Get the NIV 1984 Bible Online HERE (pre 2011 update version)

[thecross22]

Here is a 1984 NIV version that is an online study resource. If you use Studylight.org you have to go to the classic.studylight.org to get the 1984.

As to the KJV only debate, or anyone who uses the phrase "The NIV has taken xxx-amount of verse or chapters out of the Bible." The key they are always missing is... what are you basing the "Standard" on? When you say a verse was take out of something, taken out of what? And those "Numbers" they always come up with are from the KJV. So that mindset actually makes the KJV the "Standard". When Revelation says anyone who adds to or takes away from the Word of God, they take that to mean anyone who takes away or adds to the KJV. However, the KJV is NOT the Word of God. It is not the Original. It is NOT the only English version of the Original. It's not even the FIRST English version of the Original. Could it be that the NIV didn't remove verse from the Original, but that the KJV added to the Original? That thought never crosses their mind! That's blasphemy to them! Because they think that God ordained a wicked english king to translate the only infallible Word of God, 1600 years after the Original Writings. Too bad God Himself neglected to tell us that. Having read their "infallible" versions several times, I have yet to read "Thou shalt read only the KJV..." or "And God shall raise up a king from the east to write the only infallible text..."

The simple truth of the matter is, if you take all of the Manuscripts we have access to today and compare them to the KJV and the NIV (at least the 1984) you will find the NIV to be closer to representing the Original than the KJV. I think the NASB is maybe even closer being more of a Formal equivalence than Dynamic.

But what is ironic in the above debate is that Zugzwangs states that he prefers the NASB, which agrees more closely to the NIV is those 40 something thousand verses and chapters that are "reportedly". If you take all of the newer versions and compare them to versions that didn't have the newly found Manuscripts and consequently more modern textual-criticism; it becomes more clear that the difference is the amount of information available at the time of translation. NOT ideology.

Like, the "Blood of Christ" is only mentioned 6 times in the KJV. It is mentioned 4 times in the NIV, with several other occasions where Christ and the Blood are mentioned together. So if the NIV translators were trying to remove the Blood of Christ (or the Spirit as people mention in other debates) why did they put it in other places? The answer is if you go back and compare all the Manuscripts we have available to us today, not all of them have the "Blood of Christ" in those 2 or 3 verses. And looking at which ones were likely written first or which ones agree more often, it becomes more likely that a Scribe erroneously added it to One Script supposing it had been accidentally left out. But God, in His Sovereignty, has given us enough resources to accurately discern the truth. It is not something was taken away, but that something was added to. But in either case, neither has changed the Blood of Christ! The message is the same throughout.

Jesus told the Pharisees "Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." Matthew 23:24

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I absolutely detest the newest NIV translation... it actually brings a check to my Spirit. But the NIV84 is quite pleasant to me and I thoroughly enjoy my Hebrew-Greek Key Word NIV84 Study Bible along with my NIV84 Thompson Chain Reference.

As for "taking verses out" of scripture they did no such thing. The original manuscripts had no such chapters or verses. In fact those are relatively new to the Bible and useful only for reference purposes. As others have pointed out, to say a modern translation has removed verses makes the KJV the standard and such a person liable to the label of KJO.

If someone is KJO, God bless em but don't for a second push that nonsense off on others.

 

[KAndrew]

The official archived version of NIV 1984 is available here: https://public.share.wheaton.edu/sites/Library/NIV/Forms/AllItems.aspx
It is searchable by phrase or browse by book in PDF form.
(There's also still a "rogue" site out there with this version: David's Bible Megasite (NIV1984 VERSION) ... at least at the moment.)

I like the newer NIV, but as we have copies of the 1984 version in our church pews, that's the version I want to display on a powerpoint when scripture is being read from that version.

Hi all,

Digging up an old thread …

I've just registered for the sole purpose of letting all who may be interested know that the Wheaton College site referred to above has been moved. I think that it might have been moved just after that post was made, too, as the reference I found on www.wheaton.edu was also dated July 2016!

Anyhow, the 1984 NIV is still available publically on Google drives at this address:
NIV 1984

BryanLL, I, too, prefer the 2011 NIV, but we have the 1984 edition of the NIV in our church which we were given to replace our very old RSVs about 5 or 6 years ago. We certainly cannot afford to replace the 1984 editions yet.
I looked at that www.biblemegasite.com - my eyes hurt after a couple of minutes and I had to leave. But I do think that the 1984 edition was still there.

Blessings all,
Andrew