Are you not satisfied with .....?

[Mexdeaf]

I do not talk about the CT. I talked about the TR where the NKJV left. All TR and CT agree on John 10:6 where the NKJV translators did not translate from the Greek to English. -- The word for word translation is the problem here !!!

Again you try argue two different things. EVERY example you give is different word order, not different meaning or missing words or "not" word for woird.


Luke 16:14 KJV
And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

Luke 16:14 NKJV
Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him.

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

John 10:6 NKJV
Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

There no difference except to you, because you miss the meaning in English. It is same meaning either way. NKJV=KJV, no different.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Again you try argue two different things. EVERY example you give is different word order, not different meaning or missing words or "not" word for woird.


Luke 16:14 KJV
And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

Luke 16:14 NKJV
Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him.

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

John 10:6 NKJV
Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

There no difference except to you, because you miss the meaning in English. It is same meaning either way. NKJV=KJV, no different.

Thank you for taking the time to respond in print ASL - it is much more effective than any of us using English.

 

[jbh28]

I do not talk about the CT. I talked about the TR where the NKJV left. All TR and CT agree on John 10:6 where the NKJV translators did not translate from the Greek to English. -- The word for word translation is the problem here !!!

That's translational not textual by your own admission. The KJV doesn't do "word for word" in every place. That's fine.

Again, please show us a place where the NKJV deviated from using the TR and went with the CT or MT.

 

[Askjo]

Again you try argue two different things. EVERY example you give is different word order, not different meaning or missing words or "not" word for woird.

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

John 10:6 NKJV
Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

There no difference except to you, because you miss the meaning in English. It is same meaning either way. NKJV=KJV, no different.

Let's examine your statement and my statement on John 10:6.

TR John 10:6
ταυτην την παροιμιαν ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους εκεινοι δε ουκ εγνωσαν τινα ην α ελαλει αυτοις

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

The Greek text showed 2 same words: αυτοις

The KJV has them, but the NKJV has ONE. Where is other one in the NKJV???? It MISSED!!!!

 

[jbh28]

Let's examine your statement and my statement on John 10:6.

TR John 10:6
ταυτην την παροιμιαν ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους εκεινοι δε ουκ εγνωσαν τινα ην α ελαλει αυτοις

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

The Greek text showed 2 same words: αυτοις

The KJV has them, but the NKJV has ONE. Where is other one in the NKJV???? It MISSED!!!!

This is not a textual variant. Having "unto them" twice isn't necessary in English. You are not understanding what is being asked. This is translational. You must not be familiar with how translations work, but that's fine. You need to find a place where the NKJV deviated from the TR and went with a CT or MT reading. This so far you have not been able to do nor has any kjvo ever been able to do. Yet, you guys claim 1200 (800 for you) places where the nkjv did this.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Let's examine your statement and my statement on John 10:6.

TR John 10:6
ταυτην την παροιμιαν ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους εκεινοι δε ουκ εγνωσαν τινα ην α ελαλει αυτοις

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

The Greek text showed 2 same words: αυτοις

The KJV has them, but the NKJV has ONE. Where is other one in the NKJV???? It MISSED!!!!

Nothing miss. It same thing Greek→English or English→ASL.

In English perfect we say: "Jesus talked to the men but they did not understand the things he said to them."

In ASL we say (sign): Jesus talk men, men not understand what he say.

Or could sign: Jesus talk men. Men nothing understand what Jesus say.

No difference. Message same. Nothing missing. It is good translation. Not have to be every word same, or same number of words. Message is important, not count words.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

John 10:6 KJV
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them

John 10:6 NKJV
Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them.

As a point of interest, the reason that the NKJV is so different here is that the word which the KJV translates 'parable' is paroimia. Every other instance of 'parable' in the NT is parabole. The NKJV is not wrong therefore to use a different word in its translation.

Having said that, I don't think Askjo's point is wholly without merit, although it's got nothing to do with the texts (the TR and the CT are identical at this point). IMO translators should not omit words without good reason.

Steve

 

[Mexdeaf]

As a point of interest, the reason that the NKJV is so different here is that the word which the KJV translates 'parable' is paroimia. Every other instance of 'parable' in the NT is parabole. The NKJV is not wrong therefore to use a different word in its translation.

Having said that, I don't think Askjo's point is wholly without merit, although it's got nothing to do with the texts (the TR and the CT are identical at this point). IMO translators should not omit words without good reason.

Steve

FTR, those are not the words Askjo was referring to.

Your second paragraph leads me to ask- what would YOU consider "good reason" for omitting words? Where would you draw the line? The KJV translators also did it- doesn't make it "right", I know- but what would your requirements be?

 

[franklinmonroe]

Acts 27:14

TR
μετ ου πολυ δε εβαλεν κατ αυτης ανεμος τυφωνικος ο καλουμενος ευροκλυδων

KJV
But not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind, called Euroclydon. ...

1. Askjo, where is kat (against) in Matthew 16:18?

TR
κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς

KJV
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
____________________

2. And where is kat autes in Acts 4:14?

TR
τόν δὲ ἄνθρωπον βλέποντες σὺν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶτα τὸν τεθεραπευμένον οὐδὲν εἶχον ἀντειπεῖν

KJV
And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
____________________

Did the KJV depart from the TR? Or, is it possible that there is more than one way to translate "against it" into English from Greek?

 

[Askjo]

1. Askjo, where is kat (against) in Matthew 16:18?

Yes, it is. See below:

TR
κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς

KJV
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
____________________

TR Matthew 16:18
κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς

Did you miss it?

2. And where is kat autes in Acts 4:14?

TR
τόν δὲ ἄνθρωπον βλέποντες σὺν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶτα τὸν τεθεραπευμένον οὐδὲν εἶχον ἀντειπεῖν

KJV
And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.

TR Acts 4:14
τόν δὲἄνθρωπον βλέποντες σὺν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶτα τὸν τεθεραπευμένον οὐδὲν εἶχον ἀντειπεῖν

Anti = against. Example: Antichrist = Against Christ.

No plm with the KJV.

 

[franklinmonroe]

Very good! So you (Askjo) agree that there is more than one way to translate "against it" into English from Greek. But you are not fair or consistent.

The compound word in Matthew has kat- combined with another word (which means "prevail") between "against" and "it". Literally the Greek order is "against-prevail it". But that is not the word order of the KJV.

In Acts 4:14 the word kat does not occur at all, yet you are OK with a completely different term to mean "against". The prefix antei- ("anti-" as you said can mean "against", but also "opposite") is prefixed to a verb meaning "to speak" which is between "anti-" and "it" (even though there really is no autos). Literally the Greek order is just "against-speak". There is no corresponding word for "it" in the Greek; it is assumed and provided by the translators for English. "It" probably should have been italicized by the KJV text.