Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ KJV or NKJV - why NOT?

[bibleman]

Can you help me with your thoughts on these two questions?

1) If the NKJV is ONLY a little different than the KJV then WHY change to the NKJV at all?

2) If the NKJV is ONLY a little different than the KJV (and it makes it a little easier to understand) then WHY NOT change to the NKJV?

Got any thoughts in regard to this quagmire of thought?

[Ironman]

https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/N ... deadly.htm

The NKJV: A Deadly Translation


By Pastor James L. Melton


We will now give some special attention to one ofthe deadliest translations on the market--the New King James Version,first published in 1979. It is a deadly version because it's editors havesucceeded in deceiving the body of Christ on two main points: (1) That it's aKing James Bible (which is a lie), and (2) that it's based on the TextusReceptus (which is only a partial truth). The following information should behelpful when dealing with Christians who have been swindled by the Laodiceanlovers of filthy lucre:


1. The text of the NKJV is copyrighted byThomas Nelson Publishers, while there is no copyright today on the text ofthe KJV. If your KJV has maps or notes, then it may have a copyright, butthe 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 theancient Egyptian mysteries. It was also used by Satanist Aleister Crowleyaround the turn of this century. The symbol can be seen on the New KingJames Bible, on certain rock albums (like Led Zeppelin's), or you can see iton the cover of such New Age books as The Aquarian Conspiracy. (SeeRiplinger's tract on the NKJV.)

3. It is estimated that the NKJV makes over100,000 translation changes, which comes to over eighty changes per pageand about three changes per verse! A great number of these changes bringthe NKJV in line with the readings of such Alexandrian perversions as theNIV and the RSV. Where changes are not made in the text, subtle footnotesoften give credence to the Westcott and Hort Greek Text.

4. While passing off as being true to theTextus 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 completelyomitted.

6. The NKJV demotes the Lord Jesus Christ. InJohn 1:3, the KJV says that all things were made "by" Jesus Christ, but inthe NKJV, all things were just made "through" Him. The word "Servant"replaces "Son" in Acts 3:13 and 3:26. "Servant" replaces "child" in Acts4:27 and 4:30. The word "Jesus" is omitted from Mark 2:15, Hebrews 4:8, andActs 7:45.

7. The NKJV confuses people about salvation. InHebrews 10:14 it replaces "are sanctified" with "are being sanctified", andit replaces "are saved" with "are being saved" in I Corinthians 1:18 and IICorinthians 2:15. The words "may believe" have been replaced with "maycontinue to believe" in I John 5:13. The old straight and "narrow" way ofMatthew 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 a "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 havejustification for rejecting anyone they wish to label as "divisive men".

10. According to the NKJV, no one would stoopso 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 ofGod into a lie", it has also changed Romans 1:25 to read "exchanged thetruth of God for the lie". This reading matches the readings of the newperversions, 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 everyedition of the KJV since 1611! How say ye it's a King James Bible?

14. The Jews "require" a sign, according to ICorinthians 1:22 (and according to Jesus Christ - John 4:48), but the NKJVsays they only "request" a sign. They didn't "request" one when signsfirst appeared in Exodus 4, and there are numerous places throughout theBible 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 Corinthians5:17 says that if any man is in Christ he is a new "creature", which matchesthe words of Christ in Mark 16:15. The cross reference is destroyed in theNKJV, which uses the word "creation."

16. As a final note, we'd like to point out howthe NKJV is very inconsistent in it's attempt to update the language of theKJV. The preface to the NKJV states that previous "revisions" of the KJVhave "sought to keep abreast of changes in English speech", and also thatthey too are taking a "further step toward this objective". However, whentaking a closer look at the language of the NKJV, we find that oftentimesthey are stepping BACKWARDS! Please note a few examples of how well the NKJVhas "kept abreast of the changes in the English language":




