the same line: Geneva, KJV, NKJV?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Mar 5, 2008.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Does the 1982 NKJV deserve to be placed on the same line of Bibles with the 1560 Geneva and the 1611 KJV? Were all three translated from the same basic original language texts?

    Some seem willing to accept the Geneva Bible, one of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision, while inconsistently seeming to reject the NKJV.

    Is it interesting that in some words or verses, the NKJV may be more in agreement with the Geneva than the KJV is?

    Consider the following examples:

    Genesis 1:28
    fill the earth (Geneva, NKJV)
    replenish the earth (Bishops, Douay-Rheims, KJV)

    Exodus 3:22
    shall ask of her neighbour (Geneva, NKJV)
    shall borrow of her neighbour (KJV)

    Leviticus 11:16
    the seameaw (Geneva) [a older name for seagull]
    the cuckow (KJV)
    the seagull (NKJV)

    Job 30:29
    a companion to the ostriches (Geneva) a companion to owls (KJV)
    a companion of ostriches (NKJV)

    Psalm 18:34
    a bow of brass (Geneva)
    a bow of steel (KJV)
    a bow of bronze (NKJV

    Proverbs 30:23 hateful woman (Geneva, NKJV) odious woman (KJV)

    Eccl. 6:7
    soul is not filled (Geneva)
    appetite is not filled (KJV)
    soul is not satisfied (NKJV)

    Song of Solomon 8:10
    one that findeth peace (Geneva)
    one that found favour (KJV)
    one who found peace NKJV)

    Isaiah 7:25 sheep (Geneva, NKJV) lesser cattle (KJV)

    Isaiah 19:10
    in heart (Geneva)
    for fish (KJV)
    of soul (NKJV)

    Isaiah 34:5 Edom (Geneva, NKJV) Idumea (KJV)

    Isaiah 43:23 sheep (Geneva, NKJV) small cattle (KJV)

    Jer. 5:6
    wolf of the wilderness (Geneva)
    wolf of the evenings (KJV)
    wolf of the deserts (NKJV)

    Amos 5:8 Pleiades and Orion (Geneva, NKJV) the seven stars and Orion (KJV)

    Amos 5:26
    Siccuth your king (Geneva)
    tabernacle of your Moloch (KJV) ["or, Siccuth your king" 1611 margin]
    Sikkuth your king (NKJV)

    Amos 6:12 wormwood (Geneva, NKJV) hemlock (KJV)

    Zeph. 2:14 pelican (Geneva, NKJV) cormorant (KJV)

    Matthew 23:24 strain out (Geneva, NKJV) strain at (KJV)

    Mark 4:12
    lest at any time they should turn (Geneva)
    lest at any time they should be converted (1582 Rheims, KJV)
    lest they should turn (NKJV)

    Luke 17:6 mulberry tree (Geneva, NKJV) sycamine tree (KJV)

    Acts 17:4
    joined in company with Paul and Silas (Geneva)
    consorted with Paul and Silas (KJV)
    joined with Paul and Silas (1568 Bishops, NKJV)

    1 John 2:26 deceive you (Geneva, NKJV) seduce you (1582 Rheims, KJV)

    Of course, there would also be examples where the Geneva and the KJV may have the same word and the NKJV may differ. Nevertheless, there is evidence available that the NKJV should be placed on the same line of Bibles with the Geneva and the KJV.
     
  2. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yer' "right on!", brother (or sister).

    Ed
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Of course it is the same line - those who say differently....okay, thats all I am going to say.
     
  4. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    It seems that the evidence is so clear that other translations such as the NKJV would have as much right to be in the KJV-only view's line of good Bibles as the ones KJV-only advocates include of it that no one here disagrees.

    Even with the hundreds and thousands of differences between Tyndale's and the KJV, the KJV can still be called "another edition of Tyndale." While many of the differences are differences in translating, there would be more textual differences between Tyndale's and the KJV than any that KJV-only advocates think that they find in the NKJV. It becomes clear that Webster's Bible, the 1842 Baptist Bible, the MKJV, the NKJV, the KJ21, or KJ2000 can also be justly called another edition of Tyndale or another edition or revision of the KJV. David Norris acknowledged that the NKJV can “be classed largely as a revision rather than a retranslation” (Big Picture, p. 367). David Sorenson admitted that the NKJV’s N. T. “is translated from the Textus Receptus” (Touch Not, p. 240). Sorenson also listed the NKJV as being “based upon the Received Text” (p. 10). Jack Lewis claimed that “the NKJV is a deliberate effort to turn the processes of scholarship back to the state of textual knowledge prior to the influence of Westcott-Hort” (English Bible, p. 333). In his list of formal equivalent translations, Einwechter included the NKJV along with the KJV and he noted that the NKJV is “based on the TR“ (English Bible Translations, pp. 17, 29). Samuel Gipp acknowledged that the NKJV “is based on the correct Antiochian manuscripts” (Answer Book, p. 104). Gary Zeolla confirmed that the NKJV is “based on the same Greek text as the KJV, the TR” (Differences, pp. 20, 66). Kerby Fannin listed the NKJV and MKJV as being “based on the Received Text” (While Men Slept, pp. 469-470). Geisler and Nix observed: “the diligent efforts by the revisers of The New King James Version to produce an English Bible that retains as much of the classic King James Version as possible while at the same time bringing its English up-to-date has been achieved to a great degree” (General Introduction, p. 599). Alec Gilmore described the NKJV as “little more than a language update” (Dictionary, p. 119). William Paul claimed that “the NKJV is virtually the King James Version, only without the 17th century archaic word forms” (English Language Bible, p. 80). Arthur Farstad, executive editor of the NKJV, wrote: “The text of the New King James Version itself is the traditional one used by Luther and Calvin, as well as by such Catholic scholars as Erasmus, who produced it. Later (1633) it was called the Textus Receptus, or ‘TR’” (NKJV in the Great Tradition, p. 111). In note 9, Farstad commented that “deeper reflection led us to adhere to the traditional King James text” (p. 116). Farstad quoted the following from the guidelines for the making of the NKJV: “the Traditional texts of the Greek and Hebrew will be used” (p. 34). Concerning the NKJV, James D. Price observed: “Constant reference was made to the printed edition of the Hebrew Bible used by the translators of 1611, the second Bomberg edition edited by Jacob ben Chayyim. In those few places where the Bomberg text differed from the Stuttgart edition, the Bomberg reading was followed” (King James Onlyism, p. 307).
     
