KJV ---> NKJV

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Andrew,
You don't happen to have a link, do you? I can't seem to find it.
Thanks,
Bob

It's not available in electronic form on their website, but you can order it for 60 cents. It's under the section called "other publications"/"articles"/"modern version reviews".

Found the link here.

 

[Pilgrim]

Found the link here.

That's their take on the NIV. I think we were looking for the article on the NKJV (known as the Revised Authorised Version in Britain, etc.). I remember reading it a year or two ago, but apparently it is no longer available online, at least not for free. It was generally balanced, offered some criticisms of the NKJV and stopped short of endorsing it.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

That's their take on the NIV. I think we were looking for the article on the NKJV (known as the Revised Authorised Version in Britain, etc.). I remember reading it a year or two ago, but apparently it is no longer available online, at least not for free. It was generally balanced, offered some criticisms of the NKJV and stopped short of endorsing it.

You're right! It is article #110 that addresses the NKJV and it still does not appear to be online. My bad.

 

[Pilgrim]

You're right! It is article #110 that addresses the NKJV and it still does not appear to be online. My bad.

Others more familiar with the situation may correct me, but my best guess is that the NKJV has never really gained that wide of a following in Britain whereas use of the NIV there was probably even more widespread among evangelicals there than in the USA. So perhaps that is one reason why the TBS article on the NKJV no longer appears online. The NKJV seems to have really gained ground in the USA over the past decade or so. This is probably a combination of people switching from the KJV, the popularity of the MacArthur Study Bible and maybe some other factors.

 

[ADKing]

Yes, and the New Geneva Study Bible originally appeared in the NKJV as well. One minister in Northern Ireland made the same observation to me as you did, that the NKJV never really gained the same popularity there as it did here.

I have read the TBS booklet on the NKJV. The criticisms basically boil down to the following points:

1. The NJKV has the false appearance of being a faithful update of the Authorised Version whereas a close examination of verses shows that it is a completely new translation which deviates from some of the interpretations of the AV. At this point the booklet documents a number of them (e.g at Ephesians 4.12. There is a significant difference of whether the pastor/teacher is given for the equipping the saints, for the work of ministry--as two distinct purposes of the minister--or whether he equips the saints themselves to do the work of ministryper the NKJV.)

2. The NKJV has the critical readings in the margins which gives a kind of legitimacy to the practice of modern text-criticism.

3. The NKJV is under copyright which TBS belives to be a wrong practice.

There are other points as well, but these seem to be the major ones.

I would add that the NKJV did not receive official eccelsiastical sanction and so it serves rather to disunify than unify.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

I'm in a strange position as regards the NKJV -- with some others I am planting a church in my city, to commence in a week, and though y'all know my stand with the KJV I do not (and cannot) impose it on others. The ESV was a choice for the pew Bibles, but I strongly opposed that, opting instead for the NKJV, knowing the AV wouldn't fly with my colleagues. I had a difficult experience on a teaching assignment in Africa last year; before my arrival (it was a five-month training session, and I arrived for the last two) the class had been given NIVs, and when in the course of instruction one of the men -- being familiar with the AV -- noticed the omission in Acts of the entire verse of 8:37, it became necessary to continually explain the numerous omissions, which characterize the other modern versions as well.

I did not want to have this same situation in the church, for those using pew Bibles. I can work with the NJKV, although it has some few errors in translation, and the OT is not the same Hebrew text as the KJV uses. Nonetheless, I can well work with it. I have no problem with the marginal notes (these pew Bible don't have them), as they afford me a running reminder of what those using modern versions are reading; I find them helpful, though others are offended by them.

I consider it an acceptable compromise. One of my fellow elders uses the NASB, and the other the NKJV (and is leaning toward the ESV, coming from an OPC background), and time will tell how well we deal with this.

I am of an irenic bent in such matters. I have no desire to lord it over those who use different versions -- preferring a laissez-faire approach. I aim to give my views on the respective texts on those occasions where serious differences arise, keeping in mind that our primary objective is to show the living Savior to our people, and so root them in Him and His love that they bear much fruit to the glory of our Father.

I will trust Him for wisdom and grace. Perhaps I should say I am used to being in the minority as regards the version issue. This has helped me to (usually) generate more light than heat.

Steve