SCRIPTURE KJV NKJV

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

[Hill Top]

https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/N ... deadly.htm

The NKJV: A Deadly Translation


By Pastor James L. Melton


We will now give some special attention to one ofthe deadliest translations on the market--the New King James Version,first published in 1979. It is a deadly version because it's editors havesucceeded in deceiving the body of Christ on two main points: (1) That it's aKing James Bible (which is a lie), and (2) that it's based on the TextusReceptus (which is only a partial truth). The following information should behelpful when dealing with Christians who have been swindled by the Laodiceanlovers of filthy lucre:


1. The text of the NKJV is copyrighted byThomas Nelson Publishers, while there is no copyright today on the text ofthe KJV. If your KJV has maps or notes, then it may have a copyright, butthe 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 theancient Egyptian mysteries. It was also used by Satanist Aleister Crowleyaround the turn of this century. The symbol can be seen on the New KingJames Bible, on certain rock albums (like Led Zeppelin's), or you can see iton the cover of such New Age books as The Aquarian Conspiracy. (SeeRiplinger's tract on the NKJV.)

3. It is estimated that the NKJV makes over100,000 translation changes, which comes to over eighty changes per pageand about three changes per verse! A great number of these changes bringthe NKJV in line with the readings of such Alexandrian perversions as theNIV and the RSV. Where changes are not made in the text, subtle footnotesoften give credence to the Westcott and Hort Greek Text.

4. While passing off as being true to theTextus 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 completelyomitted.

6. The NKJV demotes the Lord Jesus Christ. InJohn 1:3, the KJV says that all things were made "by" Jesus Christ, but inthe NKJV, all things were just made "through" Him. The word "Servant"replaces "Son" in Acts 3:13 and 3:26. "Servant" replaces "child" in Acts4:27 and 4:30. The word "Jesus" is omitted from Mark 2:15, Hebrews 4:8, andActs 7:45.

7. The NKJV confuses people about salvation. InHebrews 10:14 it replaces "are sanctified" with "are being sanctified", andit replaces "are saved" with "are being saved" in I Corinthians 1:18 and IICorinthians 2:15. The words "may believe" have been replaced with "maycontinue to believe" in I John 5:13. The old straight and "narrow" way ofMatthew 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 a "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 havejustification for rejecting anyone they wish to label as "divisive men".

10. According to the NKJV, no one would stoopso 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 ofGod into a lie", it has also changed Romans 1:25 to read "exchanged thetruth of God for the lie". This reading matches the readings of the newperversions, 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 everyedition of the KJV since 1611! How say ye it's a King James Bible?

14. The Jews "require" a sign, according to ICorinthians 1:22 (and according to Jesus Christ - John 4:48), but the NKJVsays they only "request" a sign. They didn't "request" one when signsfirst appeared in Exodus 4, and there are numerous places throughout theBible 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 Corinthians5:17 says that if any man is in Christ he is a new "creature", which matchesthe words of Christ in Mark 16:15. The cross reference is destroyed in theNKJV, which uses the word "creation."

16. As a final note, we'd like to point out howthe NKJV is very inconsistent in it's attempt to update the language of theKJV. The preface to the NKJV states that previous "revisions" of the KJVhave "sought to keep abreast of changes in English speech", and also thatthey too are taking a "further step toward this objective". However, whentaking a closer look at the language of the NKJV, we find that oftentimesthey are stepping BACKWARDS! Please note a few examples of how well the NKJVhas "kept abreast of the changes in the English language":




SCRIPTURE KJV NKJV

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

Thanks for putting that together.
I appreciate it.

[luchnia]

I used the NKJV for a period many years ago, but it just never settled for me for some reason. Not sure I can explain the reason, but I went back to KJV and just remained with KJV.

[macca]

Wow, like I said the KJV is King of all versions...
But I still like to read other versions and I Collect old bibles.

Dake's spiritual gift from God is proof enough for me that the KJV of the Bible is God's choice for His Word to this fallen World that He loves.

[branham1965]

Has anyone tried the MEV =Modern English Version??

