• 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!

Perfect Transation/Copy

Status
Not open for further replies.

jbh28

Active Member
Hey, I am just telling you I have studied the subject for myself and reject the Wescott and Hort translations. In my mind a person would have to be crazy to accept translations by these two, but that is my own personal opinion.

But you still do not get it, I believe God preserved one inerrant translation because he promised to preserve his pure word. My faith is based on his promise, not scholarship.

But where was this "one inerrant translation" before the KJV? If it is preserved, we would have one then too. Or was the Bible not preserved before the KJV. You see, you cannot answer that because there wasn't one, yet the Bible was still preserved Just as God said. He NEVER said it would be in one translation.

Oh, and we don't use the Westcott and Hort text today. It is similar, but there are many differences. The NA27 and the USB4 are not just copies of the WH text.
 

TomVols

New Member
I'm sorry, but that is pure baloney. Modern scholars can't hold a candle to the translators of the KJV. That is fantastically absurd, do some study.
I love it when you posit your opinion as fact.

"Vanilla ice cream is the best...do some study" :laugh:

Winman, I forget....I know you reject any translation based on WH and the like. So you'd accept the NKJV since it's based on the mss underlying the KJV?
 

jbh28

Active Member
I love it when you posit your opinion as fact.

"Vanilla ice cream is the best...do some study" :laugh:

Winman, I forget....I know you reject any translation based on WH and the like. So you'd accept the NKJV since it's based on the mss underlying the KJV?

And just in case it gets mentioned, the NKJV is based on the TR. I have seen people (like Gail Riplinger) say there are 1200 differences but can't seem to name even one.

oh, chocolate chip cookie doe is the best....do some study :laugh:
 

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
Winman, I forget....I know you reject any translation based on WH and the like. So you'd accept the NKJV since it's based on the mss underlying the KJV?

This one throws me. I have asked over and over for one instance where the NKJV chooses an alternate rendering that the KJV does not choose. So far no one has pointed out a single instance.
 

Amy.G

New Member
This one throws me. I have asked over and over for one instance where the NKJV chooses an alternate rendering that the KJV does not choose. So far no one has pointed out a single instance.

KJV
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NKJV
Mat 7:14 Because narrow [is] the gate and difficult [is] the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.



KJV
2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

NKJV
2Cr 2:17 For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ. speak we in Christ.


There's more, but I have to go to church. :)
 

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator
Those are differences of translation, not of the underlying Greek text, which is the same.
 

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
KJV
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NKJV
Mat 7:14 Because narrow [is] the gate and difficult [is] the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.



KJV
2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

NKJV
2Cr 2:17 For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ. speak we in Christ.


There's more, but I have to go to church. :)

What rsr said. No one claimed the NKJV translated every word the same way that the KJV did, only which text did they choose. I am still looking for a time then the NKJV chose a critical text rendering over a TR rendering when the KJV did not do the same.
 

Baptist4life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
where the NKJV chooses an alternate rendering that the KJV does not choose.

KJV
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NKJV
Mat 7:14 Because narrow [is] the gate and difficult [is] the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.



KJV
2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

NKJV
2Cr 2:17 For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ. speak we in Christ.

That sure looks like an alternate rendering to me!

I think you're side stepping.
 

jbh28

Active Member
KJV
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NKJV
Mat 7:14 Because narrow [is] the gate and difficult [is] the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.



KJV
2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

NKJV
2Cr 2:17 For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ. speak we in Christ.


There's more, but I have to go to church. :)

Neither of these are textual differences. Both are translational differences. 2 Corinthians is better in the NKJV as the term means to peddle, typically in a negative connotation.

Matthew 7 passage, the term means "afflict, narrow, throng, suffer tribulation, trouble, difficult."

Neither passage you gave is different in the Greek.
 

jbh28

Active Member
That sure looks like an alternate rendering to me!

I think you're side stepping.

He was speaking of textual not translational differences. He was speaking of the rendering of the Greek text. Like TR vs CT. Obviously, there are differences between the KJV and the NKJV. But I have yet to see one place where the NKJV went away from the TR.
 

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
Okay - I guess I need to simplify my question. I assumed that we all understood that 'rendering' referred to the textual basis for translation, not the translation itself. Sorry about that.


Can anyone show me any case where the NKJV team chose to use the 'critical text' as the basis for translation instead of the TR where the KJV team did not do the same?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TomVols

New Member
Okay - I guess I need to simplify my question. I assumed that we all understood that 'rendering' referred to the textual basis for translation, not the translation itself. Sorry about that.


Can anyone show me any case where the NKJV team chose to use the 'critical text' as the basis for translation instead of the TR where the KJV team did not do the same?
No apology necessary. Seems like obfuscation is alive and well when people don't know or can't give answers.
 

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator
No sidestepping. There are some textual variants at Matthew 7:14, but (1) only dealing with a transition word or (2) omitting "gate," which hardly any MV follows.

On the second verse, that they are using the same underlying text is proved by the Geneva, which renders it as "making merchandise of the word of God."

Both Gill and Clarke agree that the Greek refers to those who would adulterate for gain. Thus both renderings make sense, although perhaps this is one of those occasions where brevity should give way to amplification to provide the entirety of the thought.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The following information is gleaned from Philip Comfort's New Testament Text And Translation Commentary.

