[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Greektim

Point in fact, the truth is, the NKJV used the TR as a textual basis for the NT. This is the bias I was talking about, and the objective reality I seek to provide. I can be objective on the NKJV because while I like the NKJV as a translation, I would say that it is not superior to the original languages.

When you say "readings" I can only assume you mean variant readings that differ from the TR. If that is the case, I have yet to see anyone show me one place where the NKJV departs from the TR at all in the NT. At best, I see translational differences, but that has nothing to do with Alexandrian texts like p66 or p72 or Siniaticus. Hopefully, Tony, you can point something out to me about the NKJV where it does depart from the TR to an Alexandrian reading.

I'll do you one better:

http://www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence.htm
http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/articles.html

Will Kinney, John Hinton, both linked to KJV-ASIA, I think several articles on this site, and the works of Dr. Peter Ruckman on the subject of the NKJV have already covered the Alexandrian readings and sectarian doctrinal biases inserted into the text of the "New" KJV much better than I have time to do right now Tim. You'll have to order Dr. Ruckman's books on it. Unless you'd like me to go to the sites above and copy and paste here the articles. I have a NKJV and have it on E-Sword for version comparisons. I embarked on a study of it a decade or so ago, and discovered it not to be a "translation" but merely the body of the KJV text with selectively cherry-picked Alexandrian readings and sectarian doctrines inserted. We had a discussion on two verses not long ago in this forum regarding the verses below dealing with the doctrine of imputed faith on the thread faith of Christ versus faith in Christ. The NKJV wipes out the doctrine and also in the verse from Galatians below, also throws out God's righteousness and substitutes just righteousness. Whose? Micheal the Archangel's? Elijah's? Moses? My copy of the NKJV also has footnotes on John 7:58-8:11, I John 5:7, Mark 16:9-20 and the other verses missing in the Alexandrian text stating the verses are not supposed to be there.

KJV Ga 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
KJV Php 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

NKJV Ga 2:16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
NKJV Php 3:9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;

Another corruption is Rev. 1:6, another witness for the deity of Jesus Christ, where the KJV translators allegedly violated the Granville-Sharp theory that was not invented until the 1700s:

KJV Rev 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
NKJV Rev 1:6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

The "KJVO"s have examined both sides of the NKJV issue, I think you have only examined one side, and before you can offer a truly objection position as Devil's Advocate, you need to examine both sides also.

Grace and peace brother

Tony

[Greektim]

Let's be honest, Tony. If I haven't examined both sides of the issue, then surely the KJVO's have not either. I.e. I don't know how many KJVO's consider the "other side" of things. That is usually conveyed as compromise to even consider another view.

I should also say that Gal. 2:16, Phil. 3:9, & Rev. 1:6 follow the TR not an Alexandrian reading (which I suspect is identical to the TR). You pointed out a translational difference btween the KJV, but that has nothing to do with Alexandria.

[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by Greektim

Point in fact, the truth is, the NKJV used the TR as a textual basis for the NT. This is the bias I was talking about, and the objective reality I seek to provide. I can be objective on the NKJV because while I like the NKJV as a translation, I would say that it is not superior to the original languages.

When you say "readings" I can only assume you mean variant readings that differ from the TR. If that is the case, I have yet to see anyone show me one place where the NKJV departs from the TR at all in the NT. At best, I see translational differences, but that has nothing to do with Alexandrian texts like p66 or p72 or Siniaticus. Hopefully, Tony, you can point something out to me about the NKJV where it does depart from the TR to an Alexandrian reading.

Hi Greektim. Two points. First, your statement about the NKJV or any Bible (specifically the King James Holy Bible) being "not superior to the original languages" is a bunch of hooey. It sounds like you are trying to give us the impression that you have a copy of "the originals" right there in front of you and know how to read them, when we do not. You have no such thing and would not be able to tell anyone on this earth where to get an "original languages" copy if your life depended on it.

Secondly, you tell us that nobody has yet shown you one place where the NKJV departs from the TR in the New Testament at all. Well, hopefully this will be the last time you will be able to truthfully say that.

I will make a separate post for you and others to see some concrete examples of where the NKJV does depart from the TR that underlies the true Bible, the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

Happy hunting for those "original language" thingies,

Will Kinney

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Greektim

Let's be honest, Tony. If I haven't examined both sides of the issue, then surely the KJVO's have not either. I.e. I don't know how many KJVO's consider the "other side" of things. That is usually conveyed as compromise to even consider another view.

I should also say that Gal. 2:16, Phil. 3:9, & Rev. 1:6 follow the TR not an Alexandrian reading (which I suspect is identical to the TR). You pointed out a translational difference btween the KJV, but that has nothing to do with Alexandria.

Tim, I can go over here and get my print copy of the NKJV and my Nestle's and start hunting through the readings in the NT for you, Will Kinney, Dr. Ruckman, and many others have already done that for both of us. The main website here has an articles section dealing with a good cross-section of corruptions. The most blatant and obvious Alexandrian corruptions in the NKJV are found in the footnotes of Mark 16:9-20, John 7:58-8:11, I John 5:7, saying the verses are not supposed to be there. Why are they in the Body of the text then and just not taken out?

So sales won't plummet, that's why.

