New Bible

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grant

Puritan Board Graduate
Friends,

In studying more on English translations, I have decided to switch my family over to primarily using the NKJV (we were using the ESV). Recently I purchased the below bible for my wife.

I have never owned a bible this nice and so far it has far exceeded my expectations. Currently sold out, unless you want to pay 30-40 more dollars on Amazon. It is hard to put into words, but Thomas Nelson has really and truly outdone themselves with this edition. The font size, color, and format truly draw you in as you read the text. I watched the below video as well before making my purchase. Some features: black letter, double column, goatskin, and 3-ribbons. This bible is also much thinner than others, yet still has a thicker higher quality paper. I assume these are selling really fast because most websites already show them out of stock.

https://www.christianbook.com/NKJV-thinline-reference-leather-premier-collection/9780785220886/pd/220883?en=google&event=SHOP&kw=bibles-80-100|220883&p=1179710&dv=c&gclid=Cj0KCQiAn4PkBRCDARIsAGHmH3eHKlEHKo9coOSgMFKsXd93rW9jxH7lZuF7oz4bmuOrUglAArOWNAQaAj6oEALw_wcB


I ordered the NKJV Preaching Bible for myself, but it has not come in yet. I ordered mine in brown.

 
Just out of curiosity, why did you switch to the NKJV? (This is not intended to start a translation debate, folks; I’m just curious).
 
The cloth over board looks sweet. Only $20.
?

The NKJV Thinline was on sale for $85.00, which is an insanely good price considering the quality.

I purchased the NKJV calfskin preaching bible for $90.00 (this one is a verse by verse, and has more textual variants footnotes)

Both are black letter.
 
I was just pointing out that the same Bible comes in a cloth over board, that's very cheap and looks really good. I personally wouldn't spend $85 on another Bible as we are on a tighter budget and the words of the Bible are more important to me than the leather or non leather they are packaged in, but $20 I would possibly spend.

https://www.christianbook.com/NKJV-...cloth-board/9780785217909/pd/217909?event=AAI
 
Just out of curiosity, why did you switch to the NKJV? (This is not intended to start a translation debate, folks; I’m just curious).
Taylor,

Thanks for asking. Further, I will echo that I don’t not want to debate.

For me I had several reasons:

1. I like how the NKJV includes “added” English words in italics, that can be very informative in prepping for family worship or a SS lesson, so I don’t dogmaicaly emphasize an English word that was added for sentence flow and was not even in the manuscripts.

2. I like the KJV language; however the hard truth is that the KJV form of English is not what we speak today. Sure we can try and learn it, but the reality is that old English really does need to be updated. I feel the NKJV updates the English but keeps some (not all) of the beauty of the language used in the KJV (I know some disagree).

3. Family Worship: So for family worship (wife, 5yr old, and 2 yr old), I find I like the NKJV being based on the TR (I am not settled as a TR guy and still respect CT), but with an updated English for an easier read and comprehension for the whole family. So far we have found the NKJV reads just as smooth if not smoother in many areas compared to ESV.

4. In researching (on a layman level), it seems the NKJV would be the 2nd choice, if you were to really press a hardline KJV proponent. I am NOT a KJV is the best kinda guy (at least not today). However I have been finding that the NKJV strikes a remarkably solid balance between camps in the whole TR, MT, CT discussion. The NKJV seems to be a good :eek:compromise:eek: because it is based on the TR, but at the same time it will footnote the text variants from CT, which at least will give me pause and remind me to look more into certain passages. The textual variants footnotes drives that for me. The ESV leaves many footnotes out and even some verses, that as the reader I would at least like to have the option to consider certain verses or word choices.... instead of not even being made aware that there could be a possible different reading. That said, I am not even sure a 1611 KJV would have textual variants footnotes (I could be wrong on this). After all I am not well versed in Hebrew or Greek so I really do like the footnotes. My understanding is that the NKJV preaching bible has the Full amount of variant footnotes, whichI like for private bible study.



I hope that makes sense. Again, I am not looking to debate my reasonings, just letting you know what steps occurred in my brain as I have gained much more respect for the TR from Puritan Board. Before now my family has really on ever been exposed to the ESV.:detective:
 
Last edited:
I was just pointing out that the same Bible comes in a cloth over board, that's very cheap and looks really good. I personally wouldn't spend $85 on another Bible as we are on a tighter budget and the words of the Bible are more important to me than the leather or non leather they are packaged in, but $20 I would possibly spend.

https://www.christianbook.com/NKJV-...cloth-board/9780785217909/pd/217909?event=AAI
I totally get it. Regarding the NKJV Thinline, I would still get it in cloth for the $20.00, since the guts are the same. Something about the publishers choice of color scheme, font shape, font size, and format really does draw you in. Mrs. Jones and Me (close to the song) said the same thing.
 