  5. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Here are some other O. T. examples where the NKJV seems to be more in agreement with the 1560 Geneva Bible than the KJV is.

    Some of these examples indicate that if the KJV had followed the Geneva Bible in these renderings it would be more up-to-date and less archaic. In a number of these examples, the reason that the KJV differs from the Geneva may be because the KJV kept the rendering of the Bishops' instead of the perhaps better rendering of the Geneva.

    Gen. 4:26 Enosh (Geneva, NKJV) Enos (Bishops', KJV)

    Gen. 21:26 know (Geneva, NKJV) wot (Bishops', KJV)

    Gen. 28:11 And he came (Geneva, Bishops', NKJV) And he lighted (KJV)

    Gen. 37:22 deliver (Geneva, NKJV) rid (Bishops', KJV)

    Gen. 41:54 famine (Geneva, NKJV) dearth (Bishops', KJV)

    Gen. 46:27 were seventy (Geneva, NKJV) were threescore and ten (Bishops', KJV)

    Exod. 5:19 diminish (Geneva, NKJV) minish (Bishops', KJV)

    Exod. 9:31 flax and the barley were (Geneva, Bishops', NKJV) flax and the barley was (KJV)

    Exodus 13:12 womb (Geneva, NKJV) matrix (Bishops', KJV)

    Exodus 15:27 seventy (Geneva, NKJV) threescore and ten (Bishops', KJV)

    Exodus 34:19 womb (Geneva, NKJV) matrix (Bishops', KJV)

    Lev. 10:14 they are (Geneva, NKJV) they be (Bishops', KJV)

    Lev. 21:3 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (Bishops', KJV)

    Numbers 10:29 Reuel (Geneva, NKJV) Raguel (Bishops', KJV)

    Numbers 22:6 know (Geneva, NKJV) wot (Bishops', KJV)

    Deut. 14:15 ostrich (Geneva, Bishops', NKJV) owl (KJV)

    Judges 8:30 seventy (Geneva, NKJV) threescore and ten (Bishops', KJV)

    Judges 15:3
    Then Samson said unto them (Geneva)
    And Samson said concerning them (KJV)
    And Samson said to them (NKJV)

    1 Samuel 14:11
    So they both shewed themselves (Geneva)
    And they both shewed themselves (Bishops)
    And both of them discovered themselves (KJV)
    So both of them showed themselves (NKJV)

    1 Samuel 14:56 young man (Geneva, NKJV) stripling (KJV)

    1 Samuel 30:13 ago (Geneva, NKJV) agone (Bishops', KJV)

    1 Kings 2:1 near (Geneva, NKJV) nigh (Bishops', KJV)

    2 Kings 4:38 famine (Geneva, NKJV) dearth (Bishops', KJV)

    2 Kings 19:37 land of Ararat (Geneva, NKJV) land of Aremenia (Bishops', KJV)

    2 Chron. 36:15 early (Geneva, NKJV) betimes (Bishops', KJV)

    Job 41:20 boiling pot (Geneva, NKJV) seething pot (Bishops', KJV)

    Psalm 40:7
    in the roll of the book (Geneva)
    in the volume of the book (KJV)
    in the scroll of the book (NKJV)

    Psalm 81:3 Blow the trumpet (Geneva, NKJV) Blow up the trumpet (Bishops', KJV)

    Psalm 107:39 diminished (Geneva, NKJV) minished (Bishops', KJV)

    Proverbs 6:14 evil (Geneva, NKJV) mischief (Bishops', KJV)

    Proverbs 24:28
    wilt thou deceive with thy lips? (Geneva)
    speak no falsehood with thy lips (Bishops)
    deceive not with thy lips (KJV)
    would you deceive with your lips? (NKJV)

    Isaiah 34:11 pelican (Geneva, NKJV) pelicans (Bishops') cormorant (KJV)

    Isaiah 37:38 land of Ararat (Geneva, NKJV) land of Armenia (Bishops', KJV)

    Isaiah 40:12 counted (Geneva) measured (Bishops', NKJV) meted out (KJV)

    Isaiah 43:20 ostriches (Geneva, Bishops', NKJV) owls (KJV)

    Micah 1:8 ostriches (Geneva, Bishops', NKJV) owls (KJV)
     
  6. Young Fundamentalist

    Young Fundamentalist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    the King James is the Only one
     
  7. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    You began a sentence ( minus the proper capitalization ), but forgot to finish it. Could you elaborate please?
     
  8. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Thanks for all your hard work on this subject Log. Your citings seem to confirm your idea. I think in many cases ( not all )if the KJV had followed even the second edition of Tyndale's work it would read less archaically.
     
  9. Bluefalcon

    Bluefalcon
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    4
    Would that the NKJV had followed the Byzantine text in the NT, then it would have been far more accurate than the KJV there, but, on the other hand, it would not have fulfilled its stated purpose, which was to update the rendering of the KJV without tampering with its underlying Hebrew/Greek texts. I rather think the NKJV translators did quite well with the task they were assigned, don't you?
     

Share This Page

Loading...