Then came the part that got me riled up. Before I point out the problems I found with his presentation, let me make it absolutely clear that I am not a huge fan of the NIV Bible. I use it from time to time, and I realize it is a very popular version, but it's not one of my favorites. Still, I think if you're going to criticize the NIV, do it fairly. Instead, just before the 10:00 mark, the video makes the claim that the NIV weakens the case for the virgin birth. Huh? He then talks briefly about the many words that the NIV has "removed" from the text, presumably (he says) to make the translation easier to read. And the following list of "deleted verses" pops up on the screen:
I complained about this misrepresentation of the NIV in the comment section of the YouTube video. I received a very polite response: "Thanks for your comment! This video covers the question 'Why Are There So Many Bible Translations?'... it is not an in-depth and critical study of the merits/faults of the NIV. We have a planned video that specifically addresses the NIV coming (Lord Willing) in the future. Austin understands modern textual criticism just fine - it's simply not in the scope of this particular video." While I appreciate the politeness of the response, it doesn't address the problem I had with the video. And please understand, I'm not even a big fan of the NIV; I use it from time to time, but it's far from being my favorite translation. However, I think that if you're going to criticize the NIV (or any translation), it should be done fairly.