I hope that makes sense. Again, I am not looking to debate my reasonings, just letting you know what steps occurred in my brain as I have gained much more respect for the TR from Puritan Board. Before now my family has really on ever been exposed to the ESV.

That's very helpful. Thanks for taking the time to get back to me. I just ask because I love the NKJV, too. Another good reason is that the publishers of the NKJV have no interest whatsoever in putting out a second edition That way, you don't have to worry about having the latest edition of a given translation.
 
That's very helpful. Thanks for taking the time to get back to me. I just ask because I love the NKJV, too. Another good reason is that the publishers of the NKJV have no interest whatsoever in putting out a second edition That way, you don't have to worry about having the latest edition of a given translation.
Thank brother, that is great to know.

Do you primarily use the NKJV as your daily read? What about for teaching a SS class (I think I’ve seen you do this on YouTube)?
 
Taylor,

Thanks for asking. Further, I will echo that I don’t not want to debate.

For me I had several reasons:

1. I like how the NKJV includes “added” English words in italics, that can be very informative in prepping for family worship or a SS lesson, so I don’t dogmaicaly emphasize an English word that was added for sentence flow and was not even in the manuscripts.

2. I like the KJV language; however the hard truth is that the KJV form of English is not what we speak today. Sure we can try and learn it, but the reality is that old English really does need to be updated. I feel the NKJV updates the English but keeps some (not all) of the beauty of the language used in the KJV (I know some disagree).

3. Family Worship: So for family worship (wife, 5yr old, and 2 yr old), I find I like the NKJV being based on the TR (I am not settled as a TR guy and still respect CT), but with an updated English for an easier read and comprehension for the whole family. So far we have found the NKJV reads just as smooth if not smoother in many areas.

4. In researching (on a layman level), it seems the NKJV would be the 2nd choice, if you were to really press a hardline KJV proponent. I am NOT a KJV is the best kinda guy (at least not today). However I have been finding that the NKJV strikes a remarkably solid balance between camps in the whole TR, MT, CT discussion. The NKJV seems to be a good :eek:compromise:eek: because it is based on the TR, but at the same time it will footnote the text variants from CT, which at least will give me pause and remind me to look more into certain passages. The textual variants footnotes drives that for me. The ESV leaves many footnotes out and even some verses, that as the reader I would at least like to have the option to consider certain verses or word choices.... instead of not even being made aware that there could be a possible different reading. That said, I am not even sure a 1611 KJV would have textual variants footnotes (I could be wrong on this). After all I am not well versed in Hebrew or Greek so I really do like the footnotes. My understanding is that the NKJV preaching bible has the Full amount of variant footnotes, whichI like for private bible study.



I hope that makes sense. Again, I am not looking to debate my reasonings, just letting you know what steps occurred in my brain as I have gained much more respect for the TR from Puritan Board. Before now my family has really on ever been exposed to the ESV.:detective:
I really like these reasons, and I would like to try the translation. The main difficulty though would be in corporate worship, our church uses the ESV.
 
Taylor,
1. I like how the NKJV includes “added” English words in italics, that can be very informative in prepping for family worship or a SS lesson, so I don’t dogmaicaly emphasize an English word that was added for sentence flow and was not even in the manuscripts. :detective:

NASB does this as well; I echo your appreciation for it.
 
I really like these reasons, and I would like to try the translation. The main difficulty though would be in corporate worship, our church uses the ESV.
Same here brother. What helps me is that when my pastor reads from a text (either OT/NT reading or reading his preached text) he also places the words on the screen.
 
That's very helpful. Thanks for taking the time to get back to me. I just ask because I love the NKJV, too. Another good reason is that the publishers of the NKJV have no interest whatsoever in putting out a second edition That way, you don't have to worry about having the latest edition of a given translation.

Actually the current NKJV is the second edition. It was originally published in 1982, and then a very minimal revision was released in 1984. Most people are unaware because it was never announced and the changes were minimal, but if you get ahold of one of the original editions and compare it, you will notice a few differences. They have no updated it since.
 
I've been using my NKJV for my M'Cheyne 1 year plan this year, and as you noted, the footnoted textual variants are informative. So far there is nothing that I feel is of any serious consequence. The variants that are controversial are well known.
 
I've been looking for an NKJV without red letter. Thanks for drawing my attention to this!

