|
|
Post by benshelpmeet on Sept 24, 2004 14:46:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by funnyd on Sept 24, 2004 18:28:15 GMT -5
While I completely respect your position on the King James Version, I must point out that there is a lot to be desired in Dr. Reagan's "facts", which are no more than his own beliefs based from his perspective.
First, he accuses the NKJV of using dynamic equivalence in translation. This is a false charge. The NKJV disavows its use in its preface. If we are to apply the strictest definition of what dynamic equivalence is, then *all* translations, including the KJV, use it in some form or another, if for no other reason than to adapt the differing syntactical usages of Hebrew and Greek into readable English. The NIV does use dynamic equivalence, the NKJV does not.
Dr. Reagan claims that the NKJV is "...not what it claims to be, i.e., a simple updating of the King James Bible (this claim is made in the Preface to the New King James)." This is not a true statement either. The word "update" does not appear in the preface. Rather it fits the classic definition of a revision, not as is stated by Dr. Reagan, "an entirely new translation". The NIV is an entirely new translation, the NKJV is not.
The doctrine of hell is most certainly not *attacked* in the NKJV. Simply counting references does not suffice for evidence. Here is where the rarely printed marginal notes of the KJV itself undermine Dr. Reagan. In Isaiah 14:9, conveniently omitted in his argument, the marginal note for the use of the word "hell" says it can also mean "the grave", in both verses 9 and in 15, the Hebrew is "Sheol", the same word that the KJV actually translates "grave" in Gen 37:35. "Sheol" was the resting place of the dead, which in the Greek is "hades". It did not differentiate between "paradise" for the righteous and "hell" for the unrighteous. One shortcoming in the KJV (note I didn't say error, preversion, or any other pujaritive phrase) is that it uses the word "hell" for both "hades" and "gehenna", which are two distinct places in the Greek. Besides, if the NKJV really wanted to water down the doctrine of hell, it would have to start with the parable of the rich man in Luke 16. Since it still vividly describes the torment of the rich man, Hades or hell (both the resting place of the dead awaiting judgment) is perfectly intact.
Speaking of Luke 16, Dr. Reagan's charge that the "New King James is one of the modern versions that gives comfort and aid to the Jehovah Witnesses and others who deny hell." is absurd. Jehovah's Witnesses don't use the NKJV to start with. They use the New World traslation, which has altered several verses, such as John 1:1, to fit their doctrine. Dr. Reagan admits as much further down the article.
Yes, the NKJV removed the thees and thous, but that is simply because they are not part of modern English. Note that pronouns referencing God are capitalized in the NKJV, in keeping with standard usage. The KJV fails to do this.
There are more factual errors in the article, but for sake of brevity, I'll stop there.
I am specifically not criticizing Dr. Reagan for what he believes, only for presenting his belief as "fact", with suspect (at best) evidence to back it up. If Dr. Reagan simply presented his position on the King James Version in a way as to say it best reflects his beliefs and understandings, then I would have no quarrel whatsoever. But presenting his opinions as "facts" require refutation when they are wrong.
As always, respectfully submitted.
- David
|
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 25, 2004 0:05:32 GMT -5
The following article just skims the surface of the deceit behind the NKJV issue. I could not carry the pictures over. I strongly recommend that you take a look at the pictorial coverage in the article. Dr. Watkins does a thorough job. The link is as follows: www.av1611.org/nkjv.htmlNKJV: Counterfeit by Terry Watkins coun ter feit \'kaunt-er-fit\: to imitate or copy closely especially with intent to deceive. The greatest method of deception is to counterfeit. And the master of counterfeit and deception is Satan. The Bible in 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 warns of Satan's counterfeit: "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;. . ." Isaiah 14: 14 tells of Satan's ultimate counterfeit: ". . . I will BE LIKE the most High." And among his greatest counterfeit's is the New King James Bible (NKJV). Christians that would never touch a New International Version (NIV), New American Standard (NASV), Revised Standard (RSV), the New Revised Standard (NRSV) or other per-versions are being "seduced" by the subtil NKJV. And though the New King James does indeed bear a "likeness" to the 1611 King James Bible, as you'll soon see, there's something else coiled (see Genesis 3:1) "underneath the cover" of the NKJV. WHAT ABOUT THAT MYSTERIOUS MARK? Symbols are used throughout the occult. Harpers' Encyclopedia of Mystical & Paranormal Experience (p.594) says, "Symbols are important to all esoteric teachings, for they contain secret wisdom accessible only to the initiated." Many people have asked about the mysterious symbol on the NKJV. Thomas Nelson Publishers (publishers of the NKJV) claim, on the inside-cover, the symbol, ". . .is an ancient symbol for the Trinity." But Acts 17:29, clearly FORBIDS such symbology: ". . . we ought NOT to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, GRAVEN BY ART and man's device And why does The Aquarian Conspiracy, a key New Age "handbook", bear a similar symbol? New Agers freely admit it represents three inter-woven "6"s or "666".  