Bible Daily

Understanding the NIV Translation: Are Verses Truly Missing?

The New International Version (NIV): A Modern Translation

The New International Version (NIV) stands as one of the most widely used Bible translations today. Its popularity in the United States is undeniable, often cited as the top-selling translation. However, a common concern among some readers is the apparent absence of verses when comparing the NIV to older translations like the King James Version (KJV). This comparison has led to questions about the reliability of the NIV. So, are there truly missing verses in the NIV translation, and if so, what does this imply for its trustworthiness?

The Translation Process

To understand the issue of missing verses, it's crucial to grasp the translation process. Contrary to popular belief, the KJV is not the original Bible; it's a translation from Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic into the English of 1611. Similarly, the NIV, which began its translation in 1965, is derived from these same original languages. The work involved over one hundred scholars and took thirteen years, ensuring accuracy with the original texts.

What Are the "Missing" Verses?

When comparing the NIV to the KJV, you might notice around 16 verses that seem to be absent. Here are some examples:

  • Acts 8:37
  • Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14
  • Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28
  • Luke 17:36, 23:17
  • John 5:4

How Translators Decide on Verses

The notion of missing verses stems from the use of different manuscripts for translation. The KJV relied on the Textus Receptus, which was the best available in the 1600s. However, since then, older manuscripts have been discovered, which are considered more reliable by modern scholars. These manuscripts, used for the NIV, might not include these verses or might present them differently.

For instance, in Acts 8:37, the NIV includes a footnote:

As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” [37] [c]

Here is the notation:

c. Some manuscripts include here, “Philip said, ‘If you believe with all your heart, you may.” The eunuch answered, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’”

Were Verses Missing Before the NIV?

The KJV was not the first Bible translation. Earlier translations like the Septuagint (c. 130 BC) and the Syriac Gospels (c. AD 170) exist. The presence or absence of verses in any translation depends on the manuscripts used. The few discrepancies highlight the remarkable consistency of the biblical text across various translations.

Should Christians Be Concerned?

The answer is no. Here's why:

  1. Reliable Manuscripts: The NIV translation is based on reliable, older manuscripts, ensuring its fidelity to the original texts.

  2. Transparency: Differences are noted in footnotes, ensuring readers are informed of variations without misleading them.

  3. Doctrinal Integrity: The "missing" verses do not alter fundamental Christian doctrines, maintaining the theological integrity of the Bible.

In conclusion, while the NIV might not include every verse found in older translations like the KJV, this does not undermine its reliability or its value for Bible study. The translation process reflects a commitment to accuracy and transparency, allowing Christians to trust in the NIV as a faithful representation of God's Word.