The KJV has been Preserved more Perfectly than Human Possibility.

[Alan Gross]

the few differences that KJV-only advocates claim to find between the KJV and the NKJV.

This is a list of the significate resulting changes made to the NKJV, compared to the KJV.

Each verse is explained at this link:
KJV Holy Bible Comparison with Modern Versions - GodResource

Genesis 2:18 – Help meet or comparable?
Genesis 12:7 - Thy seed or your descendants / offspring?
Genesis 13:15-16 - Thee or you? Thy seed or your descendants / offspring?
Genesis 22:17-18 - Thee or you? Seed or descendants? His or theirs?
Genesis 24:7 - Thy seed or your descendants / offspring?
Exodus 6:3 – Jehovah or Lord?
2 Kings 23:29 – Aid or Against?
Psalms 89:19 - Holy one or holy ones/people/godly ones?
Proverbs 11:16 – Strong or ruthless men?
Proverbs 16:1 - Preparations of the heart from the Lord or belong to man?
Proverbs 16:6 - Iniquity purged or atonement is provided?
Proverbs 16:10 - A divine sentence or divination?
Proverbs 18:8 – Wounds or tasty trifles?
Proverbs 18:24 - Shew himself friendly or come to ruin?
Proverbs 19:18 - Let not thy soul spare or set your heart on his destruction?
Proverbs 25:23 – North wind bring rain or driveth away rain?
Proverbs 29:7 - Regardeth not or does not understand?
Ecclesiastes 12:11 – Masters of assemblies or scholars?
Isaiah 38:10 – In the cutting off of my days or the prime of my life?
Hosea 11:12 - Judah ruleth with God and is faithful or Judah unruly against God and against the Holy One?
Zechariah 9:16-17 - God's goodness or its / their goodness?

Matthew 7:14 – strait is the gate and narrow OR difficult is the way?
Matthew 17:20-21 - Unbelief or little faith? Where is prayer and fasting?
Matthew 21:32 – Repent or relent?
Mark 10:24 - Is it Hard to go to Heaven or for those that trust in riches?
Luke 4:4 - Every word of god or bread alone?
Luke 9:55-56 - Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of?
Acts 3:26 - Son Jesus or servant?
Acts 8:9 - Bewitched or astonished?
Acts 12:4 - Easter or passover?
Acts 17:22 – Too superstitious or very religious?
Romans 1:18 – Hold or suppress the truth?
Romans 4:25 - For our justification or because of our justification?
Romans 11:30-32 – Unbelief or their disobedience?
Romans 13:1 - Higher powers or governing authorities? Ordained or established?
1 Corinthians 1:18 – Are we saved or being saved?
1 Corinthians 14:14 - unknown tongue or tongue?
2 Corinthians 2:15 – Are we saved or being saved?
2 Corinthians 2:17 – Do men corrupt or peddle the word the God?
2 Corinthians 4:2 – Dishonesty or shame?
Galatians 4:7 - Servant or slave? God through christ or God?
Galatians 5:12 - Cutoff or emasculate?
Ephesians 3:9 – World or ages? Who created all things?
Colossians 2:18 - Hath not seen or have seen?
Colossians 3:2 - Affection or mind?
1 Thessalonians 5:22 – Abstain from all appearance or every form of evil?
2 Thessalonians 2:2 – The day of Christ is at hand or has come?
1 Timothy 6:5 - Do corrupt minds believe that gain is godliness or that godliness is a means of gain?
2 Timothy 2:15 – Study or be diligent?
Titus 3:10 – Heretick or divisive man?
Hebrews 2:16 – Not the nature of angels or not give aid to angels?
Hebrews 3:16 – All rebelled or not all?
Hebrews 4:8 – Does Jesus or Joshua give us rest?
Hebrews 10:14 – Are sanctified or being sanctified?
1 Peter 1:22 - Obey through the Spirit or just obey?
1 John 5:13 – May believe or may continue to believe?
Revelation 6:17 - Who's day of wrath? Is come or has come?

 

[Logos1560]

"KJV O.T. HEBREW TEXT. There are two basic texts in existence in Hebrew, the false one, edited by Ben Asher, and the true one, edited by Ben Chayyim. ...The true text of Ben Chayyim on which our KJV is based is also available. It is called the Daniel Bomberg edition or the Second Great Rabbinic Bible (1524-25)."

Perhaps you are showing that you have been misinformed. The Ben Chayyim text actually is mostly the same as the Ben Asher text. The KJV does not follow 100% the Hebrew Masoretic text edited by ben Chayyim, which did not include three whole verses found in the KJV.

Concerning this second edition of the Hebrew Masoretic text edited by Ben Chayyim, Gergely Juhasz wrote: “For his edition, Bomberg relied on fourteenth and fifteenth-century manuscripts that mainly followed the Ben Asher text but also showed certain influences of the Ben Naphtali text” (Arblaster, Tyndale’s, p. 94). In an introductory article to a facsimile edition of The Leningrad Codex, Victor Lebedev wrote: “It is well known that the first editions of the Hebrew Bible were based on fourteenth- to fifteenth-century manuscripts reflecting a mixture of the Ben Asher and the Ben Naphtali traditions” (Freedman, p. xxv). Page Kelley maintained that “these manuscripts [used by ben Chayyim] represented a mixture of traditions, which were further mixed in ben Chayyim’s text (and Masorah)“ and that “the Second Rabbinic Bible is not viewed as a pure ben Asher text” (The Masorah, p. 25). Emanuel Tov asserted that “it has been demonstrated” that the second Rabbinic Bible “does not reflect any specific manuscript” (Textual Criticism, p. 46). Tov wrote: “No single source has been found from which the editors of the first two Rabbinic Bibles could have derived their biblical text” (p. 78). Bleddyn Roberts wrote: “The ben Chayim text does not follow any manuscript or authority in detail, and therefore shows an eclectic text. It has been shown that though a Spanish manuscript was the basis, the text frequently deviates from it, and the divergent readings reveal traces of ben Naphtali and both Ma’arbae (Western) and Madinhae (Eastern) readings” (Old Testament Text, p. 88). Roberts added: “The text of ben Chayim was substantially that of the ben Asher recension, but, based on young and sometimes corrupt manuscripts, it included occasional foreign matter that showed adherence to the ben Naphtali and other recensions” (pp. 90-91). In his foreword, Aron Dotan claimed: “Their desire to rely on Ben Asher’s text was never more than a pious wish, for the text was only known by hearsay. All the evidence about Ben Asher’s readings was second- or third-hand. It derived from masoretic remarks in biblical manuscripts, from the writings of the grammarians and Masoretes, and the lists of differences between Ben Asher and his opponent Moses ben David ben Naphtali” (Biblia, pp. viii-ix). Norman Gottwald maintained that “Ben Chayyim used Tiberian manuscripts but he worked eclectically, drawing now from one and now from another manuscript” (Hebrew Bible, p. 121).