Constance Cumbey, author of The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow and a notable authority on the New Age Movement, said, "On the cover of the Aquarian Conspiracy is a Mobius, it is really used by them as triple six (666). The emblem on the cover of the New King James Bible is said to be an ancient symbol of the Trinity. The old symbol had gnostic origins. It was more gnostic than Christian. I was rather alarmed when I noticed the emblem..." (The New Age Movement, Southwest Radio Church, 1982 p.11  The three esoteric "6"'s separated. Plainly displaying the interlocked "666". The Triqueta is used as the centerpiece for the logo for The Institute of Transpersonal Psychology (ITP). The ITP is a new age school following the Jungian Psychology [occultist Carl Jung]. One of their stated goals is ". . . to reach the recognition of divinity within"(www.itp.edu/about/tp.html) (see Genesis 3:5, "...ye shall be as gods...") The same symbol (with a circle) is displayed by the rock group Led Zeppelin. Members of Led Zeppelin are deeply involved in satanism and the occult. Guitarist Jimmy Page, so consumed with satanism, actually purchased satanist Aleister Crowley's mansion. Most believe the symbol is from the teachings of Aleister Crowley and represents 666. The Triqueta is used as the centerpiece for the logo for The Institute of Transpersonal Psychology (ITP). The ITP is a new age school following the Jungian Psychology [occultist Carl Jung]. One of their stated goals is ". . . to reach the recognition of divinity within"(www.itp.edu/about/tp.html) (see Genesis 3:5, "...ye shall be as gods...") The same symbol (with a circle) is displayed by the rock group Led Zeppelin. Members of Led Zeppelin are deeply involved in satanism and the occult. Guitarist Jimmy Page, so consumed with satanism, actually purchased satanist Aleister Crowley's mansion. Most believe the symbol is from the teachings of Aleister Crowley and represents 666. The following picture is "The Hierophant" taken from the Tarot card set designed by satanist Aliester Crowley. The "Hierophant" is a priest in the occult and Eleusinian. Notice the "three circles" at the top of the wand or rod in the Hierphant's hand. Inside the the three intertwined circles is the "NKJV symbol". To the right is the top of the wand enlarged. Notice the "NKJV symbol" (upside down) inside the three circles. One of the most occultic television shows ever aired is "Charmed". "Charmed" details the spells and occultic practices of three witches. The "NKJV symbol" is the show's primary symbol of witchcraft and is splattered throughout the series. Notice the "NKJV symbol" displayed on "The Book of Shadows". The Book of Shadows is commonly used in withcraft and satanism: |
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 25, 2004 0:13:33 GMT -5
Part 2
Book of Shadows: Also called a grimoire, this journal kept either by individual witches or satanists or by a coven or group, records the activities of the group and the incantations used. (Jerry Johnston, The Edge of Evil: The Rise of Satanism on North America, p. 269)
THE NKJV & WITCHCRAFT?
The Craft: A Witch's Book of Shadows
The Witch's Book of Shadows or Grimoire is a book of spells, enchantments, and rituals. Includes Rituals, Spells, and Wicca Ethics
The Craft Companion: A Witch's Journal
By Dorothy Morrison, a high priest of Witchcraft.
NOTE: We circled (in YELLOW and RED), and also enlarged to the side The NKJV symbol.
Here's some examples of Satanic and Pagan Jewelry which includes the NKJV logo.
LEFT BOX: Notice the satanic pentagram ring in the top right corner. The ring with the NKJV logo is the fourth down on the left, we highlighted it with a yellow circle.
BOTTOM BOX: Notice the very satanic Baphomet Goat.
We broke out and colored the NKJV symbol found in the other two satanic pieces of jewelry.
LEFT: The image on the left is from the rock group Deicide's album "Once Upon the Cross". It is a triquetra (the NKJV logo) with pentagrams and upside down crosses. The group Deicide members are very serious Satanists. Lead Singer Glen Benton has an upside down cross branded on his forehead. The inside cover of the album "Once Upon the Cross" has the Lord Jesus Christ, sliced up the middle, with his insides removed. The name Deicide means the death of God.
RIGHT: The triquetra (the NKJV logo) is also the logo for the Rap / Metal band P.O.D.
