Why were certain verses removed from the NIV Bible?

Historical Background of Bible Translation

Bible translation has always been an endeavor that aims to render the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts accurately into common languages. Over centuries, translators have accessed an ever-growing collection of ancient manuscripts, including papyri, uncials (all-capital Greek manuscripts), minuscules (later Greek manuscripts in cursive), and early translations (like the Latin Vulgate and Syriac versions). The discovery of key manuscripts such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (both from the fourth century), along with manuscripts from the Alexandrian tradition, has prompted ongoing evaluation by textual scholars regarding which words and verses were most likely contained in the earliest copies.

Why Some Verses Appear “Removed”

The NIV (New International Version), first published in 1978, was produced by a broad group of evangelical scholars who utilized the critical text of the Greek New Testament. They compared thousands of manuscripts, weighing evidence to determine the most historically reliable text. Certain verses that appear in older English translations (often following the Textus Receptus tradition) do not appear in the earliest known Greek manuscripts. When the NIV translators did not find these verses in older, more reliable textual witnesses, they placed them in footnotes or removed them from the main text to reflect the evidence that they might have been later additions.

Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text

Early editions of the Greek New Testament—collectively known as the Textus Receptus—were compiled in the 16th century by scholar-printers such as Erasmus. This became the basis for translations like the King James Version (KJV) in 1611. Over time, however, earlier manuscripts were discovered, some dating centuries closer to the original writings. Scholars who edited critical texts (like the Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament) highlighted differences from the Textus Receptus. Thus, the NIV—following more comprehensive textual evidence—occasionally differs from translations based on the later-text-tradition, which includes verses that might have been marginal notes or clarifications added over time.

Manuscript Evidence and Notable Examples

1. Matthew 17:21:

Many modern translations place this verse in a footnote because it is absent from earlier significant manuscripts, such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. The content of the verse, “But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting” (Matthew 17:21), is similar to Mark 9:29. Scholars theorize it may have been copied from Mark’s Gospel into some manuscripts of Matthew.

2. Matthew 18:11:

This verse is rendered in some traditional translations as “For the Son of Man came to save the lost.” Modern translations often omit or footnote it because it is missing in a majority of the oldest Greek manuscripts of Matthew’s Gospel.

3. Mark 9:44 and Mark 9:46:

Both verses repeat the phrase “where ‘their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.’” These lines appear within Mark 9 in certain manuscripts, but the repeated verses are absent in the earliest and more reliable copies, and so the NIV either brackets them or includes them in footnotes.

4. Luke 17:36:

The verse—“Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left”—mirrors Matthew 24:40 but does not appear consistently across older Luke manuscripts. Modern translations often note or omit it for this reason.

5. John 5:4:

This verse, which describes an angel stirring the waters of the Pool of Bethesda, does not appear in the earliest manuscripts like P66 or Codex Vaticanus. Because the mention of the angel clarifies the pool’s healing legend, many scribes may have added it as a marginal explanation that then became copied into the text. The NIV includes this verse in a footnote or separates it with brackets.

Methodology Behind Bracketing or Footnoting

Translators of the NIV follow principles of textual criticism, which include evaluating the date of a manuscript, the geographical spread of various readings, and the consistency of repairs or corrections by scribes. While some verses in older translations come from manuscripts of the Byzantine text tradition (dating somewhat later), the NIV committees focused on the earliest possible witnesses to reconstruct the original wording.

This process does not arise from skepticism about Scripture’s authority. Instead, it serves to uphold accurate transmission of the Word, ensuring that readers have the most authentic form of the text. When a verse is omitted or bracketed, the NIV often includes a note in the margin or footnote, indicating that some manuscripts include the text.

Doctrinal Implications

Although some verses appear missing at a glance, the doctrines of Scripture remain intact. Passages about the Trinity, the deity of Christ, salvation by grace, and the resurrection are strongly attested in the earliest manuscripts (e.g., John 20:28; 1 Corinthians 15:3–8). Key theological truths are reinforced by multiple witnesses throughout the biblical text. Consequently, none of these differences affect core Christian doctrine or the essential message of the Gospel: “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son…” (John 3:16).

Consistency Across Modern Manuscript Discoveries

As more manuscripts have been unearthed (such as the Bodmer Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Dead Sea Scrolls for Old Testament confirmation), they repeatedly affirm the overall integrity of the biblical texts. These discoveries provide consistent evidence for Scripture’s reliable transmission over millennia. The fact that the vast majority of textual variants are minor—like spelling differences or phrase order—demonstrates a remarkable preservation of biblical content.

Answering Concerns about Omissions

1. “Hidden Agendas?”

Concern is sometimes raised that new translations deliberately remove verses to soften doctrinal truths. However, the nature of textual criticism refutes such accusations. The discussions among translation committees involve balancing the testimony of the widest range of manuscripts rather than seeking to eliminate doctrinal content.

2. “Weakening Scripture?”

Placing certain verses in footnotes or brackets highlights genuine manuscript uncertainty. Far from weakening Scripture, it demonstrates honesty and transparency. Readers can evaluate the evidence themselves, fostering deeper confidence in the Bible’s authenticity.

3. “Is the Earlier Text Always Better?”

While it is not a strict rule that older equals better, earlier copies are generally closer to the source and less likely to have added material. Comprehensive comparison remains key, guided by both the external weight of manuscript evidence and the internal consistency of readings.

Conclusion

The reason certain verses appear “removed” in the NIV is rooted in the deep study of ancient manuscripts to determine the original wording of each book of the Bible. When the earliest, most reliable textual witnesses lack a verse while later manuscripts include it, modern translations commonly identify those words with brackets, a footnote, or in some cases remove them from the main text. These conscientious decisions by translators do not cast doubt on the truth of Scripture. Rather, they illustrate the careful scholarship aimed at preserving and presenting the biblical text in its most authentic form. The overall testimony of Scripture remains unified, confirming “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).