NKJV = The Cadillac of KJVs !

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
52
48
Is there a better version of the KJV family?

- Escape from Elizabethan unintelligible (to many) English.

- Edited by a great man of God, Art Farstad; not by British clergymen, sprinkled into "church" as babies -- no members of a so-called church with an earthly King of England in charge of it.
 
I like my NKJV Geneva study Bible. Easy read with theological notes.

Executive director Luder Whitlock Jr
General editor R. C. Sproul
OT Editor Bruce Waltke
NT Editor Moises Silva
Associate Editors James Boice, Edmund Clowney, Roger Nicole, J. I. Packer
Assistant Editors William B. Evans and John Mason

In my opinion a pretty strong group of guys
 
Sola_Scriptura said:
The information posted in the link you provided is accurate when looked at without bias. Of course, there are those that ignore obvious evidence for a translation that is easy to read. Thanks for posting.

God Bless
Click to expand...

I was first exposed to the NKJV in an electronic Bible. Would sometimes spot a verse and see that it was actually altered from the KJV. I'd thought the NKJV was maybe about modernizing the language, but still a KJV, but it's not. The NASB is closer to the KJV than the NKJV! Yet I'm not cultish about translations, was led, as a child, by a Good News Bible, the issues only coming to bear as an earnest adult Bible student leading to the KJV, which I've trusted and always used, in the main.

But easy to read is good, if this means the Bible will be read, as opposed to not! And what would be considered the worst of liberal or corrupted Bibles still have that basic gospel message that saves, more real gospel than many people down the ages have had, who've not had whole Bibles, or perhaps couldn't even read. After all, it's the gospel of faith in the Lord Jesus and the baptism of the Holy Spirit which save, not doctrinal hair splitting.

God bless you, too.
 
I'm not trying to start an arguement but what's with all the hate of bible translations other than the KJV?
 
DaveTheRave said:
I'm not trying to start an arguement but what's with all the hate of bible translations other than the KJV?
Click to expand...

I don't know, I use several translations including the NIV but I use it with extreme care and compare it to other translations.
 
DaveTheRave said:
I'm not trying to start an arguement but what's with all the hate of bible translations other than the KJV?
Click to expand...

In the past few decades, translators have taken to deliberately changing the word of God to make it more politically correct. This started with the gender neutral debate (changing masculine words to gender-neutral words) and has now moved to many other aspects. The KJV is free from modern Political Correctness.

A bigger debate, but I think is mostly dumb, is the assumption that the KJV is perfect and that every difference with the KJV is corruption. See post #2 for a link to someone using this argument. For example, the link claims "Lord" has been omitted from the NKJV 66 times, as if the NKJV is trying to deny some sort of Lordship. What the link doesn't tell you is that the word Lord still appears about 6759 times in the NKJV.
 
Jamal said:
See post #2 for a link to someone using this argument.
Click to expand...

Not true. I provided a link to information not of my origins, which points out corruptions. Take it or leave it, if you don't like factual information. I'm not making a "dumb" debate, am not interested in a "dumb" debate, something "dumb" people seek. Let the reader understand.
 
JesusIsAll said:
Not true. I provided a link to information not of my origins, which points out corruptions. Take it or leave it, if you don't like factual information. I'm not making a "dumb" debate, am not interested in a "dumb" debate, something "dumb" people seek. Let the reader understand.
Click to expand...

I challenge any reader to read what I said and compare it to your reply above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back