The book "Blood on the Doorposts" by former Satanists, Bill and Sharon Schnoebelen, also documents the "trio of sixes (666)" in the "NKJV symbol" and goes so far as claim it is "symbolic of the anti-christ":
"A disguised interlocked trio of sixes, symbolic of the anti-christ. Also symbolizes the triple goddess of Wicca (three interlocked vesica pisces together). Commonly used in Catholic liturgical iconography, and has recently found its way into the logo of the New King James Bible." (Bill and Sharon Schnoebelen, Blood on the Doorposts, p. 150)
Dr. Cathy Burns writes in her book, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, concerning the "NKJV symbol":
"Marilyn Ferguson, a New Ager, used the symbol of the triquetra (another name for the triskele) on her book The Aquarian Conspiracy. This is a variation for the number 666. Other books and material have a similar design printed on them, such as books from David Spangler, the person who lauds Lucifer, and The Witch's Grimoire. As most people know, the number 666 is the number of the beast (see Revelation 13:18) and is evil, yet the occultists and New Agers love this number and consider it to be sacred.
As stated earlier, many organizations, such as the World Future Society and the Trilateral Commission, incorporate this symbol into their logo. I think it is quite interesting to see that this same symbol appears on the cover of the New King James Bible as well!"(Dr. Cathy Burns, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, pp. 242-243)
For more info on the NKJV "mark"
Would God "mark" His word with a symbol in the occult?
The Preface to the New King James Version (NKJV) reads, "A special feature of the New King James Version is ITS CONFORMITY to the thought flow of the 1611 Bible. . . the new edition, while much clearer ARE SO CLOSE to the traditional. . ."
Among the first changes that greets the reader of the NKJV is the removal of the much maligned "thee, thou and ye". The Preface to the NKJV states, ". . .thee, thou, and ye are replaced by the simple you,. . .These pronouns are no longer part of our language." But "thee, thou and ye" were "NO LONGER part of the language" during 1611 either. (just read the intro to the 1611 King James, there are no "thee", "thou" and "ye"). In fact, Webster's Third New International Dictionary, says of ye: "used from the earliest of times to the late 13th century. . ." (p.2648) And yet the 1611 King James was published 400 years later in the 17th century!
So why are they there?
The Greek and Hebrew language contain a different word for the second person singular and the second person plural pronouns. Today we use the one-word "you" for both the singular and plural. But because the translators of the 1611 King James Bible desired an accurate, word-for-word translation of the Hebrew and Greek text - they could NOT use the one-word "you" throughout! If it begins with "t" (thou, thy, thine) it's SINGULAR, but if it begins with "y" (ye) it's PLURAL. Ads for the NKJV call it "the Accurate One", and yet the 1611 King James, by using "thee", "thou", "ye", is far more accurate!
By the way, if the "thee's" and "thou's" are ". . .no longer part of our language" - why aren't the NKJV translators rushing to make our hymnbooks "much clearer"? "How Great Thou Art" to "How Great You Are", or "Come Thou Fount" to "Come You Fount" Doesn't sound right, does it? Isn't it amazing that they wouldn't dare "correct" our hymns - and yet, without the slightest hesitation, they'll "correct" the word of God!
The NKJV claims to make the "old" KJV "much clearer" by "updating obsolete words" (New King James Version, 1982e. p. 1235)
How about that "obsolete word" - "hell". The NKJV removes the word "hell" 23 times! And how do they make it "much clearer"? By replacing "hell" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!
Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "hell"?
Matthew 16:18
KJV: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
NKJV: "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Luke 16:23
KJV: "And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."
NKJV: "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."
Hell is removed in 2 Sam. 22:6, Job 11:8, 26:6, Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 86:13, 116:3, Isaiah 5:14, 14:15, 28:15,18, 57:9, Jonah 2:2, Matt. 11:23, 16:18, Luke 10:15, 16:23, Acts 2:27, 31, Rev. 1:18, 6:8, 20:13,14.
Then the NKJV decides that maybe "Hades" should be "grave"! So the NKJV makes 1 Corinthians 15:55 "much clearer" by changing "grave" to "Hades"! ". . . O Hades, where is your victory?" Clear as mud. . .
Another one of those "obsolete words" is "repent". They take it out 44 times! And how does the NKJV make it "much clearer"? In Matthew 21:32 they use "relent". Matthew 27:3 it's "remorseful" Or Romans 11:29 they change "repentance" to "irrevocable".
The term "new testament" is NOT in the NKJV! (see Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 9:15,) The NKJV replaces "new testament" with "new covenant" (ditto NIV, NRSV, RSV, NASV). An obvious assault at the written word!
The word "damned", "damnation" is NOT in the NKJV! They make it "much clearer" by replacing it with "condemn" (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). "Condemned" is NO WHERE NEAR AS SERIOUS as "damned"! damned is eternal! One can be "condemned" and not "damned". Romans 14:22 says, ". . . Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth." Webster defines "condemned": to declare to be wrong, but the much more serious and eternal "damn": "to condemn to hell".
