• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is it okay to use the NKJV?

G

Guido

Active Member
Many modern versions of the Bible, such as the NIV, the ESV, the NLT, etc, detract from the proper doctrines of scripture, as they are translated from tainted manuscripts, and as in many places, where proper doctrine is found in the texts from which those versions are translated, they are translated wrong.

But is it okay to use the NKJV, based on the majority texts, which faithalone.org claim is the Word of God, rather than the received text? On that site, they say that, although it is not as smooth as the KJV, it is more accurate than the KJV.

I apologize for not planning this post out before writing it.
 
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
KJB1611reader said:
First, look at the websites against the nkjv like Will Kenny's. There is many places that the nkjv is not same as kjb.
Click to expand...
Will Kinney is not a reliable source. His unproven accusations against the NKJV involve the use of divers measures [an abomination to the LORD] as he does not apply the same exact measures/standards to the process of the making of the KJV as he inconsistently and thus unjustly tries to apply to the NKJV. KJV-only advocates have a wrong doctrine concerning Bible translations.

Of course, the NKJV is not the same as the KJV since it is a revision of the KJV. The KJV is not the same as the Bishops' Bible of which it is officially a revision. The NKJV is both a genuine revision and a translation just as the KJV is both a genuine revision and a translation.

There are the same type differences between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV as there are between the KJV and the NKJV. There are some even greater and more significant differences between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV than there are between the KJV and the NKJV.
 
G

Guido

Active Member
KJB1611reader said:
What is the Gospel according to them and please note, someone can have right gospel (but have wrong doctrines on translation.)
Click to expand...

Well, faithalone.org acknowledges that Christ died on the cross, suffering in our place for our sins, that he was buried, and that he third day He rose again. They say that when they present the gospel, they present this information, although one need not believe this information to attain salvation. What they call the saving message is that whoever believes in Jesus has eternal life. I think what they say is that, if you are persuaded of this, that if you believe in Jesus, you have eternal life, then you have eternal life, and are saved.
 
JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Guido said:
Many modern versions of the Bible, such as the NIV, the ESV, the NLT, etc, detract from the proper doctrines of scripture, as they are translated from tainted manuscripts, and as in many places, where proper doctrine is found in the texts from which those versions are translated, they are translated wrong.

But is it okay to use the NKJV, based on the majority texts, which faithalone.org claim is the Word of God, rather than the received text? On that site, they say that, although it is not as smooth as the KJV, it is more accurate than the KJV.

I apologize for not planning this post out before writing it.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course it is ok to use the NKJV.

And yes, the NKJV is more accurate than the KJV.

You are right, however, that this accuracy is at the cost of style.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
When teaching the Apostle Paul's journey to Rome in a college course on Acts, I "thought" I understood the clear English of the AV1611.
"And after three months we departed in a ship of Alexandria, which had wintered in the isle, whose sign was Castor and Pollux. And landing at Syracuse, we tarried there three days. And from thence we fetched a compass and came to Rhegium: and after one day the south wind blew, and we came the next day to Puteoli". I laid out the geography on a map for the class and even joked that Paul FINALLY would get to Rome - men don't ask directions, etc etc

They had been through storm and shipwreck and now trying to get to Rome. They needed directions and got a compass in Syracuse so they could correctly to the right heading to reach Italy. I never doubted it. That's what the King James said.

I got a preview copy from Thomas Nelson Company of the NKJV New Testament before market. I read it and appreciated the modernization of the wording. THEN I got embarrassed in Acts 28 when the NKJV correctly updated that they had circled around the island because of wind directions. Legitimate to use "compass" as in a circle (remember Geometry class?) but the archaic phrasing to "fetch (get) a compass (navigational tool that didn't exist in 61 CE" had led me to the wrong conclusion.

The NKJV uses poor Byzantine/Eastern Orthodox Greek copies of copies of copies that are NOT my choice but I still recommend the NKJV for more up-to-date reading. USE IT. READ IT. You will be blessed.
 
J

JD731

Well-Known Member
37818 said:
NKJV is effectively the best modern English translation. Unfortunately has some problems in common with both the KJB and other modern transitions.
Click to expand...
If you know this, why not correct one or the other or both. I have never understood that great minds say they know there are problems and they know where they are and yet never fix them.

The first recorded lie came from a translator and the hearers were held accountable for believing it.

I am troubled that you men conspire together to present such a weak and pathetic god as if he is the true God of the Bible who has invested all that he had, his own son, in our salvation, and yet cannot give an accurate record of him and is still trying after nearly 2000 years. Is he the God who admonished us all to speak the same things lest there be divisions and offenses when he comes.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
JD731 said:
If you know this, why not correct one or the other or both. I have never understood that great minds say they know there are problems and they know where they are and yet never fix them.
Click to expand...
Most of us here will not use the AV or the NKJV. Problems with language evolution and with biased/slanted word choices of the Anglican and Geneva crowds are evident. Remember God did NOT reach down in the past few hundred years and re-inspire new language. Translation into ANY receptor language is slow and painstaking to take HIS God-breathed words in Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek into ANY tongue.

God has supernaturally preserved every word. The problem, of course, are the minor errors of pious additions or deletions or simple man-made errors of scribes. We have wonderful translations. Don't you think of attacking US because there are small differences in this script from that script (there are 5500). God's Words have not been lost.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
JD731 said:
If you know this, why not correct one or the other or both.
Click to expand...
The answer is believed to be known.

What is established, is for the Greek NT.

The Greek text common between known variants, are the same.Greek text.
It is a Byzantine Priority text. There is strong evidence it is the Greek Family 35.
 
KJB1611reader

KJB1611reader

Active Member
Guido said:
Well, faithalone.org acknowledges that Christ died on the cross, suffering in our place for our sins, that he was buried, and that he third day He rose again. They say that when they present the gospel, they present this information, although one need not believe this information to attain salvation. What they call the saving message is that whoever believes in Jesus has eternal life. I think what they say is that, if you are persuaded of this, that if you believe in Jesus, you have eternal life, then you have eternal life, and are saved.
Click to expand...
Those are freegrace people like GES, avoid them please. Also, won't find anyone here barely who will give answer on NKJV.
 
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
KJB1611reader said:
Its not misleading, the nkjv did change and remove stuff.
Click to expand...
The accusations against the NKJV are misleading and unjust when different measures/standards are applied to the making of the NKJV than are applied to the making of the KJV.

The KJV did change and remove stuff that is found in the Bishops' Bible of which it is a revision so are you suggesting that makes the KJV wrong? If not, you show that you are using different measures/standards for the KJV than for the NKJV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top