Ernst Wurthwein suggested that the instances of Kethib-Qere [or Keri] in the traditional Hebrew text “number more than 1,300” (Text of O. T., p. 16). Benjamin Kennicott maintained that “Elias Levita reckons the marginal variations [in the Hebrew text] 848, and he asked: “has the Bomberg edition [of Ben Chaim] too many, in admitting 1171; or has the Plantin edition too few, in allowing but 793?“ (State, II, p. 226). Elias Levita as translated by Christian D. Ginsburg noted: “Being anxious to know the number of all the Kevis and Kethivs throughout the Scriptures, I counted them several times, and found them to be 848” (Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, p. 115).

In his introduction to the Second Rabbinic Bible, Jacob ben Chayyim as translated by Christian Ginsburg wrote: “When I examined these Masoretic books and mastered their contents, I found them in the utmost disorder and confusion, so much so that there was not a sentence to be found without a blunder, that is to say, the quotations from the Massorites are both incorrect and misplaced; since in those copies [of the Bible] in which the Massorah is written in the margin, it is not arranged according to the order of the verses contained in the page” (Chajim’s Introduction, p. 78). Chayyim wrote: “Seeing that the Massorah was too large to be printed entire in the margin, I have not repeated the Massoretic remark after it has been given once” (p. 81). Chayyim noted: “I was obliged to rearrange the Massorah magna, for it was impossible to print it in the margin of the Bible, for it is too large” (p. 82).

 

[Logos1560]

This is a list of the significate resulting changes made to the NKJV, compared to the KJV.

1 Thessalonians 5:22 – Abstain from all appearance or every form of evil?

You merely list examples copied from biased, unreliable KJV-only sources, and many of those misleading examples involve use of divers measures [double standards].

The 1557 Whittingham's New Testament, one of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision, translated 1 Thessalonians 5:22 as follows: "Abstain from all kind of evil." Condit suggested that Whittingham’s rendering at this verse was superior to the KJV’s rendering (History, pp. 239-240).

The 1602 Spanish Valera Bible as printed by the International Bible Association has the rendering "especie de mal" [species or kind of evil]. The 1543 Enzinas Spanish N. T. as reprinted by the Broken Arrow Baptist Church has the rendering "genero de mal" [kind or class of evil].

In his commentary on Thessalonians, Gordon Clark noted that the Greek noun [eidos] in this verse in theology "almost always means kind or species" (p. 69). Spiros Zodhiates wrote that this Greek noun in this verse referred to "the form of evil" (Complete Word Study Dictionary, p. 507). Concerning 1 Thessalonians 5:22, A. T. Robertson pointed out that "the papyri give several examples of eidos in the sense of class or kind and that idea suits best here" (Word Pictures, IV, p. 38). In his commentary on Thessalonians, William Hendriksen indicated that this verse means: "From every form (or kind, not appearance here) of evil hold off" (p. 140). Concerning "appearance," Marvin Vincent wrote: "As commonly explained, abstain from everything that even looks like evil. But the word signifies form or kind. Compare Luke 3:22; John 5:37. . . . It never has the sense of semblance. Moreover, it is impossible to abstain from everything that looks like evil" (Word Studies, IV, p. 51).

 

[Logos1560]

This is a list of the significate resulting changes made to the NKJV, compared to the KJV.

Acts 12:4 - Easter or passover?

Thanks for confirming my point that you do not apply the same measures/standards to the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision. The 1560 Geneva Bible has "the passover" at Acts 12:4 since that is a correct, accurate translation of the Greek word used there. This would be an example where the NKJV agrees with a better rendering in the 1560 Geneva Bible.

Comparing Scripture with Scripture, Luke, who was also the human writer of the book of Acts, clearly used the Greek word pascha to refer to either the entire period--the one day of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread or as an acceptable name for the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Luke wrote: “Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover” (Luke 22:1). Along with Luke 22:1, typical KJV-only statements concerning Acts 12:4 ignore Ezekiel 45:21 where the Passover is referred to as “a feast of seven days.” In Ezekiel 45:21, the name “Passover” was clearly used for or used to include the feast of Unleavened Bread, which is a feast of seven days. In Matthew 26:17, the name “Passover” was used for a time described as “the first day of the feast of unleavened bread.” After Jesus and his disciples had already observed the feast of Passover (Luke 22:14-15; John 13:1), the same Greek word was still used for a time when the feast of unleavened bread was in progress (John 18:28).

Furthermore, the immediate context of Acts 12:4 demonstrated that king Herod was aware that his earlier action of vexing certain of the church “pleased the Jews” (Acts 12:3). The context also revealed that Herod “proceeded further” to take another action that he thought would please the Jews. Would Herod be continuing to please the Jews if he supposedly waited to observe a pagan holiday or festival? Would the celebrations and practices associated with a pagan festival please or offend the Jews? Does the context actually maintain that Herod in proceeding further to take Peter would then do something contradictory to this action intended to please the Jews? It was actually Luke that used the Greek word pascha for the time for which Herod was waiting since this verse gives no indication that Herod was being directly quoted. The Bible verse or context does not directly say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha. “The people” of Acts 12:4 could be referring to or would be including the Jews mentioned in verse 3. In Acts 12:11, it refers to “the expectation of the people of the Jews.” Therefore according to the context, the Jews were clearly the people that Herod wanted to please again by his further action. Therefore, nothing in the verse and context proves that Herod could not have been waiting for the Jews to finish keeping their pascha so that he could bring Peter forth and please the Jews again. In other words, the context indicates that Herod did not want to risk displeasing the Jews by executing Peter during their Jewish pascha and may not indicate whether Herod personally had any scruples or principles against executing Peter during a festival. Herod also would have no reason to seek to displease the Jews and to honor and respect the church that he was vexing by waiting until after any claimed church celebration. Therefore, the clear evidence from the context clearly supports the understanding that the Jews would be the ones keeping the pascha [also called the feast of unleavened bread in Luke 22:1] instead of the assertion that Herod had to be the one keeping it. If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he would be keeping and not some pagan festival nor any Christian celebration.

 

[Logos1560]

This is a list of the significate resulting changes made to the NKJV, compared to the KJV.

2 Corinthians 2:17 – Do men corrupt or peddle the word the God?

The NKJV rendering of 2 Corinthians 2:17 ("peddling the word of God") agrees with the 1560 Geneva Bible rendering ("make merchandise of the word of God").

This example again shows that the same measures/standards are not applied by KJV-only advocates to the hundreds and thousands of differences between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV.

 

[Logos1560]

This is a list of the significate resulting changes made to the NKJV, compared to the KJV.

Acts 3:26 - Son Jesus or servant?