The word "devils" (the singular, person called the "devil" is) is NOT in the NKJV! Replaced with the "transliterated" Greek word "demon" (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). The Theosophical Dictionary describes demon as: ". . . it has a meaning identical with that of 'god', 'angel' or 'genius'". Even Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (p.157) defines "demon" as: "an inferior deity, WHETHER GOOD OR BAD". Webster defines "demon" as: "divinity, spirit, an attendant power or spirit", but "devil" as: "the personal supreme spirit of EVIL. . ."
In 2 Timothy 2:15, the NKJV (like the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) remove that "obsolete" word - "study"! The only time you're told to "study" your Bible. AND THEY ZAP IT! Why don't they want you to "study" your Bible? Maybe they don't want you to look too close - you might find out what they've ACTUALLY done to your Bible! The "real" KJV is the only English Bible in the world that instructs you to "study" your Bible!
That "obsolete" word "virtue" is replaced with "power" in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, 8:46! How does anybody confuse "virtue" with "power"? Simple - by being "bosom-buddies" with the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV! That's what they did!
|
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 25, 2004 0:18:10 GMT -5
Part 3
One of the most absurd changes ever made is changing the word "servant" to "slave"! The NKJV in Romans 6:22, reads: "But now having been set FREE from sin, and having become SLAVES OF GOD. . ." The NKJV, in 1 Corinthians 7:22, calls the Christian, "Christ's slave". Talk about a contradiction! John 8:36 says, "If the Son therefore shall make you FREE, YE SHALL BE FREE INDEED." But isn't a Christian supposed to serve? Yes, in love. Not as a slave! Galatians 5:13 explains it, perfectly: "For, brethren, ye have been called unto LIBERTY;(not slavery!) only use not LIBERTY for an occasion to the flesh, but BY LOVE SERVE one another."
In order to "harmonize" with the satanic New Age Movement (and of course the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!), the NKJV changes "end of the WORLD" to "end of the AGE"! And in it's no longer the "WORLD to come" but "AGE to come". The New Age Movement teaches a series of ages (hence the name: New AGE). See Matthew 12:32, 13:39, 13:40, 13:49, 24:3, 28:20, Mark 10:30, Luke 13:30, 20:34,35, 1 Cor 1:21.
The New Age Movement and the occult are longing for one called the Maitreya. The Bible calls him the Anti-Christ. New Ager's refer to him as the "the Coming One" - AND SO DOES THE NKJV! In Luke 7:19, 20 (see also Matt 11:3) John told his disciples to ask Jesus: "Are You THE COMING ONE. . ." In the "The Great Invocation", a "prayer" highly reverenced among New Agers and chanted to "invoke" the Maitreya, says, "Let Light and Love and Power and Death, Fulfil the purpose of the Coming One."
And to REALLY show their sympathy with the satanic New Age Movement - BELIEVE IT OR NOT - in Acts 17:29 the New Age NKJV changes "Godhead" to "Divine Nature"! ( ditto NIV, NASV)
And if you think the NKJV just "innocently" updated the "obsolete words", removed the "thee's and thou's" - here's what the translators proudly admit: "IT IS CLEAR that this revision REQUIRED more than the dropping of "-eth" endings, removing, "thee's" and "thou's," and updating obsolete words." (The New King James Version, 1982e. p. 1235)
AND THEY AIN'T JUST A KIDDIN'!
Here's a sampling of the required changes:
Genesis 2:18: The NKJV ought to make Hillary Clinton proud: "And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make a helper COMPARABLE TO HIM"
Genesis 22:8: One of the greatest verses in the Bible proclaiming that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh: "God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:" The NKJV adds that little word "for": "God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering" And destroys the wonderful promise! Where'd they get their little "for"? From the NASV!
Genesis 24:47: The "old" KJV reads: "I put the earring upon her face". But the NKJV has different plans for beautiful Rebekah: "I put the nose ring on her nose". Where did it get the ridiculous idea to "cannibalize" Rebekah? Just take a peek at the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!
Ezra 8:36: The KJV reads, "And they delivered the king's commissions unto the king's lieutenants. . ." The "much clearer" NKJV reads, "And they delivered the king's orders to the king's satraps. . ." Who in the world thinks "satraps" is "much clearer" than lieutenants? The NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV - they do! They put in the same "much clearer" word!
Psalms 109:6: removes "Satan". (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV).
Matthew 7:14: change "narrow is the way" to "difficult is the way". There's nothing "difficult" about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, "For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light." THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!
Matthew 12:40: change "whale" to "fish" (ditto NIV) I don't guess it matters (what's the truth got to do with it?), the Greek word used in Matthew 12:40 is ketos. The scientific study of whales just happens to be - CETOLOGY - from the Greek ketos for whale and logos for study! The scientific name for whales just happens to be - CETACEANS - from the Greek ketos for whale!
