KJV VS. NKJV

[SovereignGrace]

Mad

Cheer up!! The ESV is just under the Message, Amplified, BBE, ISV and NLT. But it is just a cut above the NLT. But just barely. Alien Whistling DevilishNinja Rolleyes Thumbsup X3 Inlove Geek Eek Biggrin Sneaky Speechless Roflmao Cool Thumbsup Biggrin Sleep Speechless Barefoot

 

[Internet Theologian]

Cheer up!! The ESV is just under the Message, Amplified, BBE, ISV and NLT. But it is just a cut above the NLT. But just barely. Alien Whistling DevilishNinja Rolleyes Thumbsup X3 Inlove Geek Eek Biggrin Sneaky Speechless Roflmao Cool Thumbsup Biggrin Sleep Speechless Barefoot

Rolleyes

 

[SovereignGrace]

Hey, I said it is above the NLT. That's a good thing. Right? Or riiiiiight?

Ducking for cover now.

 

[annsni]

The NKJV is a great Bible for those who prefer the KJV but need something that speaks a little more modern English than the KJV. It holds the familiarity of the KJV wording but without all of the thees and thous.

 

[McCree79]

Two reformed guys who like the NIV? What's this world coming to?!?!?!?

Pretty sure there is a Latin Manuscript that speaks of this being a sign to come right before the parousia. Right before the "man of lawlessness" I believe.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

 

[McCree79]

Back to OP. The NKJV is a great update to KJV. I use the NKJV frequently in text comparisons. It is also the translation of the Bibles I gave out for Christmas to family members. It has worked it's way up into one of my favorite 3 translations.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

 

[McCree79]

Cheer up!! The ESV is just under the Message, Amplified, BBE, ISV and NLT. But it is just a cut above the NLT. But just barely.[emoji14]Alien Whistling DevilishNinja Rolleyes Thumbsup X3 Inlove Geek Eek Biggrin Sneaky Speechless Roflmao Cool Thumbsup Biggrin Sleep Speechless Barefoot

....I thought you left....
Hahaha


Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

 

[TCassidy]

The NKJV is a great Bible for those who prefer the KJV but need something that speaks a little more modern English than the KJV. It holds the familiarity of the KJV wording but without all of the thees and thous.

The lack of the "thees" and "thous" is actually a weekness. Greek pronouns identify their case and number (Nominative, Objective and Singular or Plural) and the "thees" and "thous" carried that additional information over into English which the generic "you" fails to do.

What it is important to remember is that the "thees" and "thous" were no longer in common use in England between 1604 and 1611, the time of the Millenary Petition and the publication of the KJV of 1611. That can be seen by reading "To The Reader" from the original 1611 edition. With the exception of when the Geneva Bible is quoted there is nary a "thee" or a "thou" to be seen. They were carried over from Middle English (1100-1500) for the purpose of identifying the case and number of the pronouns. (Simply put if the pronoun starts with a "t" it is singular (thou, thee, thy, thine) and if it starts with a "y" it is plural (ye, you, your and yours). (As to case, singular nominative is "thou" and singular objective is "thee." Plural nominative is "ye" and plural objective is "you." "Thy" and "Thine" are singular possessive and "your" and "yours" are plural possessive.)

Of course, being in Texas I have the advantage. You seen, Texican (the English spoken in Texas) provides that information. We say "You" "You all" (or "Y'all") and "all You all" (or "all y'all").

 

[TCassidy]

Still waiting for beameup to answer

Westcott & Hort "contaminated" the NKJV

How? It is based on the same Greek text as the KJV.

 

[evangelist6589]

Two reformed guys who like the NIV? What's this world coming to?!?!?!?

Plenty of Calvinist use the NIV.

 

[Jerome]

That's exactly where its origins lie:

September 22, 2015 Calvin Seminary Celebrates 50th Anniversary of NIV Commissioning

Right from the start, the Christian Reformed Church and scholars from Calvin Theological Seminary have played a key role in creating — and continuing to work on — the New International Version of the Bible

"The NIV arose out of the CRC and the CRC has been deeply involved in working on it," says Williams, secretary of the committee that meets every year to consider updates to the NIV.

 

[Deacon]

The lack of the "thees" and "thous" is actually a weekness. Greek pronouns identify their case and number (Nominative, Objective and Singular or Plural) and the "thees" and "thous" carried that additional information over into English which the generic "you" fails to do.

What it is important to remember is that the "thees" and "thous" were no longer in common use in England between 1604 and 1611, the time of the Millenary Petition and the publication of the KJV of 1611. That can be seen by reading "To The Reader" from the original 1611 edition. With the exception of when the Geneva Bible is quoted there is nary a "thee" or a "thou" to be seen. They were carried over from Middle English (1100-1500) for the purpose of identifying the case and number of the pronouns. (Simply put if the pronoun starts with a "t" it is singular (thou, thee, thy, thine) and if it starts with a "y" it is plural (ye, you, your and yours). (As to case, singular nominative is "thou" and singular objective is "thee." Plural nominative is "ye" and plural objective is "you." "Thy" and "Thine" are singular possessive and "your" and "yours" are plural possessive.)

Of course, being in Texas I have the advantage. You seen, Texican (the English spoken in Texas) provides that information. We say "You" "You all" (or "Y'all") and "all You all" (or "all y'all").

As another alternative the KJV you might try the Y'all Version [LINK], The second person plural is clearly distinguished from the second person singular. You can even choose your dialect. Seems to be missing the simple Philadelphia, "you'se" (pronounced "use") for "ya'll".

Rob

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I don't see the 'Y'all version as a massive seller in the U.K. Those who possess the excellent N.T. commentaries by William Hendricksen will recall that he expressed the plural by spacing it out, eg. 'y o u' and 'y o u r .'

I think that's a pretty good idea (except for reading aloud), and I reckon a new edition of the NKJV should include it.

 

[Van]

Great topic, to bad many posts address other topics, like the NIV and the ESV. The problem with the NKJV is that it is based on the TR and contains all (or most) of the conjectural emendations found in the TR. OTOH, it often says the same thing as the NASB, but says it better. When using it (the NKJV) for study or presentation prep, one step should be to compare the passage under study with the WEB. Most, if not all, the egregious corruptions will stand out as differences. If the passage is essentially the same, sail forward with confidence your source is reliable.

 

[Jkdbuck76]

Brother Van, can you show me an example of an egregious corruption please?

Sent from my SM-T230 using Tapatalk

 

[Jkdbuck76]

I'm serious. It was a sincere request.

Sent from my SM-T230 using Tapatalk

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

My understanding is that for the Old Testament the NKJV used a corrupted Hebrew Text.

 

[SovereignGrace]

My understanding is that for the Old Testament the NKJV used a corrupted Hebrew Text.

Where did you find this info my Brother?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Where did you find this info my Brother?

I believe in an introduction of a NKJV they say they used Biblia Sturgessia (not sure if that spelling is correct), and that they also consulted the Septuagint. I do not consider those texts to be accurate.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I believe in an introduction of a NKJV they say they used Biblia Sturgessia (not sure if that spelling is correct), and that they also consulted the Septuagint. I do not consider those texts to be accurate.

Not being snarky, I am not a big fan of the NKJV at all, but what criteria does one use to show text's criteria accurate and others not? What causes you to not consider those texts inaccurate, iow?