KJV-only advocates do not apply the same measures/standards to the KJV itself in its rendering of the same Greek word at Matthew 12:18 and that is also found at Acts 3:26, Acts 4:27

This same Greek word found at Acts 4:27 and 30 was also used of Jesus at Matthew 12:18a where it was translated "servant" in the KJV. However, it was translated "child" in Wycliffe's, 1534 Tyndale's, Matthew's, Great, and Bishops' Bibles and as "son" in 1526 Tyndale's. Why is this difference important in Acts 4:27 and 30 but unimportant in Matthew 12:18? Concerning Acts 4:27 but not concerning Matthew 12:18, Morton asked: "Which exalts the Lord Jesus Christ the most, being called God's servant or God's child?" (Which Translation Should You Trust, p. 43). Would Ruckman claim that the KJV rendering at Matthew 12:18 was "another attack on Christ's Deity?" Riplinger claimed that the NKJV translators took the "Sonship away from the Lord Jesus Christ" and made him merely a "servant" (Which Bible is God's Word, p. 42). Would Morton, Riplinger, Stauffer, and Ruckman claim that the KJV translators took away the Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ at Matthew 12:18 and made him merely a "servant?" The prophet Isaiah had referred to Christ as the servant of the Lord (Isa. 42:1-4, Isa. 52:13).

The Companion Bible [KJV] has this note for "child" at Acts 4:27: "child=servant, Greek pais, as in v. 25" (p. 1585). The 1657 English edition of The Dutch Annotations has the following note for "thy holy child Jesus" at Acts 4:27: "or servant, minister, See Acts 3:13, 26, see also Matthew 8:6 compared with Luke 7:2 and here verse 25." Concerning Acts 3:13, A. T. Robertson noted: "This phrase occurs in Isaiah 42:1; 52:13 about the Messiah except the name 'Jesus' which Peter adds" (Word Pictures, III, p. 43). Concerning Acts 3:13 in his 1851 commentary as edited by Alvah Hovey in the American Baptist Publication Society's American Commentary on the N. T., Horatio Hackett (1808-1875) wrote: "pais, not son=huios, but servant=Heb. ebhedh, which was one of the prophetic appellations of the Messiah, especially in the second part of Isaiah. (See Matt. 12:18, as compared with Isa. 42:1). The term occurs again in this sense in v. 26; 4:27, 30" (pp. 59-60). Concerning Acts 4:27, John Gill noted: "Unless the word should rather be rendered servant, as it is in verse 25 and which is a character that belongs to Christ, and is often given him as Mediator, who, as such, is God's righteous servant" (Exposition, VIII, p. 176).
To accuse the NKJV of copying the Jehovah Witnesses' Version when the NKJV translators did not copy it or even consult it is slanderous. To accuse the NKJV translators of taking away the Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ is ridiculous. The Greek word pais in these verses was used for both child or servant with the meaning determined by the context. Greek has a different word for "son"--huios. The KJV translated this word pais as "servant" 10 times, "child" 7 times, and "son" 3 times.

James D. Price explained that the real reason for this choice of rendering in the book of Acts in the NKJV is that the translators thought that in this context Peter was alluding to Isaiah 52:13, which identifies Christ as the Servant of the LORD (False Witness, p. 25). This first-hand statement from a NKJV translator refutes Riplinger’s false accusation that the reason for the NKJV’s rendering was a lexicon. Does love for the KJV justify such false and seemingly malicious attacks on the NKJV?

 

[Logos1560]

Is it interesting that the 1560 Geneva Bible, the number 2 English Bible translation according to Alan Gross, has many of the same renderings as the NKJV, including some that he condemns when found in the NKJV?

 

[Logos1560]

Acts 1:3 presented (Geneva, NKJV) shewed (KJV)
Acts 1:3 that he had suffered (Geneva) his passion (KJV) His suffering (NKJV)
Acts 1:4 he commanded (Geneva) commanded (KJV) He commanded (NKJV)
Acts 1:4 but to wait (Geneva, NKJV) but wait (KJV)
Acts 1:19 their own language (Geneva, NKJV) their proper tongue (KJV)
Acts 1:20 charge (Geneva) bishopric (KJV) office (NKJV)
Acts 1:22 be made (Geneva) be ordained (KJV) become (NKJV)
Acts 1:23 presented (Geneva) appointed (KJV) proposed (NKJV)
Acts 1:28 on Matthias (Geneva, NKJV) upon Matthias (KJV)
Acts 2:8 language (Geneva, NKJV) tongue (KJV)
Acts 2:13 They are full (Geneva, NKJV) These men are full (KJV)
Acts 2:15 since it is (Geneva, NKJV) seeing it is (KJV)
Acts 2:25 David saith (Geneva) David speaketh (KJV) David says (NKJV)
Acts 2:34 sit at (Geneva, NKJV) sit thou on (KJV)
Acts 3:12 So when Peter (Geneva, NKJV) And when Peter (KJV)
Acts 3:12 or godliness (Geneva, NKJV) or holiness (KJV)
Acts 3:17 I know (Geneva, NKJV) I wot (KJV)
Acts 3:18 thus fulfilled (Geneva, NKJV) so fulfilled (KJV)
Acts 3:23 shall be (Geneva, NKJV) shall come to pass (KJV)
Acts 3:25 to Abraham (Geneva, NKJV) unto Abraham (KJV)
Acts 3:26 your iniquities (Geneva, NKJV) his iniquities (KJV)
Acts 4:2 in Jesus Name (Geneva) through Jesus (KJV) in Jesus (NKJV)
Acts 4:18 So they (Geneva, NKJV) And they (KJV)
Acts 4:28 to do (Geneva, NKJV) For to do (KJV)
Acts 5:16 were all healed (Geneva, NKJV) were healed every one (KJV)
Acts 5:21 all the elders (Geneva, NKJV) all the senate (KJV)
Acts 5:35 Men of Israel (Geneva, NKJV) Ye men of Israel (KJV)
Acts 5:41 So they (Geneva, NKJV) And they (KJV)
Acts 6:11 against Moses and God (Geneva, NKJV) against Moses and against God (KJV)
Acts 7:6 But God (Geneva, NKJV) And God (KJV)
Acts 7:11 famine (Geneva, NKJV) dearth (KJV)
Acts 7:17 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (KJV)
Acts 7:20 acceptable unto God (Geneva) exceeding fair (KJV) well pleasing to God (NKJV)
Acts 7:25 that God (Geneva, NKJV) how that God (KJV)
Acts 7:38 congregation (Geneva, NKJV) church (KJV)
Acts 7:40 know not (Geneva) wot not (KJV) do not know (NKJV)
Acts 8:1 to his death (Geneva, NKJV) unto his death (KJV)
Acts 8:7 with a loud (Geneva, NKJV) with loud (KJV)
Acts 8:23 For I see (Geneva, NKJV) For I perceive (KJV)
Acts 8:27 to worship (Geneva, NKJV) for to worship (KJV)
Acts 9:8 from the ground (Geneva, NKJV) from the earth (KJV)
Acts 9:9 ate nor drank (Geneva, NKJV) did eat nor drink (KJV)
Acts 9:16 how many things (Geneva, NKJV) how great things (KJV)
Acts 9:22 the Christ (Geneva, NKJV) very Christ (KJV)
Acts 9:25 through the wall (Geneva, NKJV) by the wall (KJV)
Acts 9:38 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (KJV)
Acts 10:2 household (Geneva, NKJV) house (KJV)
Acts 10:9 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (KJV)
Acts 11:1 Now the (Geneva, NKJV) And the (KJV)
Acts 11:25 to seek (Geneva, NKJV) for to seek (KJV)
Acts 11:26 first called Christians (Geneva, NKJV) called Christians first (KJV)
Acts 11:28 famine (Geneva, NKJV) dearth (KJV)
Acts 12:4 the passover (Geneva, NKJV) Easter (KJV)
Acts 12:9 knew not (Geneva) wist not (KJV) did not know (KJV)
Acts 13:10 straight ways (Geneva, NKJV) right ways (KJV)
Acts 13:16 hearken (Geneva) give audience (KJV) listen (KJV)
Acts 13:20 about four (Geneva, NKJV) about the space of four (KJV)
Acts 13:22 will do (Geneva, NKJV) shall fulfill (KJV)
Acts 13:35 wilt not (Geneva) shalt no (KJV) will not (NKJV)
Acts 13:36 with his fathers (Geneva, NKJV) unto his fathers (KJV)
Acts 14:8 had never walked (Geneva, NKJV) never had walked (KJV)
Acts 14:14 But when (Geneva, NKJV) Which when (KJV)
Acts 14:15 O men (Geneva) Sirs (KJV) Men (NKJV)
Acts 14:23 in whom (Geneva, NKJV) on whom (KJV)
Acts 14:25 to Attalia (Geneva, NKJV) into Attalia (KJV)
Acts 14:26 commended (Geneva, NKJV) recommended (KJV)