Matthew 18:26 & Matthew 20:20: The NKJV removes "worshipped him" (robbing worship from Jesus) (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
Mark 13:6 & Luke 21:8: removes "Christ" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
John 1:3: change "All things were made BY him;" to "All things were made THROUGH Him" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)
John 4:24: change "God is a spirit" to the impersonal, New Age pantheistic,"God is spirit" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
John 14:2: (NKJV 1979 edition) change "mansions" to "dwelling places" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
John 14:16: change "comforter" to "helper"(refers to Holy Spirit) (NASV)
Acts 4:27, 30: change "holy child" to "holy servant" (refers to Jesus) (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Acts 12:4: change "Easter" to "Passover" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
Acts 17:22: changes "superstitious" to "religious" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Acts 24:14: change "heresy" to "sect" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Romans 1:18: change "hold the truth" to "suppress the truth" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Romans 1:25: change "changed the truth" to "exchanged the truth" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Romans 5:8: change "commendeth" to "demonstrates" (NIV, NASV)
Romans 16:18: change "good words and fair speeches" to "smooth words and flattering speech" (NIV, NASV, NRSV)
1 Cor. 1:21: change "foolishness of preaching" to "foolishness of the message preached" (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV) There's nothing foolish about the gospel of Jesus Christ. Unless you're not saved! 1 Cor. 1:18 says: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish FOOLISHNESS. . ." I wonder where that leaves the translators of the NKJV, NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV?
1 Cor. 1:22: change "require" to "request" (NASV)
1 Cor. 6:9: removes "effeminate" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)
1 Cor. 9:27: change "castaway" to "disqualified" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
2 Cor. 2:10: change "person of Christ" to "presence of Christ" (NASV, NRSV, RSV)
2 Cor. 2:17: With all the "corruptions" in the NKJV, you'd expect 2 Cor. 2:17 to change. IT DOES! They change, "For we not as many which CORRUPT the word of God" to "For we are not, as so many, PEDDLING the word of God" (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
2 Cor. 5:17: change "new creature" to "new creation" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)
2 Cor. 10:5: change "imaginations" to "arguments". Considering New Age "imaging" and "visualization" is now entering the church, this verse in the "old" KJV just won't do. (NIV, RSV)
2 Cor. 11:6: change "rude in speech" to "untrained in speech" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
Gal. 2:20: omit "nevertheless I live" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
Phil. 2:6: (NKJV 1979e.) change "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" to "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped". (robs Jesus Christ of deity) (NIV, NASV, RSV)
Phil. 3:8: change "dung" to "rubbish" (NIV, NASV, NRSV)
1 Thess. 5:22 change "all appearance of evil" to "every form of evil" (NASV, RSV, NSRV)
1 Timothy 6:5: The NKJV changes "gain is godliness" to "godliness is a MEANS OF gain". There are NO Greek texts with "means of" in them! Where, oh where, did they come from? Care to take a wild guess? YOU GOT IT! The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!
1 Timothy 6:10: The NKJV changes "For the love of money is the root of all evil:" to "For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil". The words "KINDS OF" are found in NO Greek text in the world! Where did they get them? Straight from the NIV, NASV, NRSV!
1 Tim. 6:20: change "science" to "knowledge" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
Titus 3:10: change "heretic" to "divisive man" (NIV)
Hebrews 4:8 & Acts 7:45: "Jesus" is changed to "Joshua". (NIV, NASV, RSV)
2 Pet. 2:1: change "damnable heresies" to "destructive heresies" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
1 John 3:16: remove "love of God"; (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
1 John 5:13: The NKJV reads: "These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may CONTINUE TO believe in the name of the Son of God." They add "CONTINUE TO" without any Greek text whatsoever! Not even the perverted NIV, NASV, NRSV and RSV go that far! A cruel, subtil (see Genesis 3:1) attack on the believer's eternal security!
Rev. 2:13: change "Satan's seat" to "Satan's throne" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
Rev. 6:14: "Heaven" is changed to "sky" in (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
AND THAT DOESN'T SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF ALL THE CHANGES!
The NKJV removes the word "Lord" 66 times!
The NKJV removes the word God 51 times!
The NKJV removes the word "heaven" 50 times!
In just the New Testament alone the NKJV removes 2.289 words from the KJV!
The NKJV makes over 100,000 word changes!
And most will match the NIV, NASV, RSV, or RSV!
And Thomas Nelson Publishers have the audacity to claim in an ad for the NKJV (Moody Monthly, June 1982, back cover), "NOTHING HAS BEEN CHANGED except to make the original meaning clearer."
The New King James is a COUNTERFEIT!
It's NOT NEW! The changes are already in the NIV, NASV, NRSV, or RSV!
