http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/NKJVOmissions.html
Baptist churches that claim to use the "King James Bible AV 1611"
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by MichaelNZ, Aug 15, 2012.
Page 4 of 7
-
Also please point out 1 of the 1200 times where the KJV ignores the TR. This statement is simply a lie.
Where this chart is accurate it is simple a matter of translational choices - not omissions. -
I did a quick search for the source of that deviations list and it goes back to her tract “New King James Errors & Omissions".
I should have done my research better. -
I am a big supporter of the traditional text body and formal equivalence. I checked out the NKJV for many years. It is a faithful and literal translation from the same text body as the KJV. -
I've been in KJO churches all my life. Even the SBC church I attended years ago was KJO. But as I look at the issue more I continue to see that position being held up by bad scholarship and rhetoric. But the other side is rife with false-teaching and ecumenism. So I don't know what to do quite frankly... :tear: -
-
-
Of course, I say this not knowing exactly what your definition of "false teaching" is. For most of us, that definition is "anything someone teaches that I disagree with, whether it has a Scriptural basis or not." :smilewinkgrin: -
Ditto THAT!!
Bro.Greg -
Ecumenism...YEP!
Bro.Greg -
-
He spake also this parable; A certain [man] had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.As can be seen above, the term "Lord" is being applied to a fictious person in a parable; it is NOT be said about Jesus Christ.
Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung [it]: -
-
-
Though I do get books from David Cloud's website. I seem to be closest to his beliefs when it comes to the KJV. And I love that he is an Independent Baptist that preaches repentance!:applause: -
-
But to blame "modern versions" for "apostacy" and the like is erroneous, in my opinion. There were apostates and modernists even before the modern versions came into being. -
-
I said
-
The above assertion that the NKJV had to borrow from the copyrighted modern versions based on the Critical Text in order to get a copyright does not even make good sense. How would using renderings from a copyrighted version be a way to get a copyright?
The fact that the 1994 21st Century KJV that only updates some archaic language in the KJV has a copyright would be evidence that contradicts this KJV-only claim. In addition, the fact that the 1994 21st Century KJV and the 1998 Third Millennium Bible that are almost identical in text both have copyrights also conflicts with it.
Page 4 of 7