Five Examples of the NIV Changing the Gospel

There has been a great deal of controversy surrounding the newer versions of the Holy Bible. The New International Version, or NIV, has been put under a microscope because of its changes and omissions to the Holy Scripture. When studied closely and compared to older versions like the King James Version, the NIV simply does not stand up in terms of doctrine. Following are five ways that the NIV makes changes and omissions of a simple word or phrase that completely changes the doctrine that the Holy Bible teaches.

In Matthew 1:25 of the King James Bible, the author writes this: “And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.”

One of the most essential doctrines of the Christian faith is the virginity of Mary before Jesus was born. This was important because Jesus had to be born without the natural sin of Adam. If Jesus was not the firstborn of the virgin Mary, she would not have been the pure women that the Christian faith teaches. But the NIV, by leaving out one word from that verse, removes the certainty that Mary was a virgin at the time of Christ’s birth.

Here is what Matthew 1:25 says in the NIV: “But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”

By removing the word “firstborn” and simply replacing it with “a son,” the translators of the NIV imply that Mary may have had other children before Jesus was born. At the very least, the NIV does not make it a certainty that Jesus was the firstborn son of Mary. Therefore, the NIV (at the very least) casts a doubt on the doctrine that Mary was a virgin and, as a result, Christ was born without natural sin.

The Christian doctrine teaches that Christ lived a sinless life. In 1 John 3:5, the Bible teaches us this: “And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.” There are other verses that tell us that Christ had no sin and this is just one of them. But the NIV would have us believe something different.

In Matthew 5:22, we are told that being angry with a brother without cause is a sin. In the King James Bible, the verse reads like this: “But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” This tells us that we must have a reason for being angry with our brother or else we are sinning.

The same verse in the NIV would have us believe something different. Here is how Matthew 5:22 in the NIV reads: “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.” The problem here is that the NIV takes out the phrase “without cause.” As such, it implies that being angry even with cause is a sin, which means Jesus would have sinned when he went into the temples and threw over the tables of the money changers.

Are you starting to see how changing a word here and leaving out a word there can change an entire belief system? Let’s keep going, shall we?

As Christians, we are taught that the things we do for God in secret will bring us rewards in the open. We are supposed to do things “behind the scenes” rather than taking credit for them because we should have a desire to do them for God’s glory rather than our own. There are several verses in the sixth chapter of Matthew that explain this doctrine.

Matthew 6:4 says, “That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.” In Matthew 6:6, we are told this: “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." And in Matthew 6:18, it says this: “That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.” As you can see from these verses, giving tithes, praying and fasting are things we should do in secret so as to not glorify our own deeds. When we do these things in secret, God will give us rewards for all to see.

But the NIV takes out each instance of the word “openly” in these three passages. It might seem like just a small change, but it changes the way God rewards us for our secret deeds.

Surely the editors of the NIV wouldn’t even think about omitting words and phrases from the Lord’s Prayer, would they? In Matthew 6:13 of the NIV, the phrase “For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever, Amen,” is left out. Unfortunately for the editors of the NIV, this phrase appears in more than 490 of the 500 manuscripts that the Holy Bible is based on. Why would they leave out such a pertinent phrase that appears in more than 98 percent of the transcripts that exist? One of the reasons is to blur the lines between the Almighty God and Satan. This idea goes back to the idea of the New Age Movement playing a major role in the editing of the NIV, which is a topic I will take up in another post.

Why would the NIV editors omit this phrase? The Lord’s Prayer is found in full in other books of the gospel. But when you remove it from one part, it’s easier for future versions to remove the other instance.

Jesus Christ is the Son of God. That is evident throughout the Scriptures. So why does the NIV seem to whittle down those instances out that verify Christ’s deity? In Matthew 8:29, it says: “And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time?” That’s from the King James Version and it is talking about the demons being witness to the fact that Jesus was indeed the Son of God. Their statement couples “Jesus” with “Son of God” so there is no doubt about who they were talking about.

But in the New International Version, the editors leave “Jesus” out of the demons’ questions. Here is how the NIV recounts the situation: “What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. "Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?” By removing “Jesus” from this verse, it is unclear about who the demons are talking to. Are they talking to Jesus? Or are they talking to someone else?

Of course, this verse does not nullify the deity of Jesus Christ. But it is just one instance in which the NIV editors have decided to change the Scripture in a way that makes it easier to question or even doubt the Christian doctrine.

These are just five instances within the first eight chapters of The Gospel in which verses have been changes to seemingly promote an agenda. There are dozens, if not hundreds more instances of these subtle changes that make all the difference in the world.