 

[Logos1560]

Acts 15:3 sent (Geneva, NKJV) brought (KJV)
Acts 15:7 know that (Geneva, NKJV) know how that (KJV)
Acts 15:23 and the brethren (Geneva, NKJV) and brethren (KJV)
Acts 15:25 to us (Geneva, NKJV) unto us (KJV)
Acts 15:29 from things (Geneva, NKJV) from meats (KJV)
Acts 15:40 commended (Geneva, NKJV) recommended (KJV)
Acts 16:4 to keep (Geneva, NKJV) for to keep (KJV)
Acts 16:10 to preach (Geneva, NKJV) for to preach (KJV)
Acts 16:14 things which Paul spake (Geneva) things which were spoken of Paul (KJV)
things spoken by Paul (NKJV)

Acts 16:22 them to be beaten with rods (Geneva, NKJV) to beat them (KJV)
Acts 16:31 household (Geneva, NKJV) house (KJV)
Acts 16:34 household (Geneva, NKJV) house (KJV)
Acts 17:4 joined in company (Geneva) consorted (KJV) joined (NKJV)
Acts 17:6 But when they (Geneva, NKJV) And when they (KJV)
Acts 17:26 to dwell (Geneva, NKJV) for to dwell (KJV)
Acts 17:34 among whom (Geneva) among the which (KJV) among them (NKJV)
Acts 18:5 the Christ (Geneva, NKJV) Christ (KJV)
Acts 18:28 the Christ (Geneva, NKJV) Christ (KJV)
Acts 19:28 Now when they (Geneva, NKJV) And when they (KJV)
Acts 19:33 to the people (Geneva, NKJV) unto the people (KJV)
Acts 20:1 to go (Geneva, NKJV) for to go (KJV)
Acts 20:9 overcome with sleep (Geneva) sunk down with sleep (KJV) overcome by sleep (NKJV)
Acts 20:10 But Paul (Geneva, NKJV) And Paul (KJV)
Acts 20:13 Then we (Geneva, NKJV) And we (KJV)
Acts 20:28 whereof (Geneva) over the which (KJV) among which (NKJV)
Acts 21:38 the Egyptian (Geneva, NKJV) that Egyptian (KJV)
Acts 22:2 he said (Geneva, NKJV) he saith (KJV)
Acts 22:6 as I journeyed (Geneva, NKJV) as I made my journey (KJV)
Acts 22:6 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (KJV)
Acts 22:8 to me (Geneva, NKJV) unto me (KJV)
Acts 22:17 Syrtes (Geneva) quicksands (KJV) Syrtis Sands (NKJV)
Acts 22:20 clothes (Geneva, NKJV) raiment (KJV)
Acts 22:21 Then he (Geneva) And he (KJV) Then He (NKJV)
Acts 22:27 to him (Geneva, NKJV) unto him (KJV)
Acts 22:30 On the next day (Geneva) On the morrow (KJV) The next day (NKJV)
Acts 23:3 to him (Geneva, NKJV) unto him (KJV)
Acts 23:9 Then there (Geneva, NKJV) And there (KJV)
Acts 23:14 oath (Geneva, NKJV) curse (KJV)
Acts 23:32 And the next day (Geneva) On the morrow (KJV) The next day (NKJV)
Acts 23:34 read it (Geneva, NKJV) read the letter (KJV)
Acts 24:1 came down (Geneva, NKJV) descended (KJV)
Acts 24:4 courtesy (Geneva, NKJV) clemency (KJV)
Acts 24:11 to worship (Geneva, NKJV) for to worship (KJV)
Acts 25:30 commanded his accusers (Geneva, NKJV) gave commandment to his accusers (KJV)
Acts 25:34 had read it (Geneva) had read the letter (KJV) had read it (NKJV)
Acts 26:1 So Paul (Geneva, NKJV) Then Paul (KJV)
Acts 26:4 from the beginning (Geneva, NKJV) at the first (KJV)
Acts 26:18 eyes, that (Geneva) eyes, and (KJV) eyes in order (NKJV)
Acts 26:28 to become (Geneva, NKJV) to be (KJV)
Acts 28:21 Then they (Geneva, NKJV) And they (KJV)
Acts 28:21 any evil (Geneva, NKJV) any harm (KJV)
Acts 28:24 some were persuaded (Geneva, NKJV) some believed (KJV)
Acts 28:27 should return (Geneva) should be converted (KJV) turn (NKJV)

 

[Alan Gross]

You merely list examples copied from biased, unreliable KJV-only sources,

Looks like they are 'King James Superiority' and from the standpoint of the Initial Purpose, Text used, Translators, Translation techniques, and Theology, why wouldn't they be?

And why wouldn't anyone with any discernment be?

Because, they are too busy flapping their wings at the (unfortunately, not thought through, indefensible positions of the well-meaning) KJV-onlies?

Is that why you always bring them up?

Because, you can't defend your position, otherwise?

I see your position on Modern Bibles as being the "most perfect distance from God and the Original Autographs that is humanly possible, without special supernatural cooperation, to render them surreptitious."

How far off am I?