It is based on the Textus Receptus and the Jacob Ben Hayyim edition of the Masoretic text.
It uses the King James Version as base manuscript.

modernenglishversion.com

I know Pastor Rod Parsley uses it sometimes.And i greatly respect him.

[bibleman]

Has anyone tried the MEV =Modern English Version??

It is based on the Textus Receptus and the Jacob Ben Hayyim edition of the Masoretic text.
It uses the King James Version as base manuscript.

modernenglishversion.com

I know Pastor Rod Parsley uses it sometimes.And i greatly respect him.

I have it from Kenneth Copeland. It is ok but still I use the king James most of the time

[branham1965]

Reverend Dake said when he was Spirit filled that the Lord gave him A SUPERNATURAL GIFT.
And i heard him say on youtube that all the verses that he received were in the King James Version.

some will try to say this was not real and downplay it.

But it was real just the same.And his works have blessed many lives.

[DanW]

I have used the New King James for years and enjoy it. I use many others, like the New American Standard, NIV, NET, ESV, and many more obscure ones. Most people these days have easy access to a multitude of translations because of apps on their phones.

The KJV only, and the borderline KJV only arguments seem to hang around year after year, although the younger generations have no interest in such pointless debate.

Was the KJV a gift from God? Yes, in the sense that it was the best translation at the time and was very well done. But it was a work done for a people 400 years ago, in a different country. It's not just a little different from the NKJV and others. It is often incomprehensible and at other times, verses that should be clear can fly right over your head if you don't see them translated in a modern translation.

I grew up in the Catholic church, and when I was young, there was still an argument raging in that church about the decision to drop the latin mass in favor of English. Do you know there are still places you can go today where stubborn luddites celebrate the mass in Latin? Nothing is more damaging to the church than tradition. It always robs us.

I have no problem with anyone using the KJV, although they need to check it against the Greek or other translations. Some people proudly refer to it as "the authorized version" as if God Himself gave it a stamp of approval.

One problem, and I understand it to some degree, is the frustration some people feel when they see multiple ways a verse gets translated. They ask, "Which one is right?" But if you study the languages (and I'm only a novice beginner in Greek) you soon understand that translations are not word to word codes. In other words, you can't have truly "literal" translation all the time because languages are built differently, thoughts are expressed differently, and even simple phrases are not said the same way. For example, Greek has no punctuation, and word order can be jumbled. An English translation is the result of decisions that have to be made on how the sentence should be structured, how words are to be translated (semantic range comes into play) and whether an attempt to go "word for word" faithfully conveys what is being said in the original.

Language use changes every decade, hence the updates to modern popular translations. What was perfect in 1611 is totally misleading in 2020. I used to tease my girls before they left the house, I'd warn them, "Avoid the lust of concupiscence, and all superfluity of naughtiness, which is meet, along with all wantoness." One of them asked me the other day where we might go out to eat. I responded, "whithersoever the governor listeth." What?

I minister to inmates. My wife ministers to little children. Our church mandates KJV in all our work. It is very frustrating to us. The New King James isn't perfect either. No translation is. But it is a nice transition that holds much of the KJV familiar phrasing intact, while making many, many needed updates in word choices and other pertinent changes.

I am encouraged by the fact that so many people take advantage of all the great translations available on their cell phones. We don't need the KJV to go away, but in my opinion, we do need to stop cheating people out of simple understanding of what God is trying to say. I am firmly convinced that God wants to speak to people in their language, in a simple way that they can understand.

[DanW]

2Tim. 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Good example that was brought up. I don't know if any other translation uses "study" as the King James does. The word means to make haste, to be diligent, or to do ones best. Numerous Greek Lexicons bear this out. Gordon Fee, a noted Assembly of God theologian says, "Timothy is to do his best (Gk., spoudason; cf. 4:9, 21; Titus 3:12; the KJV translation, “study,” has misled generations of English–speaking Christians)."-New International Biblical Commentary

Why did the KJV use study? Maybe because the latter end of the verse talks about handling God's Word. Maybe "study" implied more than look at books 400 years ago in England. I don't know.