I think the NKJV is a good alternative for those who wish to use it.
Although the NKJV is not simply the KJV with updated English but is based upon more than the Textus Receptus.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think the NKJV is a good alternative for those who wish to use it.
Which KJV translation, because noone in this room surely would advocate preaching from the 1611 KJV. The current translation of the KJV has undergone change, so is it not a modern translation?
Okay, that answers from the side of KJVOers. I would like to hear a response from those that support the ESV/NASB. I understand that most seminaries do translation lessons from the Alexandrian texts, thus the students all claiming that "original texts always look like the NASB when translated".
You might take an hour and listen to my lecture critiquing the common Traditional Text arguments.
It is available be here...Christ Reformed Church - Audio Messages -
Okay, that answers from the side of KJVOers. I would like to hear a response from those that support the ESV/NASB. I understand that most seminaries do translation lessons from the Alexandrian texts, thus the students all claiming that "original texts always look like the NASB when translated".
You might take an hour and listen to my lecture critiquing the common Traditional Text arguments.
It is available be here...Christ Reformed Church - Audio Messages -
Okay, that answers from the side of KJVOers. I would like to hear a response from those that support the ESV/NASB. I understand that most seminaries do translation lessons from the Alexandrian texts, thus the students all claiming that "original texts always look like the NASB when translated".
uhm, 6 kids and my day never ends...I'll try to find an hour somewhere in here. But can you break some of it down here, please?
I've always use the KJV. From 1st graders to adults, from pastors to housewifes, no problems. It also seems that when I read from the King Jimmy, I speak with authority that is lacking when I use modern translations.
Remember that the KJV was translated in opposition to the Reformation.
The KJVOers argument is against the Alexandrian texts due to corruption within the Alexandrian church (and we know that there were heresies spread throughout varies parts of the church, such as gnosticism, judaizing, etc and those mentioned in the NT). Could someone speak to this issue? What were the issues in the Alexandrian church and did/how did they affect the texts?
To the Reformers and to the orthodox the Received Text, for three hundred years, was the very word of God. This is no small matter, as Rushdoony says: "the Faith is at stake." (8)
How come nobody is suggesting the NKJV as a preferred (or recommended) standard for a local church? I kinda like the NKJV.
How come nobody is suggesting the NKJV as a preferred (or recommended) standard for a local church? I kinda like the NKJV.
Because it's Old Testament is a critical text - so you have the same problem just in the Hebrew.
The Reformed orthodox worked extensively in defending the Hebrew. So, the NKJV comes forth to provide an alternative modern translation of the Received Text to settle the dispute and then does a textual switcharoo in the Old Testament to Kittle's critical text.
The fact is, textual criticism was not advancing as a discipline until the late 18th Century and its resulting scholarship took over 100 years to advance through continued development and the introduction of new manuscript finds.
I use the NKJV after a number of forays with other translations.
A few of my members would like be to use the NIV or the ESV. ESV maybe, NIV never. However, I'm sticking to my guns. I've told my members that if they want me to switch to another translation I will....to the KJV.
To the Reformers and to the orthodox the Received Text, for three hundred years, was the very word of God. This is no small matter, as Rushdoony says: "the Faith is at stake." (8)
I continue to maintain that the Reformers and the formerly orthodox were NOT on the "Traditional Text" page. The fact is, textual criticism was not advancing as a discipline until the late 18th Century and its resulting scholarship took over 100 years to advance through continued development and the introduction of new manuscript finds.
To demonstrate John Calvin's view of the text, read the following from one of my prior writings...
---
I came across the following statement in Calvin’s Commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2:4.
"Where I have rendered -- everything that is called God, the reading more generally received among the Greeks is, every one that is called. It may, however, be conjectured, both from the old translation and from some Greek commentaries, that Paul's words have been corrupted. The mistake, too, of a single letter was readily fallen into, especially when the shape of the letter was much similar; for, where there was written παν το, (everything,) some transcriber, or too daring reader, turned it into παντα, (every one.)"
This is very interesting...here Calvin argues for an alternate reading on the basis of a supposed scribal error or a 'too daring reader' (this deduced from an alternate reading from the Vulgate and some 'Greek commentaries'--not a variant in another Greek manuscript!). His rejection of 'παντα' in favor of 'παν το' here demonstrates that Calvin did not handle the issue of variants according to any 'Traditional Text' paradigm.
For the record, I think Calvin is wrong here (I would not argue for a reading not found in any extant Greek manuscript). I only intend to point out a place where a sampling of his approach to textual criticism is demonstrated. I find more and more of this sort of thing as I study the old commentaries.
This proves wrong the argument used by Traditional Text advocates that says the 'Traditional Text' approach to handling textual variants was the only known position until the advent of modern textual criticism.
Had Calvin had access to all of the manuscripts we have today, I think it highly likely he would have been an advocate for something like the Critical Greek Text.