...

Looks like they just made a Bible comparison to me.

"Doctrine of Preservation"

""For anyone to claim that any translation could be preserved perfectly the Bible would have to testify to this point. We must consider what the Bible says about itself and what God's plan is for the words he spake and gave to man."

 

[Alan Gross]

Acts 15:3 sent (Geneva, NKJV) brought (KJV)
Acts 15:7 know that (Geneva, NKJV) know how that (KJV)
Acts 15:23 and the brethren (Geneva, NKJV) and brethren (KJV)
Acts 15:25 to us (Geneva, NKJV) unto us (KJV)
Acts 15:29 from things (Geneva, NKJV) from meats (KJV)
Acts 15:40 commended (Geneva, NKJV) recommended (KJV)
Acts 16:4 to keep (Geneva, NKJV) for to keep (KJV)
Acts 16:10 to preach (Geneva, NKJV) for to preach (KJV)
Acts 16:14 things which Paul spake (Geneva) things which were spoken of Paul (KJV)
things spoken by Paul (NKJV)

Acts 16:22 them to be beaten with rods (Geneva, NKJV) to beat them (KJV)
Acts 16:31 household (Geneva, NKJV) house (KJV)
Acts 16:34 household (Geneva, NKJV) house (KJV)
Acts 17:4 joined in company (Geneva) consorted (KJV) joined (NKJV)
Acts 17:6 But when they (Geneva, NKJV) And when they (KJV)
Acts 17:26 to dwell (Geneva, NKJV) for to dwell (KJV)
Acts 17:34 among whom (Geneva) among the which (KJV) among them (NKJV)
Acts 18:5 the Christ (Geneva, NKJV) Christ (KJV)
Acts 18:28 the Christ (Geneva, NKJV) Christ (KJV)
Acts 19:28 Now when they (Geneva, NKJV) And when they (KJV)
Acts 19:33 to the people (Geneva, NKJV) unto the people (KJV)
Acts 20:1 to go (Geneva, NKJV) for to go (KJV)
Acts 20:9 overcome with sleep (Geneva) sunk down with sleep (KJV) overcome by sleep (NKJV)
Acts 20:10 But Paul (Geneva, NKJV) And Paul (KJV)
Acts 20:13 Then we (Geneva, NKJV) And we (KJV)
Acts 20:28 whereof (Geneva) over the which (KJV) among which (NKJV)
Acts 21:38 the Egyptian (Geneva, NKJV) that Egyptian (KJV)
Acts 22:2 he said (Geneva, NKJV) he saith (KJV)
Acts 22:6 as I journeyed (Geneva, NKJV) as I made my journey (KJV)
Acts 22:6 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (KJV)
Acts 22:8 to me (Geneva, NKJV) unto me (KJV)
Acts 22:17 Syrtes (Geneva) quicksands (KJV) Syrtis Sands (NKJV)
Acts 22:20 clothes (Geneva, NKJV) raiment (KJV)
Acts 22:21 Then he (Geneva) And he (KJV) Then He (NKJV)
Acts 22:27 to him (Geneva, NKJV) unto him (KJV)
Acts 22:30 On the next day (Geneva) On the morrow (KJV) The next day (NKJV)
Acts 23:3 to him (Geneva, NKJV) unto him (KJV)
Acts 23:9 Then there (Geneva, NKJV) And there (KJV)
Acts 23:14 oath (Geneva, NKJV) curse (KJV)
Acts 23:32 And the next day (Geneva) On the morrow (KJV) The next day (NKJV)
Acts 23:34 read it (Geneva, NKJV) read the letter (KJV)
Acts 24:1 came down (Geneva, NKJV) descended (KJV)
Acts 24:4 courtesy (Geneva, NKJV) clemency (KJV)
Acts 24:11 to worship (Geneva, NKJV) for to worship (KJV)
Acts 25:30 commanded his accusers (Geneva, NKJV) gave commandment to his accusers (KJV)
Acts 25:34 had read it (Geneva) had read the letter (KJV) had read it (NKJV)
Acts 26:1 So Paul (Geneva, NKJV) Then Paul (KJV)
Acts 26:4 from the beginning (Geneva, NKJV) at the first (KJV)
Acts 26:18 eyes, that (Geneva) eyes, and (KJV) eyes in order (NKJV)
Acts 26:28 to become (Geneva, NKJV) to be (KJV)
Acts 28:21 Then they (Geneva, NKJV) And they (KJV)
Acts 28:21 any evil (Geneva, NKJV) any harm (KJV)
Acts 28:24 some were persuaded (Geneva, NKJV) some believed (KJV)
Acts 28:27 should return (Geneva) should be converted (KJV) turn (NKJV)

This example again shows that the same measures/standards are not applied by KJV-only advocates to the hundreds and thousands of differences between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV.

I'm not KJV-only. U?

The mostly irrelevant idiosyncrasies are not the caliper Anti-Crist renderings that the Occult prefers.

KJV-only advocates do not apply the same measures/standards to the KJV itself in its rendering of the same Greek word at Matthew 12:18 and that is also found at Acts 3:26, Acts 4:27

I' m not KJV-only. U?

The measures/standards for comparison are regarding
the Initial Purpose for revision, the Texts used, the Translators, the Translation techniques, and Theology, concerning their differences or similarities to the Occult.

Is it interesting that the 1560 Geneva Bible, the number 2 English Bible translation according to Alan Gross, has many of the same renderings as the NKJV, including some that he condemns when found in the NKJV?

Are the meanings from the Geneva, carried into the NJKV, more acceptable with regard to clearly depicting God-Honoring expressions of the words being used, or are they ludicrous in their susceptibility to misunderstanding, over the Centuries?

 

[Alan Gross]

If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he would be keeping and not some pagan festival nor any Christian celebration.

The Bible verse or context does not directly say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha.

After Jesus and his disciples had already observed the feast of Passover (Luke 22:14-15; John 13:1), the same Greek word was still used for a time when the feast of unleavened bread was in progress (John 18:28).

Thanks for confirming my point that you do not apply the same measures/standards to the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision. The 1560 Geneva Bible has "the passover" at Acts 12:4 since that is a correct, accurate translation of the Greek word used there. This would be an example where the NKJV agrees with a better rendering in the 1560 Geneva Bible.

"... the “Easter” in Acts 12:4 is not the Christian “Easter” but it is the pagan Easter."

From: Acts 12:4

Acts 12:4
(KJV) "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

(1611 KJV) And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

(1568 Bishops Bible) And when he had caught hym, he put hym in pryson also, and delyuered hym to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intendyng after Easter to bryng hym foorth to the people.

(1535 Matthews) And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after ester to bring him forth to the people.

(1526 Tyndale) And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.

C*********t Versions

(NKJV) So when he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to keep him, intending to bring him before the people after Passover.

(NCV) After Herod arrested Peter, he put him in jail and handed him over to be guarded by sixteen soldiers. Herod planned to bring Peter before the people for trial after the Passover Feast.

