginning of the verse as it is in the original. The NIV moves most of the passage to the end of the verse, rendering it <i>[d]o what it says</i>, with <i>word</i> in a separate clause, different from the original, at the beginning of the verse.</p> <meta james 1:27> <center><h3>Chapter 2</h3></center> <h4>Verse 2</h4> <p>The original ÇÁÅÿ´±ºÄÅ»¹¿Â (literally, "gold-fingered") is rendered <i>with a gold ring</i> (KJV) and <i>wearing a gold ring</i> (NIV). The original suggests a man wearing much more than one ring, an idea that is lost in both translations; <i>with gold on his fingers</i> would have been much more faithful to the original.</p> <h4>Verse 19</h4> <p>The original º±»É À¿µ¹Â is rendered literally as <i>thou doest well</i> in the KJV, but with the simple <i>good!</i> in the NIV.</i> <p><i>Devils</i> (KJV) and <i>demons</i> (NIV) are both rendered from the original term ´±¹¼¿½¹±, which is the Greek word from which we get the English word <i>demon</i>.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 5</h3></center> <h4>Verse 19</h4> <p>The original À»±½·¸· (lit. "wander") is rendered <i>err</i> in the KJV and by the literal <i>wander</i> in the NIV.</p> <hr><center><h2>1 John</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 2</h3></center> <h4>Verse 3</h4> <p>The original Ä·Áɼµ½ is rendered <i>keep</i> in the KJV and as <i>obey</i> in the NIV, but the KJV rendering is meant in the sense that means "obey."</p> <hr><center><h2>Revelation</h2></center> <center><h3>Chapter 2</h3></center> <h4>Verse 10</h4> <p>The only real difference in meaning here is that the original Ä¿½ ÃĵƱ½¿½ Ä·Â ¶É·Â is rendered as <i>a crown of life</i> in the KJV and as <i>the crown of life</i> in the NIV. The NIV rendering is more literal.</p> <center><h3>Chapter 14</h3></center> <h4>Verse 13</h4> <p>The difference <i>saying unto me, "Write..."</i> (KJV) and <i>saying, "Write..."</i> (NIV) reflects a difference in the original manuscripts.</p> <hr> </body> </html>