Cache Valley, Utah
| New King James|
I know, I know... I myself am a King James patriot. But, I'm curious as to your thoughts on the New King James.
| 2005/7/29 8:54||Profile|
Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
| Re: New King James|
I think it is a good, straight forward translation. I have two, one with Thompson's chain reference and another with John MacArthur's study notes. The translators, while wanting to keep the meter and poetry of the KJV (as much as possible), lost a lot in the charm and majesty department, because lets face it, old English sounds far more cool than modern English.
Daniel van de Laar
| 2005/7/29 11:12||Profile|
| Re: New King James|
Personally, i like the NKJV. While KJV is my primary and favorite, I find the NKJV makes some scripures a little eaiser to grasp. Aside from 'thees and thous' and sentence structure being changed (e.g. A mighty hitter is he, Casey Jones to "Casey jones is a mighty hitter) i can't see that there is a whole lot of differce, but submit that humbly and open to correction.
| 2005/7/29 11:21||Profile|
Cache Valley, Utah
Are the changes in the NKJV simply restructuring dated passages and removing the 'thees' and 'thous', or are there any dramatic changes to it?
| 2005/7/29 13:27||Profile|
| Re: New King James|
There is an introduction to the [url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/nkjv.html]NKJV[/url] on Michael Marlowe's pages. Marlowe is not a supporter of the Byzantine/Majority text and this little intro shows it. (I have contended with him at length on the authenticity of John 8 which he believes is a later addition) His notes should give you a good feel for the version.
| 2005/7/29 16:18||Profile|
| Re: Hi Eli|
I'm not a 'Ruckmanite' or anything remotely like that. And I don't think Jesus or Paul spoke King James English and all of that, or that it's the only good Translation in the world.
I just like the KJV for it's source, the TR, as I tried to make clear on another thread.
And because it's a 'translation' and not an 'interpretation'.
And, because if we MUST memorize a Bible, it may as well be one that is keyed best to the Strong's, Englishman's Concordance, Dictionaries, Lexicons. etc. etc. etc.
I tried to switch versions and did for 9 yr.s, but then found, I was quoting the verses wrong, couldn't find them in the Concordances, and I had to re-learn the KJV and that was extra work that I didn't need, when I was trying to do a word study.
I have a few charts, but I'll just post this one.
(On a side note: I better put a Disclaimer here.
I don't endorse All sites that I may list a link to, on any of the threads.
They may just have a topic on a page, that hits the mark well.
Lord Bless you Eli.
| 2005/7/29 16:44|
If no one minds, I thought I better put in another clarification here.
I've been questioned about Westcott & Hort, because of what I mentioned on the thread about Bible Versions.
I merely mentioned downloading it from e-sword.net because it provided the "grammar", though I thought I made it clear about how I feel about the TR.
The TR is what we stand on also.
I only listed the link above, because the chart has to be 'bought' otherwise, there it was free.
I don't endorse the site, though they try to do a reasonable job defending the Received text.
I surely do not believe the star that Israel uses is "the mark of the beast". Hoy Vey !
The 'star' does have some questions to it, but I'm pro-Israel and am part Jewish, so ........
But, a good site I could have given instead, would have been http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/ on the subject. Look under 'Articles'.
Thanks for Bear-ing up with me. :-(
| 2005/7/29 17:49|
Concerning the NKJV:
There is some new age terminology, ex: Coming One (Matt 11:3, Like 7:19-20). If you think this is not a big deal, it is. The organization named 'Lucis Trust' (Lucis / Lucifer) speaks of the 'Coming One' who is none other than Satan himself. You may notice that some of the Satanic philosophies on their website have crept into many other organizations. The website is:
Be forewarned, when you start getting into Satan's stronghold, he may hit you full force. Make sure you are knowledgeable of truth before you read into deception like Lucis Trust. The way you catch a counterfeiter is to study a true dollar.
Other issues with NKJV:
Numbering is sometimes incorrect. Ex:
II Sam 10:18: "David killed seven hundred charioteers"
1 Chr 19:18: "David killed seven thousand charioteers"
Wording is sometimes backwards. Ex, John 18:
 they led Him away to Annas, who was high priest that year
 The high priest then asked Jesus
 Then Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest
I was told that going through this study would make my head spin, and open me up to being beaten up by Satan, which did happen. It is an exhausting study, so much so that I haven't continued it as habit. But I did find enough evidence to go with the King James.
However, if you say that this study is hogwash, and you love Jesus Christ, and trust His Word, and want to win souls for His glory, then I have no problem with you.
A great session that includes some King James info available on this site on Kent Hovind's Q and A (part 7):
| 2005/7/29 21:12||Profile|
| Re: by letsgetbusy on 2005/7/29 Concerning the NKJV:|
I cannot thank you enough for this information because I thought it was ok to read NKJV I used it for some time, until I got the KJV which was the one I really wanted. This was through a recommendation from two Ministers who have traveled the world. I have great respect for them.
I have been useing the KJV for some years now.
I will be passing this information on to others.
Thankyou Lord for this enlightenment to your word. Amen
| 2005/7/30 14:19||Profile|
HI Letsgetbusy ~
You 'really' studied this out. With good conclusions in the end. That is rough territory you entered, fer shur, for research.
Could I ask for a sort of personal favor ? Well, actually, it's not for me ... but for those coming on this thread, that may be unsaved or young in the Lord and not discerning what you were trying to say.
Originally "Lucis Trust" was named "Lucifer Trust", back in the days of Alice Bailey, etc., etc.
That site is VERY DECEPTIVE (as in 'sneaky') for someone young or unknowing, won't see it as you did, etc. Or just not saved or whatever.
I don't think anyone would mind if you edited your post, and just make it clearer that, that link is Very Occultic, or word it something like that.
I read your post about 4 times, and I know what you're saying,but read it as someone who didn't know about them would, and know that many could think that you got "good info on Bible versions from it" ... and not realize that you were doing a deep study into 'New Age and Beyond' stuff.
That site is the Hub of the Wheel, when it comes to the BIG STUFF, of the last days 'theosophy' ... heavy duty delusional, Seductive and linked to the UN, VERY MUCH and as you know, bringing in "their" coming one, etc..
A young kid may not know what they are reading on that site, cuz it's so "loving and world peace-y and 'Good Works-y' " .... which I know you saw, but babes may not.
Thanks for bearing with me here. I appreciate your posts very much, and hope you know that it's just for the clarification, for those reading this thread that I'm concerned for, not you at all.
Maybe you could put in big red letters, BEWARE OF LUCIS TRUST or something :lol: .
(Boy, I have an unruly sense of humor :-?
Trying to keep my funny-bone out of most of my posts, is getting harder everyday.)
Thanks for hearing me out though.
| 2005/7/30 17:46|