And it's certainly NOT true to the 1611 King James Bible!
|
|
|
|
Post by debelynne on Sept 25, 2004 2:03:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by LindaFisk on Sept 25, 2004 2:50:32 GMT -5
Wow. I have no idea who any of those people are but the whole thing is creepy. And horrible. And why would they change the wording of the Bible so much? I don't get any of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by funnyd on Sept 25, 2004 8:17:44 GMT -5
The only thing "creepy" are these articles.
I was really hoping that we could leave av1611.org out of this discussion. Terry Watkins' site has been around for several years, and he seems straight from the Peter Ruckman/Gail Riplinger/Texe Marrs school of proof by vigorous assertion, innuendo, and denegration with unsubstantiated charges, and certainly a lack of Christian love!
None of these charges are backed by any evidence other than calling them per-versions, counterfeits, and other pujaritive language that do nothing to bolster their positions. Substituting name-calling for evidence does not persuade anyone but the already persuaded. Unfortunately, reasoned defenses of their positions seem too much to ask.
- David
|
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 25, 2004 9:14:38 GMT -5
David,
Apparently the difference between me and you regarding the bible is what we believe about the purity and preservation of scriptures and those who stand strongly, squarely, and soundly on the KJV. The men and ladies (Gail Ripplinger) who defend the KJV do it in many ways, but I can always tell someone who secretly has a disdain for the concept of ONE pure preserved version for the English speaking people. Unfortunately you have been, like so many, duped by modern "schol-
arship", so called. They carefully craft their words to make the reader believe all they have is a revised KJV.
You said, "None of these charges are backed by any evidence..." Every article I have posted was done because it had well substantiated evidence all through it. I oft find, when truth gets too hot, the first flag to fly up is the "no Christian love" flag. When you can't refute the evidence, you denegrate the character, motives, and sources of the defender.
This is not a New Evangelical page. This is a staunch, old fashioned , bible believing (and defending) Baptist page. We cannot and will not back down when it comes to the defense of God's word. As originally stated, we stand strong on the KJV, ALL other modern English versions have been corrupted by the inclusion of corrupted manuscripts and the philosophy of the modern translator/interpreters. The great men of God of old knew the superiority of the Textus Receptus and rejected the "new" versions. We are merely carrying on a established conviction.
With uncompromising love and truth,
Bro. Ben
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Gal. 4:16
|
|
|
|
Post by alice on Sept 25, 2004 11:37:21 GMT -5
 What is this about the symbol on the cover of the NKJV? Is this true? I guess it is-there is the symbol-what else could it be? This is very upsetting.  Alice
|
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Sept 25, 2004 17:03:24 GMT -5
Ben,
Your listing of how the KJV words those various verses compared to the more modern translations got my curiousity up. I think i'm going to pull out my handy-dandy Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Hebrew Bible) and my Greek New Testament (Greek New Testament) and do some investigating myself.
Which actually brings up a question...how do you feel about translating directly from the Greek and Hebrew texts rather than relying on another person's translation; be it KJV, NASB, NIV, etc.
in HIS grip
bobbyd
|
|
|
|
Post by funnyd on Sept 26, 2004 11:37:33 GMT -5
(Sorry I didn't respond yesterday, still making hurricane preps)
I am not a New Evangelical. I've found out that I'm too conservative for that label. As a matter of fact, I've always felt that I am in a spiritual no-mans land, too conservative to be evangelical, too contemporary to be fundamental.
If the tone of my response sounded a little sharp, I sincerly apologize. But please understand that I was part of a church that underwent a terrible split over this and other similar issues--a split that never healed. It is for this reason that I firmly oppose the views of Ruckman, Riplinger, et. al., and the attitudes that they foister as they do nothing to promote unity in the church. If that disqualifies me from further participation on this board, than I will humbly bow out.
Again, I fully and completely respect the views of those who prefer to use the KJV. However, you are right, Bro. Ben, in that I don't hold the view of the KJV being the single pure preserved Word (I don't hold it in disdain, as you suggested, but I don't agree with it, either). It raises too many other questions, such as:
- How could the KJV be held up as the pure word while the versions that it is based upon (Bishop's Bible, Geneva, and ultimately Wycliffe) not be?
- Why would the KJV be considered the pure preserved Word when its translators themselves made no such claim?
- Why would God wait until the 17th centrury to preserve His word? Why not an earlier time when the corrupt Catholic church bore no rival?
- Why did the Pilgrims bring over the Geneva Bible with them, and not the KJV, which had been available for several years before they left England?
- The 1611 KJV included the Apocrypha. So do we need to consider that part of the pure Word also?
- Why is it that, according to Ruckman, et. al., that God preserved His Word in English and it would take preference over the Word in the original languages? According to Ruckman, we are to "throw away" the Greek and Hebrew lexicons if they disagree with the KJV!