(CEB) He put Peter in prison, handing him over to four squads of soldiers, sixteen in all, who guarded him. He planned to charge him publicly after the Passover.

(NWT-Jehovah’s Witnesses) And laying hold of him, he put him in prison, turning him over to four shifts of four soldiers each to guard him, as he intended to produce him for the people after the passover.

con't

 

[Alan Gross]

Affected Teaching
"(Acts 12:4 KJV) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

"One of the accusations which is leveled at the King James Bible is the translation of the word “pascha” as “Easter.” The word “pascha” is not a Greek word but is from the Aramaic “pascha.” The Herod in view here was Herod Agrippa who was a grandson of Herod the Great and who was Nephew to Herod Antipas who beheaded John the Baptist. They were Idumaean, which was Edomite.

"This means that Herod Agrippa was not a Jew but an Edomite. The Edomites were descendants of Esau.
(Gen 25:30 KJV) And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom.
(Gen 36:1 KJV) Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom.


"Therefore the Herod Dynasty was not in the line of Jacob. It was the king of Edom who did not allow Israel to pass through their land when they came out of the Land of Egypt. (Num 20:21 KJV) Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border: wherefore Israel turned away from him.

"Archaeology has dug up many clay figures in the area known as Edom. The main gods of the Edomites were the fertility gods of the region. According to Assyrian secular records, it is known that Edom had one national god named “Qos,” however they were hardly monotheistic in that they had other gods. (2 Chr 25:14 KJV) Now it came to pass, after that Amaziah was come from the slaughter of the Edomites, that he brought the gods of the children of Seir, and set them up to be his gods, and bowed down himself before them, and burned incense unto them. If you notice this verse speaks about gods in the plural. There was also evidence of Baal worship.

"The Bible does not mention any specific gods which the Edomites worshipped. In fact, in the early years they had worshipped Jehovah but after they refused passage to Israel, they started to descend into idolatry. Since they had taken up the local gods of the area, Astarte, would have been one of the gods of the area. Normally wherever Baal was Astarte was also found. Astarte was a deity of fertility. Astarte was known as Aphrodite to the Greeks. Astarate was also known as “Ishtar” which was the goddess of fertility.
These false gods can be found in basically all of these ancient pagan civilizations. So the region of Edom, which was south of Israel, would not have been a stranger to them. These false gods even crept into both Israel and Judah. (Jer 7:18 KJV) The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger. The queen of Heaven was also known as Ishtar the fertility goddess. In our day, we are seeing a resurgence of goddess worship.

"Now back to Herod’s declaration about Peter. Herod was going to wait until after Easter to bring Peter out to the people and no doubt they would have pronounced the same sentence as the Lord Jesus Christ received. Now, there seems to be a difficulty because the word “pascha” should be translated “Passover.” Correct? Absolutely not. We owe a great debt to William Tyndale who translated this verse correctly.

"(1526 Tyndale) And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.

"The reason that Tyndale had translated “pascha” as Easter in this verse was a question of timing.

"(Num 28:16-17 KJV) And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. {17}

"And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

"(Mark 14:12 KJV) And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?

"As we can see that the Passover came first and was followed by the Feast of Unleavened Bread. So if we look at Acts 12:3, we see a very important phrase.

"(Acts 12:3 KJV) And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

"Notice very carefully what it says in the last phrase. It states that these were the days of Unleavened Bread.

"The Passover was already complete.

So therefore, in verse four, it would not make sense if Herod was going to bring Peter out after Passover when the Passover was already over but Peter was still in prison. Since the days of unleavened bread was a feast lasting seven days, we are not told what day this was. It could have been day 6 where Peter was still in prison.
Now enter the word “Easter.”

"Immediately Christians think of the day the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead. However, the word “Easter” is a very pagan name. It is derived from “Eostra” which is a pagan festival of Spring. The Bible nowhere commands Christians to celebrate the resurrection or birth of Christ. So when Christianity was turned into a religion by the third century, these pagan holidays were incorporated in the church calendar year but with Christian meanings.

"For example, Christmas was really the feast of Saturnalia but the church wanted to cover this pagan festival and therefore instituted Christmas as Christ’s birth being on December 25.

"Herod being an Edomite and a pagan would not care the least about what festival was taking place.

"After all, they crucified the Lord Jesus Christ on the preparation day for the High Sabbath and Passover.

"Why would a pagan king concern himself with the holidays of the Jews?

"He could have had Peter executed any time he wanted to and during any holiday in the Jewish calendar.

"Since Herod was a pagan, he would have been celebrating a feast of Ishtar, the fertility god.

"This was his “Easter” as he would have been too busy celebrating Ishtar under the name Easter, that he would wait until after his pagan festival was over and then he would get back to his duties and have Peter executed.

"Easter was a pagan spring festival which occurred simultaneously with Passover and therefore “Easter” is the proper word for Acts 12:4 and not Passover. "So the “Easter” in Acts 12:4 is not the Christian “Easter” but it is the pagan Easter.
Back

 

[Alan Gross]

The NKJV rendering of 2 Corinthians 2:17 ("peddling the word of God") agrees with the 1560 Geneva Bible rendering ("make merchandise of the word of God").

from: 2 Corinthians 2:17

2 Corinthians 2:17
(KJV) "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."

(1611 KJV) For wee are not as many which corrupt the word of God: but as of sinceritie, but as of God, in the sight of God speake we in Christ.

(1568 Bishop’s Bible) For we are not as many are, whiche chop & chaunge with the word of God: but as of purenesse of God, in the syght of God, so speake we in Christe.

(1526 Tyndale) For we are not as many are which choppe and chaunge with the worde of God: but even oute of purenes and by the power of God and in the sight of God so speake we in Christ.
...

(NKJV) 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.

(NWT-Jehovah’s Witnesses) [We are;] for we are not peddlers of the word of God as many men are, but as out of sincerity, yes, as sent from God, under God’s view, in company with Christ, we are speaking.
...

"Affected Teaching"

"This is another situation concerning a word meaning. If you will notice the KJV, 1611 KJV, Tyndale, and Bishop’s Bible carry understood the meaning to be a corruption of God’s word. Tyndale and the Bishop’s Bible both have the correct idea of this word when they translated it “chop and change.”

"The Greek word behind “corrupt” does come from a merchandising term but it took on the meaning of “someone who sells goods deceitfully.”

"The word is “kapeleuo” which carries with it the idea of “peddling, hawk, trade, or corrupt.”

"It is like someone in a market who puts the best produce on top and the bad on the bottom. It is a deceitful sales gimmick. The bad product will eventually corrupt the good product.

"The term “corrupt” would be a problem for the new version editors since they have been corrupting the word of God since 1881.

"So it was necessary for them to give it a surface meaning and turn it into a meaning of someone who peddles the word of God for profit.

