What's wrong with the NKJV?

Larry you prove nothing!I have rejected you scriptually.Why can't you be a man and go away?I refuse to discuss anything with you because you have displayed that you will not accept truth.Don't bother with your questions of when?where?what? you know very well the answer to those questions.

 

The NKJV claims to make the "old" KJV "much clearer" by "updating obsolete words" (New King James Version, 1982e. p. 1235)

How about that "obsolete word" - "hell". The NKJV removes the word "hell" 23 times! And how do they make it "much clearer"? By replacing "hell" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "hell"?

Matthew 16:18
KJV: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
NKJV: "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Luke 16:23

 

I have showed you that the TR wasn't changed since 1894, something you can verify for yourself. I have showed you that the TR was changed multiple times prior to 1894, five times by Erasmus himself prior to the translating of the KJV. What that proves is that modern scholarhip has never changed the TR. When you said they had, you made a blatantly and demonstrably false statement.

I have offered you nothing but truth. You have yet to offer one verse of Scripture in support of your position. Why? All we are asking is that you support your position with Scripture because we accept Scripture as the final authority.

You have rejected me but it has not been scriptural becuase 1) you have not followed the scriptural pattern; 2) the reasons for which you reject me are not scriptural reasons. Your failure to particpate in the discussion is a problem for all of us because it makes it very hard to have a "discussion" board when members won't discuss. I do ask questions that I know the answer to. I am trying to get you to realize what the answer is. But so far you have shown yourself unwilling to do that. I won't "be a man and go away" because truth is under assault and Brian, myself, and others must defend it from its detractors. When people malign the word of God, we cannot idly sit by and spectate.

I urge you again, if you have answers, put them forth. Use Scripture to show us where God said what you are saying.

 

Allow me to continue to cite the Webster's definition: 4) Hell. See by posting a halftruth, you misrepresented the whole truth. Then when you look up hell in the same dictionary, you find an excellent definition, and it uses "hades."

But you err in getting your theology from Webster. YOu should get your theology from theoligical works that properly define hades. BAGD (a Greek dictionary which is where you shoudl be looking up Greek words) says: The place of the dead. strangely enough, that's what it means.

Christ however was not an Assyrian or a new ager. He was Christ and when he used "hades" he was referring to the place of separation from God.

Everyone ... that is everyone who likes to use the words that Christ used. It is amazing that you hate the NIV because it substitutes some words for others and here you argue that teh KJV should substitute one word for another. That's inconsistent.

 

Matthew 16:18
KJV: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

I hate to burst your KJVO bubble, but the original Greek word is haides, which is defined in English as "Hades" or the "place/state of departed souls". So if "Hades" is what appears in the NKJV, it's more true to the greek than the contemporary "hell". Same with Luke 16:23.

[ January 23, 2003, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

I believe the Bible is the word (and words) of God. If you ask me to give you a copy of the Bible, I will hand you a King James Bible. Therefore, changing one word, letter, or punctuation mark alters the very words of God and is unacceptable. The PROBLEM is with the Laodecian 'christians' who hopelessly yearn for some more mystical and ambiguous authority. Modern 'christianity' says live by your feelings. God says, "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."

That said, here is one CLEAR example of how the "nkjv" (NON King James Version) directly aids false doctrine tied to SALVATION:

1611 AV: For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Cor 1:18)

Jerry Falwell Version: For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Cor 1:18)

So, is SALVATION a current possesion, or a process of redemption?

 

Actually, if you are going to update the Bible or even some hymns, let's go "all-the-way!"

How Great Thou Art = you beez da bomb!
Come Thou Fount = po' sum wattah on meez
We're Marching to Zion = we be cruzin' to da mall

 

But the KJV has been changed a multitude of times over the last 400 years. The punctuation did not even exist when God inspired the Bible. Therefore, in 1611 God "changed" his word and has done so on a regular basis until you have Bible you use today.

I didn't know Jerry Falwell had a version. He has said he thinks the KJV is the best. However, you haven't even heard the worst of it yet. Did you know that according to your King James Version, you are not even saved right now??

Rom 5:10 in your KJV says that you will be saved. How unfortunate it that if salvation is a present possession. 1 Peter 1:5 tells us that our salvation is ready to be revealed in the last time. What?? You means we don't already have it??

I point this out, not to be smart aleck (although I enjoy that). What this shows is that your argument can be used against the KJV. If the new versions are guilty of making salvation something we don't have, the KJV does it too.

The truth is that 1 Cor 1:18 says that we are being saved. It is a present tense verbal. There is nothing heretical about that verse. The Bible teaches that we have been saved, that we are being saved, and that we will be saved.

 

[ January 23, 2003, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: Scotty aka Scott J ]

 

I know... feelings are all that matter... boy. I do not feel like my unsaved grandmother should have to go to hell if she does not accept Christ. I guess, then she is fine?

EXPERIENCE/EMOTIONS do not alter TRUTH. sorry. maybe too much time listening to the glass toilet has ruined your mind...

this is a good point. Many publishers who do not believe in the inerrancy have changed many spellings and even words. However, if you cannot tell a phony from the real thing you are not paying attention.

THE Greek?!? You mind SHOWING me THE GREEK!?!?!?!? You have been lied to sooooo long you don't even know when you are repeating a LIE!

"If you tell a lie often enough and loud enough the people will believe it." -Adolph Hitler (paraphrase)

 

Really? Please cite the scripture that says that the KJV and only the KJV is the Word of God in English. I think quite clearly you do set yourself up as the final authority. You have a conclusion and no proof scriptural nor historical will change your mind... that makes you- not God, not the Bible, not the KJV of the Bible- the final authority.

 

I agree. Feelings have absolutely no impact on truth. So... where is the tangible proof of KJVOnlyism. There is no scripture that establishes it. The historical evidence contradicts it. Logic disproves it.

 

Yes, I agree. Those verses were complete lies in 1605. How dare they even TALK about "THE Bible" before 1611?

 

Great. We know your opinion. Now, show us the scripture that proves what you believe. Can't? Oh, then show us the proof that the KJV is equivalent to the originals.

... that is exactly right. KJVOnlyism was invented by an SDA in the 1930's (certainly within the age of modern 'christianity') and is based on nothing but feelings sprinkled with experential religionism.

Great choice of proof texts.

The citation:

The parallel passage:

The OT passage:

[/qb]

So which one is the Word of God? By your rule (notice whose AUTHORITY we're talking about), only one of these passages can be the very words of God.

 

OK. familiar verse:
Do you believe:
Psalm 12
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
?

If so, WHERE are the W-O-R-D-S of God today?

They MUST be PERFECT. Every word, every jot and every tittle. Otherwise God did not preserve His word...

 

Amen. Psalm 12:6-7 finally was true in 1611. I'm glad I don't live in the previous 80% of church history when that and other passages were complete lies.

 

Where in the Bible does God say He will preserve the Bible in only the original languages or that only the original languages can convey His pure word?

People who believe the KJB is the Word of God believe that it is the final authority. People who believe in greek and hebrew believe that they and their education and their higher understanding of the "scriptures" are the final authority.