Rest assured, I'm nobody's "dupe". I have spent much time dealing with this issue from all perspectives, I have read Ruckman; I have read Riplinger, I have read Comfort, and others.
I have spent time in Strong's. I have even read the rarely-published KJV The Translators to the Reader. They show that the KJV was deveopled in the exact same manner that the NKJV, NASB, HCSB, and other quality translations were. They drew upon the best existing translations at the time (The Bishop's and Genva Bible), what they considered to be the best orignal manuscripts of the time (the Masoretic and the Textus Receptus), and translated according to sound exegetical principles. The same can be said of many of the modern versions, although reasonable men can argue against the use of the N-A/UBS critical texts.
If one holds to the belief that the KJV is pure and preserved, it is completely understandable to consider other texts inferior. But for anyone to denounce them as satanic (as Watkins does) goes too far, and can drive a bitter wedge into an otherwise peaceful congregation. Been there, done that, want no part of it.
- David
|
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 26, 2004 20:15:17 GMT -5
I am writing this post to bring the current thread to finality. There are a few things in response to the post by David that I would like to shed light on. Please consider the following reply.
Actually the KJV was based on the works of Erasmus, Tyndale, Luther, and Beza. The Wycliffe was and English translation based on a Catholic manuscript. Though it was one of the first English translations and God did bless Wycliffe for his burden for the English speaking people to have the word of God, it was based on an inferior manuscript. History has borne testimony to the version that God has put His stamp of approval on. It has been roughly 400 years since the above mentioned works came on the scene. Except for those who really get into manuscript studies, the Bible used for the last 300 years has been the KJV. Not until the 1900's did God's people consider using anything else. There were available translation works, but God's people used the version that had God's stamp of approval.
Why would the translators claim this? They were merely doing an honest translation work. The fact that they based their work on superior manuscripts placed them historically as those who were used by God to give us the preserved text for the English speaking people.
Because we have God's promises that He would preserve His word, we know and can be confident that He has had His pure preserved word available throughout history. There may have been times during the Dark Ages when the word of God was precious, but we must take God at His word.NOTE: I will make a new thread in the Fundamental Issues Forum on the Preservation of Scripture: What is it?
I don't know. Does it matter? I think not.
Because of the Catholic influence on the churches and theologians of the Reformation, the inclusion of the Apocrypha was made in many translation works. In the Reformation tradition of considering them (as Luther said) "useful and good for reading," but not equal to Scripture. So based on this attitude, it is obvious that we would not even consider the preservation and purity issue. Frankly, who cares if the Apocrypha is preserved, it is a post Christian addition, not canonized by the churches of the Lord.
I don't know why Ruckman said this, I and most of the KJV men I know are not Ruckmanites. Interesting that those who stand against the idea of a pure preserved KJV use one or two men who are somewhat brash sometimes in their approach to KJV defense as a justification to reject God's claim that He would preserve His word. You aren't going to answer to me or Peter Ruckman, or Terry Watkins as far as that goes, you are going to answer to God. I am merely believing, by faith, that God acatually kept His word when He said He would preserve it pure for me in 2004.
This, simply, is not true. The KJV is an actual translation from the original tongues. Because of the literal sense the the KJV translation it is sometimes harder to read in that you need to spend a little time (study to shew thyself approved) and see that the KJV translators were being honest in their literal word for word translation. The new translations are different because they are based on dynamic equivilencey, that is to say, they do not give you a literal word for word translation, but give you what they believe the passage is saying. The problem with this is you, at this point, are subject to the doctrines of the translators. This is why you have attacks on key fundamental doctrines and skeptic, modern, denial of biblical claims like the incarnation of Christ, the sinlessness of Christ, etc.
"Some people say they like a particular version because they say it's more readable. Now, readability is one thing, but does the readability conform to what's in the original Greek and Hebrew language? You can have a lot of readability, but if it doesn't match up with what God has said, it's of no profit. In the King James Bible, the words match what God has said. You may say it's difficult to read, but study it out. It's hard in the Hebrew and Greek and, perhaps, even in the English in the King James Bible. But to change it around just to make it simple, or interpreting it, instead of translating it, is wrong." Pastor D.A. Waite, Th. D., Ph. D., Director, The Bible for Today, Inc.
Interesting note The following is a list of the the number of actual words in the versions below.
Version Words
KJV 790685
NIV 726109, 64576 words taken away
NKJV 770930, 19755 words taken away.
RSV 760151, 30534 words taken away.
