Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by parsonbob, Jul 14, 2006.
I enjoy reading the NKJV. Does it change the meaning or leave out verses like the NIV does.
Yes, the NKJV is a very good English translation of the Bible. It is very readable and available in a number of formats/study editions.
NIV does not "change the meaning" or "leave out verses." You are working with faulty information from uninformed sources.
I like it. I preach from it. I believe it's a solid translation.
I like it a lot. I have the John Macarthur study Bible NKJV.
Ransom, while I agree that the NKJV is the best alternative to the KJV, I disagree with your denial of the NIV. I don't believe I would be an uninformed source (since I have read the NIV and compared it with the trustworthy KJV) if I had been the one who informed the author of this thread. It does indeed change the meaning and take out verses. There are many, many resources that have simple line-to-line comparisons between the two. It really is that simple. Someone has already done the work.
This issue does get heated, so let's stay sweet. I can take you disagreeing with me. It's ok.:thumbs:
If we wish to discuss the NIV, let's open a new thread, please. Let's stick to the NKJV on this thread.
Thankyeee very much!
The guy who started the thread mentioned the NIV, what gives?
The KJV and the NKJV are not same because they disagree each other 2,000 times! 40% of 2,000 words in the NKJV is not TR.
Disagreement does NOT prove one right & the other wrong.
Yes, the NKJV is a good translation, is the word of God in English, same as several other translations, old and new. So it sometimes departs from the TR? So what?
Once again an example of the fact that many people such as AskJo have a benchmark of the KJV.
When in reality the benchmark is the original languages. I could careless if a translation disagrees with the KJV or any other translation. I want to know how it measures up to the benchmark of the original languages.
The NKJV measures up nicely to the benchmark of the original languages. It is a top tier translation.
I have the McArthur study Bible in NKJV as well. Its my favorite translation and study Bible. I have a NASB McArthur coming in the mail (for free!!).
Ransom, while I agree that the NKJV is the best alternative to the KJV, I disagree with your denial of the NIV.
One, I didn't say the NKJV is the best alternative to the KJV.
Two, I did not (and do not) "deny" the NIV.
Clearly you are reading someone else's post.
Well, the truth of the matter is it may not prove "one right and the other wrong", but it does prove they are not BOTH RIGHT! Things that are different are not the same. So which one is right? If that is not the question, this is, "Which one is closer to right"?
This is, of course, dependent on you view of Divine Preservation. The NKJV has not been around as long as KJV, so we have to talk "sources" for these two translations to see which has been around AND utilized by Christ's church (not Catholic) the most.
"I yield back the balance of my time"
I was speaking of your denial that the NIV does not leave out verses or change meanings. Read the rest of my post!
Matthew 15:5 Textus Receptus Greek Text
υμεις δε λεγετε ος αν ειπη τω πατρι η τη μητρι δωρον ο εαν εξ εμου ωφεληθης και ου μη τιμηση τον πατερα αυτου η την μητερα αυτου
Matthew 15:5 NKJV
But you say, "Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God"
Please show me where "God" in the TR agreeing with the NKJV is.
Of course, anybody can DAMN my Bible by misquoting it
[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] Correct quotation of Matthew 15:5 (nKJV):
But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother,
"Whatever profit you might have received
from me is a gift to God"--
If your source does NOT have the itilacized words, then
your source is practicing DECEPTION and DONE GOTCHA!
'gift to God' is a very common translation of the Greek term 'dōron'
BTW, here is the correct reading of the KJV:
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Matthew 15:5 ;(KJV1769 Edition):
But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] his[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] mother,
It is a gift,
by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
So yes, the KJVs add words to the number in the Greek TRs
to make sense in English.
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]
First of all, will you concede that the NKJV is a translation of the Textus Receptus? (At least one of them.)
I don't know.
I was taught that there is approximately 1.4% difference between the TR and the NKJV's Majority text under Dr. Thomas Strouse. If that Majority is another version of the TR, I don't know.
Strouse is wrong. The NKJV is based on Scrivener's TR which was reconstructed in 1894 to reflect the Greek basis of the KJV. The NKJV is not based on the Majority Text. The ONLY English bible based on the Majority Text is the English Majority Text Version.