Should the Bible say "Lucifer" or "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12? A Plain, Straightforward Bible Treatment of "LUCIFER" in Isaiah 14:12.

Logos1560 said:

The 1611 KJV is "God's Holy Bible"

Click to expand...

What about why the ‘New King James Version’ in 1 Corinthians 1:18, says;

“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

when the New World Translation, in 1 Corinthians 1:18, says;

“For the speech about the torture stake is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is God’s power”?

Alan Dale Gross said:

What about why the ‘New King James Version’ in 1 Corinthians 1:18, says;

“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

when the New World Translation, in 1 Corinthians 1:18, says;

“For the speech about the torture stake is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is God’s power”?

Click to expand...

This diversion concerning 1 Corinthians 1:18 is not the subject of this thread concerning Isaiah 14:12.

Your post seems to depend upon the unsound use of fallacies such as the fallacy of guilt by association and upon use of divers measures [an abomination to the LORD (Proverbs 20:10)]. The NKJV translators did not consult nor use the New World Translation in their translation decisions so this post in effect bear false witness against them.

By use of the fallacy of guilt by association, the KJV would look bad with its renderings borrowed from or influenced by the Greek Septuagint, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, and the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament translated from an edition of Jerome's Latin Vulgate.

Your post ignores and avoids the actual Greek tense of the verb being translated from the Textus Receptus in the NKJV.

Alan Dale Gross said:

Then, can you explain why the ‘New King James Version’ in Acts 3:26, says;

“To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus,
sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

when the New World Translation, in Acts 3:26, says;

“God, after raising up his Servant, sent him to you first+ to bless you

by turning each one of you away from your wicked deeds”?

Click to expand...

This misleading diversion concerning Acts 3:26 is not the subject of this thread concerning Isaiah 14:12.

Your post seems to depend upon the unsound use of fallacies such as the fallacy of guilt by association and upon use of divers measures [an abomination to the LORD (Proverbs 20:10)]. The NKJV translators did not consult nor use the New World Translation in their translation decisions so this post in effect bear false witness against them. To accuse the NKJV of copying the Jehovah Witnesses' Version when the NKJV translators did not copy it or even consult it is slanderous.

This same Greek word found at Acts 3:26, Acts 4:27 and 30 was also used of Jesus at Matthew 12:18a where it was translated "servant" in the KJV. However, it was translated "child" in Wycliffe's, 1534 Tyndale's, Matthew's, Great, and Bishops' Bibles and as "son" in 1526 Tyndale's. Why is this difference important in Acts 3:26 and in Acts 4:27 and 30 but unimportant in Matthew 12:18?

The Greek word pais in these verses was used for both child or servant with the meaning determined by the context. Greek has a different word for "son"--huios.

The KJV translated this word pais as "servant" 10 times, "child" 7 times, and "son" 3 times.

James D. Price explained that the real reason for this choice of rendering in the book of Acts in the NKJV is that the translators thought that in this context Peter was alluding to Isaiah 52:13, which identifies Christ as the Servant of the LORD (False Witness of G. A. Riplinger's Death Certificate for the NKJV, p. 25).

Do KJV-only advocates reject and condemn what the KJV itself states at Isaiah 52:13 and at Matthew 12:18?

How do KJV-only advocates rationalize or excuse in their minds the improper, bogus attempt to associate the word of God in present standard English in the NKJV with the New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses?

That attempt is wrong and unscriptural.