Some of these hardbacks are quite attractive.

https://www.christianbook.com/NKJV-...e-hardcover/9780785218166/pd/218161?event=AAI
My ESV was a single column verse by verse and I love it; however when I looked at the Thinline NKJV in the double column line match (which I was unsure of) , I really was surprised how much I immediately liked the format better than the single column verse by verse.
 
Friends,

In studying more on English translations, I have decided to switch my family over to primarily using the NKJV (we were using the ESV). Recently I purchased the below bible for my wife.

I have never owned a bible this nice and so far it has far exceeded my expectations. Currently sold out, unless you want to pay 30-40 more dollars on Amazon. It is hard to put into words, but Thomas Nelson has really and truly outdone themselves with this edition. The font size, color, and format truly draw you in as you read the text. I watched the below video as well before making my purchase. Some features: black letter, double column, goatskin, and 3-ribbons. This bible is also much thinner than others, yet still has a thicker higher quality paper. I assume these are selling really fast because most websites already show them out of stock.

https://www.christianbook.com/NKJV-thinline-reference-leather-premier-collection/9780785220886/pd/220883?en=google&event=SHOP&kw=bibles-80-100|220883&p=1179710&dv=c&gclid=Cj0KCQiAn4PkBRCDARIsAGHmH3eHKlEHKo9coOSgMFKsXd93rW9jxH7lZuF7oz4bmuOrUglAArOWNAQaAj6oEALw_wcB


I ordered the NKJV Preaching Bible for myself, but it has not come in yet. I ordered mine in brown.


Wait till you discover the Authorised Version ;-)
 
Wait till you discover the Authorised Version ;-)
Ha... I knew someone would not be able to resist. I have spent some time in the KJV. Though I do not think it is a 1611. I enjoy using it for comparison during study; however, my family was a big factor in not using it as our main daily read translation.

1. I am not a convinced KJVO person. I am not even convinced that it is the best English translation we have. I do ask we not debate this on this thread as this has already been hashed out elsewhere. If a group wants to update the English to the AV, I would support it, but the NKJV satisfies that for me. No English translation is perfect. To be crystal clear, I have much respect for those who support the AV as the best English translation.

2. Since my family has willingly and patiently adapted to many of my more recent doxtrinal changes over the years (infant baptism, seeking to be confessional, singing inspired songs Acapella in family worship *something we have never done and started because my church mostly sings uninspired songs to piano*, and being sabbatarian in word and deed), I decided to transition to a more modern (easier-to-read) English still based on the TR tradition. This helped me not put another new hurdle before my family (learning 17 Century English), which is a hurdle not required by scripture. My wife and I both have only studied the ESV since becoming serious about bible study. So ultimately this is what drove my choice considering my new respect for the TR and my gratitude for my Family coming along side, listening to, and agreeing to following my lead in all the aforementioned areas. Thus far, I am really happy with my choice.:detective:

P.S. I think I fixed most of my original grammar errors.
 
Last edited:
Not looking to debate either just having a little fun. BUT, ALL I'll say is that, it's really not so hard getting used to the language. I moved over to the AV myself around seven years ago and I thought I'd have the same problem but it was really quite easy. However, the church I moved to uses it in worship and I was using it at home, so I was using it all the time. That helps.

:)
 
As an aside, I was kinda bummed that Schuyler is only only gonna do red letter versions for new prints of the NKJV in the full size Quentel. Currently they only have black and brown calfskin for $99.00, but when those are gone, they are only reprinting in red letter.

So if you have been eyeing a Quentel full size in NKJV, you may want to pick up one now, because I am told when they run out, they will only offer red-letter for the NKJV.
 
Last edited:
As an aside, I was kinda bummed that Schuyler is only only gonna do red letter versions for new prints of the NKJV in the full size Quentel.

So if you have been eyeing a Quentel full size in NKJV, you may want to pick up one now, because I am told when they run out, they will only offer red-letter for the NKJV.
Are the personal size red letter? What's the beef with the personal size? I have it in NASB and it is just delightful.
 
Are the personal size red letter? What's the beef with the personal size? I have it in NASB and it is just delightful.
No beef. I just checked online and it looks like the Personal size is also only offered in red-letter currently.

Other factors I considered:

The font size in the personal size Schuyler is also smaller than the Thomas Nelson NKJV Thinline.

Schuyler personal has 28gsm paper and the Thomas Nelson NKJV has 36gsm. Also considering the facts that the TN NKJV has bigger font, thicker paper, goatskin, great formatting and is practically half the price of the Schuyler Perosnal size goatskin.

P.S. Schuyler Personal is 8.5 font size. The TN NKJV Goatskin is 11 point font size.:detective:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top