"Paul did fight against the idea of financial profit from preaching and he did what he could to avoid any accusations in that area.

"However, the subject in view goes deeper than just financial hawking. It is the corruption of God’s word which is the subject of this verse. This why the Bishop’s Bible and Tyndale had it right when they translated it “chop and change” because this is what is happening to the word of God, especially in our day.

"Modern version editors are chopping up the word of God and this chopping causes massive changes which results in substantial corruption.

"It goes way beyond a simple financial gain from God’s word to the actual corruption of it.

"By replacing the word “corruption” with words that deal with financial gain in the modern versions, it removes any suspicion of someone using a corrupted modern version.

"2 Corinthians 2:17 is a warning about the corrupting of God’s word.

"There are two basic ways to corrupt God’s word.

"The first is by actually deleting and omitting verses or phrases from the text.

"The second is more subtle and that is to skew an interpretation away from a core truth and replace it with conjecture favorable to the false teacher or teaching."

 

[Alan Gross]

This same Greek word found at Acts 4:27 and 30 was also used of Jesus at Matthew 12:18a where it was translated "servant" in the KJV.

Acts 3:26

(KJV) "Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities."

(1611 KJV) Unto you first, God hauing raised vp his Sonne Iesus, sent him to blesse you, in turning away euery one of you from his iniquities.

(1587 Geneva Bible) First vnto you hath God raysed vp his Sonne Iesus, and him hee hath sent to blesse you, in turning euery one of you from your iniquities.

(1526 Tyndale) Fyrst vnto you hath God raysed vp his sonne Iesus and him he hath sent to blysse you that every one of you shuld turne from youre wickednes.
...

(NKJV) To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

(NWT- Jehovah’s Witnesses) To YOU first God, after raising up his Servant, sent him forth to bless YOU by turning each one away from YOUR wicked deeds.”
...

Textus Receptus - Traditional Text

umin prwton o qeoV anasthsaV ton paida autou ihsoun apesteilen auton eulogounta umaV en tw apostrejein ekaston apo twn ponhriwn umwn

Hort-Westcott - Critical Text
umin prwton anasthsaV o qeoV ton paida autou apesteilen auton eulogounta umaV en tw apostrejein ekaston apo twn ponhriwn [umwn]

C******e Manuscripts

This verse is c*******d in the following manuscripts:

Aleph 01 - Fourth century
B 03 - Sinaiticus - Nineteenth Century Counterfeit
C 04 - Ephraemi Rescriptus - Fifth century
D 05 - Bezae Cantabrigiensis - Fifth century
E 08 - Oxford (Location) - Sixth century

Manuscripts which agree with the Textus Receptus for this verse
Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.)
A 02 - Alexandrinus - Fifth century
P 025 - Ninth century

Published Critical Greek Texts with C*********s
Omit “Jesus”
Greisbach, Johann - 1805
Lachmann, Karl - 1842
Tischendorf, Constantine - 1869
Tregelles, Samuel - 1857
Alford, Henry - 1849 revised in 1871
Westcott and Hort - 1881
Weiss, Bernhard - 1894
Nestle - 1927 as revised in seventeenth edition in 1941
Nestle-Aland - 1979 - Twenty Sixth Edition
Nestle-Aland - 1993 - Twenty Seventh Edition
United Bible Societies - 1983 - Fourth Edition
Von Soden, Freiherr - 1902

Affected Teaching

"In Acts 3:26 we have a double corruption.

"First, the modern versions have removed the name of Jesus from the English text because the Gnostics removed it from the Greek text.

"The New King James Version retains the name of Jesus but it errors in the description which places it in the category of a corrupted version.

"Secondly, they have reduced the Lord Jesus Christ from Son to servant.

"The word in question is the Greek word “paida” (paida) and it is one of the Greek words which contain several meanings. The root word is actually “pais“ (pais) and it may mean “servant, child, son or daughter.”

"This word defines human relationships and relationship to God. Nowhere in the King James Version is this word, when referencing the Lord Jesus Christ, ever translated “servant.”

Luke 2:43

(KJV) And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.

(NKJV) When they had finished the days, as they returned, the Boy Jesus lingered behind in Jerusalem. And Joseph and His mother did not know it;

(NIV) After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it.

(NWT-Jehovah’s Witnesses) and completed the days. But when they were returning, the boy Jesus remained behind in Jerusalem, and his parents did not notice it.

Acts 3:13

(KJV) The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.

(NKJV) The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Servant Jesus, whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go.

Acts 3:26

(KJV) Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

(NKJV) To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

Acts 4:27

(KJV) For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,

(NKJV) “For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together

Acts 4:30

(KJV) By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.

(NKJV) by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus.”

"The New King James is identical in translation in the above verses in the NIV, NASV, NLT, ESV, ASV, HCSB, NAB, and NWT.

"This means that they followed false translations and corrupted meanings.

"The word “paida” could have been translated as Son in the modern versions but since the modern version editors think lowly of Christ, as we have seen in the past, they decided to translate the word as “servant,” making Him equal to a household servant instead of exalting Him as the Son of God.
(Mat 8:8 KJV)

"The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed."

 

[Alan Gross]

the number 2 English Bible translation according to Alan Gross, has many of the same renderings as the NKJV, including some that he condemns when found in the NKJV?

Of these that I listed, where I saw the NKJV rendering as problematic:

Acts 3:26 - Son Jesus or servant?
Acts 8:9 - Bewitched or astonished?
Acts 12:4 - Easter or passover?
Acts 17:22 – Too superstitious or very religious?

The NKJV redendering is found in the Geveva, once.

Acts 3:26 is referencing different words; "your iniquities" vs "Son/servant".

Acts 3:26 your iniquities (Geneva, NKJV) his iniquities (KJV)

And this one is included;

Acts 12:4 the passover (Geneva, NKJV) Easter (KJV)

see: The KJV has been Preserved more Perfectly than Human Possibility.

 

[Alan Gross]

The measures/standards for comparison are regarding
the Initial Purpose for revision, the Texts used, the Translators, the Translation techniques, and Theology, concerning their differences or similarities to the Occult.

"The NKJV: A D(????)y Translation"

By James L. Melton

"We will now give some special attention to one of the d(???????)t translations on the market--the New King James Version, first published in 1979.

"It is a d(????)y version because its editors have succeeded in deceiving the body of Christ on two main points:

(1) That it's a King James Bible (which is a lie), and

(2) that it's based on the Textus Receptus (which is only a partial truth).

"The following information should be helpful when dealing with Christians who have been swindled by the Laodicean lovers of filthy lucre:

"1. The text of the NKJV is copyrighted by Thomas Nelson Publishers, while there is no copyright today on the text of the KJV. If your KJV has maps or notes, then it may have a copyright, but the text itself does not.

