Featured Fables or Fiction concerning editions of the KJV

I see what the revisions in the NKJV are really all about. My eyes are open to the truth. Your eyes seem to be closed since you have failed to correct your incorrect accusations against the NKJV after they were exposed as being not true.

The revisions include updating archaic language in the KJV, restoring some clearer or better renderings in the pre-1611 English Bibles, refining unclear or less accurate renderings in the KJV, correcting misleading or incorrect renderings in the KJV, revising some textual emendations followed in the KJV, etc.

KJV defender David Norris acknowledged that the NKJV can “be classed largely as a revision rather than a retranslation” (Big Picture, p. 367). KJV defender David Sorenson admitted that the NKJV’s N. T. “is translated from the Textus Receptus” (Touch Not, p. 240). David Sorenson also listed the NKJV as being “based upon the Received Text” (p. 10). Laurence Vance acknowledged that the NKJV’s “New Testament was based on the Received Text” (Brief History, p. 92).

KJV-only author Samuel Gipp acknowledged that the NKJV “is based on the correct Antiochian manuscripts” (Answer Book, p. 104).
Wilbur Pickering maintained that “the King James Version (AV) and the New King James Version (NKJV) reflect a form of the text based upon the many later MSS” (Identity of the NT Text II, p. 1; Identity of the NT Text IV, p. 2).
KJV-only author Jack McElroy admitted that the “NKJV is translated from the same Greek New Testament and virtually the same Hebrew Old Testament as the 1611 King James Bible” (Which Bible Would Jesus Use, p. 135).

Charles Surrett, who is biased toward the KJV, indicated that at least “72 times” the KJV’s underlying Greek New Testament text supported the NKJV’s renderings in the book of Romans over the KJV’s renderings (Certainty of the Words, p. 123).

 

I know what I am talking about. Perhaps you fail to understand what I clearly state or else you try to distort and misrepresent what I stated.

I did not claim that the word "edition" always means the same thing as "revision." The two terms edition and revision are sometimes used interchangeably and sometimes not.

The same exact edition can be reprinted in a different year. When a different edition is made, it often involves revising which would make it a revision. If someone edits an old edition, they are typically revising it, making a new different edition.