Now consider the following verse of scripture. " Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. " Luke 8:12 It is interesting to note that the devil comes and takes away the word of God. God in His faithfulness has given the word of God in a pure preserved version in the KJV. Sinful man in his pride has rejected the pure preserved word and instead bought into the lies of modern scholarship. The devil has indeed come, as you can see in the cases of the versions above, and taken away the word. The result: We have seen a dramatic decline in the revivals in our land. Indeed we are living in days of apostasy. Even though we may be "conservative" in a sense, and would not like to be termed a New Evangelical, I'm afaid we have entered into a even more deceitful period in Church history the era of Neo Fundamentalism, and like the new versions of scripture, it is NOT fundamentalism at all.
With grief and pain at our nations apostasy,
Bro. Ben
|
|
|
|
Post by pulpiteer on Sept 26, 2004 21:17:28 GMT -5
In Acts 10:34 The Bible says that God is no respecter of persons. If God is no respecter of persons, then He will give us the same power, the same Spirit, the same WORDS that he gave those who have gone before us. In Jeremiah 23:29, God says," Is not my word like as a fire? ... and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? Would He give us a matchstick? or a tack hammer? If you continue on in this passage, you will see God is against the prophets that, "Steal my words..." We must have the pure Word of God!
Some would say that it was just men making the copies, well, it was just men writing the originals too. God used men to write His words!
In Hosea 8:12 God says, "I have written to him the great things of my law..." Matthew 24:35 "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my WORDS shall not pass away." You see when the author is still alive, it is His responsibility to keep the WORDS pure. Psalms 12:6-7 state, "The WORDS of the LORD are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation forever."
God has promised to keep them forever, and if you start to add or to take away from the Bible you will be in trouble with the Author!
God is the God of the copies, the translations, the BIBLE!
The Bible is the Word of God, and the Word of God is true!
|
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Oct 11, 2004 16:12:19 GMT -5
I know there were hopes to put this topic to bed, once and for all...but i feel compelled to share some info that i found from reviewing the Greek texts and making comparisons:
YOU SAID: Matthew 7:14: change "narrow is the way" to "difficult is the way". There's nothing "difficult" about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, "For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light." THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!
I FOUND: Greek agrees, as well as some of the more conservative modern translations.
****
YOU SAID: Matthew 12:40: change "whale" to "fish" (ditto NIV) I don't guess it matters (what's the truth got to do with it?), the Greek word used in Matthew 12:40 is ketos. The scientific study of whales just happens to be - CETOLOGY - from the Greek ketos for whale and logos for study! The scientific name for whales just happens to be - CETACEANS - from the Greek ketos for whale!
I FOUND: The Greek word used is "ketous" which generally is translated as "large sea creature". I'll just leave it at that.
****
YOU SAID: Matthew 18:26 & Matthew 20:20: The NKJV removes "worshipped him" (robbing worship from Jesus) (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
I FOUND: The greek words used in these two verses are "proseunei" and "proskunousa" which mean to bow down", the image given by the meaning is in worship, but the given meaning isn't necessarily so.
****
YOU SAID: Mark 13:6 & Luke 21:8: removes "Christ" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
I FOUND: The Greek reads "saying I am...", Christ is not in the Greek text.
****
YOU SAID: John 1:3: change "All things were made BY him;" to "All things were made THROUGH Him" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)
I FOUND: A rough translation from the Greek reads: "All through same became and apart from same became not yet one which has become". "Through" is used in Greek and not "by".
****
YOU SAID: John 4:24: change "God is a spirit" to the impersonal, New Age pantheistic,"God is spirit" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
I FOUND: Spirit is the first word of this verse in the Greek, so a literal reading is "Spirit the God". Due to the Greek word translated "the" being in the middle, it could be translated as "the Spirit the God" or "God is spirit". Just using Greek grammer rules on this one folks.
****
YOU SAID: John 14:2: (NKJV 1979 edition) change "mansions" to "dwelling places" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
I FOUND: The greek word used is "monai" which translates as "rooms" more accuratley than mansions or dwelling places.
****
YOU SAID: John 14:16: change "comforter" to "helper"(refers to Holy Spirit) (NASV)
I FOUND: the Greek word used is "parakalton", a literal translation of this word is "beside-caller", which has more of the idea found in "helper"
****
YOU SAID: Acts 4:27, 30: change "holy child" to "holy servant" (refers to Jesus) (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
I FOUND: the word used in the Greek is best translated as "child"
****
YOU SAID: Acts 12:4: change "Easter" to "Passover" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)
I FOUND: The Greek word uses is "pasca" which is the same word traslated as Passover in the Gospels.
****
YOU SAID: Acts 17:22: changes "superstitious" to "religious" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
I FOUND: The word used in Greek translates into "fearful of gods".
****
YOU SAID: Acts 24:14: change "heresy" to "sect" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)
I FOUND: The Greek is best translated as "religious party, division or faction"
|
|