"2. There's nothing "new" about the NKJV logo. It is a "666" symbol of the pagan trinity which was used in the ancient Egyptian mysteries. It was also used by satanist Aleister Crowley around the turn of this century. The symbol can be seen on the New King James Bible, on certain rock albums (like Led Zepplin's), or you can see it on the cover of such New Age books as The Aquarian Conspiracy. (See Riplinger's tract on the NKJV.)

"3. It is estimated that the NKJV makes over 100,000 translation changes, which comes to over eighty changes per page and about three changes per verse! A great number of these changes bring the NKJV in line with the readings of such Alexandrian perversions as the NIV and the RSV. Where changes are not made in the text, subtle footnotes often give credence to the Westcott and Hort Greek Text.

"4. While passing off as being true to the Textus Receptus, the NKJV IGNORES the Receptus over 1,200 times.

"5. In the NKJV, there are

22 omissions of "hell",
23 omissions of "blood",
44 omissions of "repent",
50 omissions of "heaven",
51 omissions of "God",
and 66 omissions of "Lord".

The terms "devils"
, "damnation",
"JEHOVAH",
and "new testament" are completely omitted.

6. The NKJV demotes the Lord Jesus Christ.

"In John 1:3, the KJV says that all things were made "by" Jesus Christ, but in the NKJV, all things were just made "through" Him.

"The word "Servant" replaces "Son" in Acts 3:13 and 3:26.

"Servant" replaces "child" in Acts 4:27 and 4:30.

"The word "Jesus" is omitted from Mark 2:15, Hebrews 4:8, and Acts 7:45."

7. The NKJV confuses people about salvation.

"In Hebrews 10:14 it replaces "are sanctified" with "are being sanctified", and it replaces "are saved" with "are being saved" in I Corinthians 1:18 and II Corinthians 2:15.

"The words "may believe" have been replaced with "may continue to believe" in I John 5:13.

"The old straight and "narrow" way of Matthew 7:14 has become the "difficult" way in the NKJV.

8. In II Corinthians 10:5 the KJV reads "casting down imaginations", but the NKJV reads "casting down arguments". The word "thought", which occurs later in the verse, matches "imaginations", not "arguments". This change weakens the verse.

9. The KJV tells us to reject an "heretick" after the second admonition in Titus 3:10. The NKJV tells us to reject a "divisive man". How nice! Now the Alexandrians and Ecumenicals have justification for rejecting anyone they wish to label as "divisive men".

10. According to the NKJV, no one would stoop so low as to "corrupt" God's word. No, they just "peddle" it (II Cor. 2:17). The reading matches the Alexandrian versions.

11. Since the NKJV has "changed the truth of God into a lie", it has also changed Romans 1:25 to read "exchanged the truth of God for the lie". This reading matches the readings of the new perversions, so how say ye it's a King James Bible?

12. The NKJV gives us no command to "study" God's word in II Timothy 2:15.

13. The word "science" is replaced with "knowledge" in I Timothy 6:20, although "science" has occurred in every edition of the KJV since 1611! How say ye it's a King James Bible?

14. The Jews "require" a sign, according to I Corinthians 1:22 (and according to Jesus Christ - John 4:48), but the NKJV says they only "request" a sign. They didn't "request" one when signs first appeared in Exodus 4, and there are numerous places throughout the Bible where God gives Israel signs when they haven't requested anything (Exo. 4, Exo. 31:13, Num. 26:10, I Sam. 2:34, Isa. 7:10-14, Luke 2:12, etc). They "require" a sign, because signs are a part of their national heritage.

15. The King James reading in II Corinthians 5:17 says that if any man is in Christ he is a new "creature", which matches the words of Christ in Mark 16:15. The cross reference is destroyed in the NKJV, which uses the word "creation."

16. As a final note, we'd like to point out how the NKJV is very inconsistent in its attempt to update the language of the KJV. The preface to the NKJV states that previous "revisions" of the KJV have "sought to keep abreast of changes in English speech", and also that they too are taking a "further step toward this objective". However, when taking a closer look at the language of the NKJV, we find that oftentimes they are stepping BACKWARDS! Please note a few examples of how well the NKJV has "kept abreast of the changes in the English language":



SCRIPTURE KJV vs NKJV

Ezra 31:4 little rivers vs rivulets
Psalms 43:1 Judge vs Vindicate
Psalms 139:23 thoughts vs anxieties
Isaiah 28:1 fat vs verdant
Amos 5:21 smell vs savor
Matthew 26:7 box vs flask
Luke 8:31 the deep vs the abyss
John 10:41 did vs performed
Luke 19:11-27 pounds vs minas
John 19:9 judgement hall vs Praetorium
Acts 1:18 bowels vs entrails
Acts 18:12 deputy vs proconsul
Acts 21:38 uproar vs insurrection
Acts 27:30 boat vs skiff
Hebrews 12:8 bastard vs illegitimate

(?)

 

[Logos1560]

I'm not KJV-only.
I' m not KJV-only.

Because you may deny being KJV-only does not prove that you do not advocate what constitutes a KJV-only view. Since you do not state that you would accept any post-1611 English Bible translation [including the NKJV based on the same texts as the KJV] as being the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the KJV is the word of God translated into English, it suggests that you are KJV-only. Perhaps you do not understand what constitutes KJV-only opinions.

The term KJV-only does not mean that someone follows Peter Ruckman's views as D. A. Waite incorrectly tried to claim when he denied that he was KJV-only. What you post and assert provides clear evidence that you believe and advocate some KJV-only opinions.

You regularly make use of KJV-only sources, and you suggest that you believe what those sources assert even when the claims are not true. James L. Melton is KJV-only.

 

[Logos1560]

"The NKJV: A D(????)y Translation"


(2) that it's based on the Textus Receptus (which is only a partial truth).

You choose to believe a false accusation.

The truth remains that the NKJV is based on the Textus Receptus. It may be based on multiple, varying editions of the Textus Receptus just as the KJV itself was based on multiple, varying editions of the Textus Receptus. The KJV sometimes followed or influenced by the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, and the KJV did not follow any one Textus Receptus edition available in its day 100%.

 

[Alan Gross]

Because you may deny being KJV-only does not prove that you do not advocate what constitutes a KJV-only view.

Silly.

Since you do not state that you would accept any post-1611 English Bible translation [including the NKJV based on the same texts as the KJV] as being the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the KJV is the word of God translated into English, it suggests that you are KJV-only.

Misinformed religious obsession.

The term KJV-only does not mean that someone follows Peter Ruckman's views as D. A. Waite incorrectly tried to claim when he denied that he was KJV-only. What you post and assert provides clear evidence that you believe and advocate some KJV-only opinions.

So, you don't know what KJV-only is, other than a vague stereotype?

You regularly make use of KJV-only sources,

Do I? Can you name one?

I use a lot of sources.

So, do I then, ipso facto, believe everything they say?

and you suggest that you believe what those sources assert even when the claims are not true.

I believe asserted claims that are true.

James L. Melton is KJV-only.

Oh my, wow.

What kind? according to Dr. Bob?