The Nestle-Aland (26th and 27th editions) and The United Bible Societies' Greek New Tesament (3rd and 4th corrected editions) (NU)

Westcott and Hort,The New Testament in the Original Greek (WH)

Matthew 5:47b

The KJV sides with WH and NU : Don't the Gentiles do the same?

The NKV goes with a variant/TR : Don't the tax-collectors do the same?

Mark 3:19

WH NU :Judas Iscariot : all translations including the KJV and NKJ.

Variant/TR : Judas of Kerioth : no translations

Mark 3:22

Neither the KJV nor the NKJ go with the TR and NU. :Beelzebul
The NKJ goes along with Variant1/WH :Beezebul
In Variant 2 :The KJV NIV and NEB have :Beezebub

Mark 8:7

WH NU : having blessed them : KJV and NKJ

Variant 2/TR : having blessed :no translation

Luke 1:35

TR WH NU : the one being born: NKJ
Variant : the one being born of you : KJV

These examples will have to do for now. More later.
 

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
The following information is gleaned from Philip Comfort's New Testament Text And Translation Commentary.

The Nestle-Aland (26th and 27th editions) and The United Bible Societies' Greek New Tesament (3rd and 4th corrected editions) (NU)

Westcott and Hort,The New Testament in the Original Greek (WH)

Matthew 5:47b

The KJV sides with WH and NU : Don't the Gentiles do the same?

The NKV goes with a variant/TR : Don't the tax-collectors do the same?

Mark 3:19

WH NU :Judas Iscariot : all translations including the KJV and NKJ.

Variant/TR : Judas of Kerioth : no translations

Mark 3:22

Neither the KJV nor the NKJ go with the TR and NU. :Beelzebul
The NKJ goes along with Variant1/WH :Beezebul
In Variant 2 :The KJV NIV and NEB have :Beezebub

Mark 8:7

WH NU : having blessed them : KJV and NKJ

Variant 2/TR : having blessed :no translation

Luke 1:35

TR WH NU : the one being born: NKJ
Variant : the one being born of you : KJV

These examples will have to do for now. More later.

Thanks. As I thought I had read there are times when the KJV uses a variant that the NKJV uses the TR. I would be interested if there are any times when the NKJV is less true to the TR than the KJV.
 

jonathan.borland

Active Member
Matthew 5:47b

The KJV sides with WH and NU : Don't the Gentiles do the same?

The NKV goes with a variant/TR : Don't the tax-collectors do the same?

Your information appears to be wrong. The KJV I'm looking at has "publicans," which is simply another way of saying "tax-collectors." The KJV and NKJV seem to be parallel here.


Mark 3:22

Neither the KJV nor the NKJ go with the TR and NU. :Beelzebul
The NKJ goes along with Variant1/WH :Beezebul
In Variant 2 :The KJV NIV and NEB have :Beezebub

Again, it appears you either need to check your sources or check your spelling. Both the KJV I'm looking at and the NKJV have "Beelzebub," which is merely a transliteration of the Vulgate's "Beelzebub."


Luke 1:35

TR WH NU : the one being born: NKJ
Variant : the one being born of you : KJV

This is a legitimate example. The 1550 edition of Stephanus, the "textus receptus," the Byzantine consensus and most early Greek manuscripts do not have "of you," but the two words were included in one of the early great uncials ("C," Ephraemi rescriptus, ca. 400), the Complutensian Polyglot, Erasmus' edition, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th editions of Beza, etc., as well as in several versions and many early fathers. The NKJV went with Stephanus (and others), the KJV translators with Erasmus (and others).

Jonathan C. Borland
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Winman

Active Member
I love it when you posit your opinion as fact.

"Vanilla ice cream is the best...do some study" :laugh:

Winman, I forget....I know you reject any translation based on WH and the like. So you'd accept the NKJV since it's based on the mss underlying the KJV?

No, I do not like the NKJV regardless if it is based on the TR. It may be, but more often than not is translated like the MVs which I believe affects doctrine in many verses.

Matthew 7:14 is a good example:

KJV-

Matt 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NKJV-

Matt 7:14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

Being saved is not difficult, one must simply trust on Jesus for salvation. But it is narrow, a man can only come to the Father by Jesus Christ.

The NKJV is translated like many of the MVs and gives a different understanding than the KJV in this verse.
 

Mexdeaf

New Member
No, I do not like the NKJV regardless if it is based on the TR. It may be, but more often than not is translated like the MVs which I believe affects doctrine in many verses.

Being saved is not difficult, one must simply trust on Jesus for salvation. But it is narrow, a man can only come to the Father by Jesus Christ.

The NKJV is translated like many of the MVs and gives a different understanding than the KJV in this verse.

Purely subjective opinion.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Your information appears to be wrong. The KJV I'm looking at has "publicans," which is simply another way of saying "tax-collectors." The KJV and NKJV seem to be parallel here.

You are right.Comfort made an error there.And consequently I did also.



Again, it appears you either need to check your sources or check your spelling. Both the KJV I'm looking at and the NKJV have "Beelzebub," which is merely a transliteration of the Vulgate's "Beelzebub."

It was my faulty spelling. The KJV has Beelzebub for Mark 3:22. I didn't and don't have a copy of the NKJ for confirmation of that version.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top