Problems with the New International Version

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Randy_Carson

Guest
PART ONE

Consider the following translations of 2 Peter 1:20:

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (KJV)

But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, (New American Standard)

Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, (New American Bible)

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. (note the NIV adds “the prophet’s”)

This is one passage that is never cited as a proof text for sola scriptura. That’s hardly surprising. In this passage, Peter rejects the idea of private or individual interpretation: “no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” Then Peter warns: “But false prophets also arose among the [Jewish] people, just as there will be false teacher among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who brought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” (2 Peter 2:1) Note that under divine inspiration, Peter connects individual interpretation with heresies!

The Greek word that is translated as “heresies” comes from the verb haireomai, which means “to take or to choose for one’s self.” In the first century, it had the negative meaning of going off on one’s own in rebellion to the established teaching. Thus, in Acts 24:14, some translations render it as “sect”.

The statement in 2 Peter 1:20 is so strong in its opposition to the idea of *sola scriptura *that one Protestant translation attempts to subvert its meaning by inserting words that are not in the original. Thus, it appears that the New International Version (NIV) intentionally mistranslates “one’s own interpretation” with “by the prophet’s own interpretation.” However, *tou prophetou *is not found in the Greek text.
 
PART TWO

In the following verses, the Greek word, paradosis, is translated in the NIV as “tradition”; note that in each of these instances, paradosis is viewed in a negative light.

Matthew 15:1-5
Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, “Why do your disciples break the tradition paradosis] of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition paradosis]? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition paradosis].”

Mark 7:1-13
The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were “unclean,” that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition [paradosis] of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.) So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition paradosis] of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: " ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions paradosis] of men.” And he said to them: “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions paradosis]! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition paradosis] that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

Galatians 1:14
I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the tradition paradosis] of my fathers.

Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition paradosis] and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

In the following verses, the Greek word, paradosis, is translated in the NIV as “teaching”; note that in each of these instances, paradosis is viewed in a positive light.

1 Corinthians 11:2
I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teaching paradosis], just as I passed them on to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings paradosis] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6
In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching paradosis] you received from us.

+++

Doesn’t it seem curious that the NIV renders the word “paradosis” correctly as “tradition” in the ten places where the “tradition” of the Pharisees was condemned but incorrectly translates it as “teaching” in the three places where the “tradition” of the Apostles was extolled?

This is especially puzzling since the correct Greek word for “teaching doctrine” is “didachi i” while the word for “teaching” is “didaskalia i”? To put it plainly, if the New Testament authors had wanted to say “teaching”, they would have written “didachi i” or possibly “didaskalia i”. However, each of the scriptures listed above actually contain the word, “paradosis”. The NIV translators had to go out of their way to render this word incorrectly in three separate verses! Why would they do that?

Could it be that the anti-Catholic bias of the translators and publishers of the NIV could not allow them to render the word “paradosis” properly as “tradition” wherever it was portrayed positively because this translation would weaken the arguments of those who get a lot of mileage out of falsely claiming that Catholicism contains little but worthless “traditions of men”?
 
dont forget about the angel’s greeting to mary which they translate as:

“Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
(luke 1:28)

most translations at least start the sentance with “hail”
 
6glargento said:
dont forget about the angel’s greeting to mary which they translate as:

“Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
(luke 1:28)

most translations at least start the sentance with “hail”
Click to expand...
In English Hail means Greetings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top