I just found a site that is against the use of NIV Bible and if you search on the site there are more against the NIV version.
Well, I use the NIV, and I truly didn't like hearing such bad things of the NIV. I use the NIV version and I studied a lot from it. I only use it for the New Testament. I would like your opinion; Is the NIV version a wrong version to use, and is the King James version the best version? Which type do you use? Thanks a lot!
You'll find just about anything on the Internet and the site you referenced is one of the nuttier ones put out by the King James Only crowd. Their basic belief is that if a Bible doesn't read like the King James, then it is wrong. Of course, if a version read like the King James, then it would be the King James, but that doesn't seem to enter people's heads.
There is no perfect translation. But your preference for a particular translation isn't an accurate measure of how good a translation is. The King James isn't a bad translation, but it uses English that is hundreds of years old and the meaning of words have changed. I like the New International Version for its readability, but it also contains its flaws. Whichever version you use, you need to be aware of its weak points. Please see The New International Version of details of some of its problems.
I typically switch between the New King James Version and the New American Standard Bible because I am more interested is accuracy in translation than in ease of reading. That is not to say these versions are without problems. For a really detailed description of the good and bad points in a number of translations, see: Which Translation Should I Use?
Thanks a lot. It's because on that site they say that the company that gives out the NIV translation also does the Satanic Bible and that they changed, in Isaiah, Lucifer for "morning star" and that they are calling Jesus Lucifer. So thanks a lot and as soon as I can I'll try getting one of those translations.
The meaning of the name Lucifer is "morning star" or "star of the morning." You can find it in any Hebrew dictionary. To acknowledge what a name means is not attributing evil to Jesus. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus is called the bright and morning star, not because of Isaiah 14:12 (a discussion of the king of Babylon -- see Isaiah 14:4), but because of the prophecy in Numbers 24:17, "I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; a Star shall come out of Jacob; a Scepter shall rise out of Israel, and batter the brow of Moab, and destroy all the sons of tumult."
Zondervan is the publisher of the New International Version starting in 1973. In 1988 they were bought by HaperCollins Publishers. HaperCollins in turn is owned by a company called NewsCorp. In 1999 NewsCorp bought Avon Books and merged it into their HarperCollins company. Avon Books tends to publish romance novels, but back in 1976 it published the Satanic Bible written by the founder of the Church of Satan. Thus, Zondervan is being accused of publishing the Satanic Bible, not because it actually publishes it, but because its parent holding company also owns another company that published this book. It would be similar to being accused of stealing because you happen to work in the same office where a former thief now works.