It was one of the other forum members who(justifiably)brought up the thread of the "faith OF Christ" vs "faith IN Christ" that the NKJV corrupts, and that's a doctrine, the doctrine of Imputed Faith. I have viral bronchitis right now, the antibiotics are gone and have to build up and it may be another week before they fight this off. Do you know how "saved" I feel right now? I'm miserable, I don't have faith to get me across the street, let alone to Heaven if I die right now. But if I look into myself, I see a faith in me that would make me do things superhuman right now, the faith Jesus Christ had when He faced Calvary and endured it. When they burned Christians and threw them to wolves and dogs and lions, when Arthur Blessit got put in front of a firing squad, all these people had that faith "of" Christ. People have emailed me and thanked me for explaining that, what a great help it's been to them and I tell them the truth: thank God according to Job 32:8 for giving you the understanding, not me, thank the people in the forum who brought that out, don't thank me. That's why I joke about having my own little "cult", I'm honest with them, the producers of the NKJV weren't, and still aren't.

The reason many "KJVO"s accuse the "Alexadrian Cultists", Mvers, whatever, of not examining both sides the issue is simple: They haven't. Go over to FFF and ask Barry or Robycop3 about Gail Riplinger. I bet they read every book James White wrote about her, not a one of them has read her books. Dave Hunt and Hal Lindsey both poop on Gail Riplinger's work and then both admit they never read her books. Several students, sheep actually, at the college I attended called me a "Ruckmanite" and said, oh, he's wrong about the KJV and the other versions, none of them ever read any of his books.They weren;'t allowed to. I was told if I bring a copy of PROBLEM TEXTS on campus I would be expelled. Ruckman said, in the 21st edition of Nestle's and on through, is mostly W/H then in the 26th, they insert Receptus readings. I searched out and found the 21st and bought the 26th: He was right. When I first joined this forum I read someone had written that Daniel Wallace's NET BIBLE was one of the worst translated and worded of all 200+ English translations on the "market". I got a copy and read about 5000 verses, they were right. I'd trust a Living Bible or a NWT before I would this one

I have my own reason for saying the "New" KJV is not a KJV: in changing words and passages it destroys the cross-reference method of Bible study of Isaiah 28:9-13.

Grace and peace brother

Tony

[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by Greektim

Let's be honest, Tony. If I haven't examined both sides of the issue, then surely the KJVO's have not either. I.e. I don't know how many KJVO's consider the "other side" of things. That is usually conveyed as compromise to even consider another view.

Hi Tim. I agree with tonybones. I too have very definitely examined both sides of this issue. I have read James White's book about 3 times through. I've read Carsons anti KJV book, and all of Rick Norris's Unbound Scripture and all of James Price's King James Onlyism, A New Sect. Read them all and then wrote a Bible Believers response to both Norris and James Price.

My belief in the 100% truthfulness and inerrancy of the King James Bible is a God given conviction based upon many hours of study and prayer, plus a lot of just plain common God given sense. The arguments I see coming from you "No bible is the complete and inerrant words of God" guys are so silly, vapid, empty and just plain dumb, that I am convinced that this is a spiritual battle and not one of the intellect. Nobody is naturally that stupid

Happy hunting on that copy of your "original languages" thingy,

Will Kinney

[Ask Mr. Religion]

A good resource to start you off on your assignment is here:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/

AMR

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

Hi Tim. I agree with tonybones. I too have very definitely examined both sides of this issue. I have read James White's book about 3 times through. I've read Carsons anti KJV book, and all of Rick Norris's Unbound Scripture and all of James Price's King James Onlyism, A New Sect. Read them all and then wrote a Bible Believers response to both Norris and James Price.

My belief in the 100% truthfulness and inerrancy of the King James Bible is a God given conviction based upon many hours of study and prayer, plus a lot of just plain common God given sense. The arguments I see coming from you "No bible is the complete and inerrant words of God" guys are so silly, vapid, empty and just plain dumb, that I am convinced that this is a spiritual battle and not one of the intellect. Nobody is naturally that stupid

Happy hunting on that copy of your "original languages" thingy,

Will Kinney

Will, if we had the original manuscripts for all the Scriptures, each and every one gathered into one neat volume, who would claim ownership of them? The one manuscript that they all refer to and cite as "the original text", Vaticanus, who owns it? And why do they not allow anyone to examine the real one and only issue photos of it? If God had written the original words of the Bible onto the side of a mountain and put an angel there to guard it, how many would still try and infiltrate the perimeter to change it?

Ever read Animal Farm, where they write the political commandments on the side of the barn? Most the animals had short term memory problems, and every time the pigs did something wrong the animals went to the commandments, but somehow they seemed "different"? And then Squealer the pig is caught, fallen from a ladder with a bucket of paint and a brush and the commandments seem "different"? Finally when there is seen no physical difference between men and the pigs, they read the commandments and there is only one?

All Animals Are Equal, Some Are More Equal Than Others.

See a pattern here? I do. I see why God entrusted the preservation of the Scriptures not to priests, a church, a government, nor scholarship, but to those who believed them the most. That's why I said in my thing on "triple inspiration", those who attack and criticize the Scriptures are the ones who use them and believe them the least.

Grace and peace brother

Tony

[George]

Aloha all,

Do you see WHY I do not "engage", "discuss", or "dialogue" with "GREEKTim" or "Tmonk"? The minute we have a Christian come onto the AV1611 Forum sincerely looking for information about the "Which Bible Issue" we have these "naysayers" crawl out of their hole and cause chaos & confusion! [1 Corinthians 14:33]

We could have directed this young man to a host of sources that support our convictions; he could have examined them and made up his own heart & mind as to what is "true". Don't forget - the OTHER SIDE of this issue can be abundantly found both in the secular schools and colleges; and sad to say in most of the "Christian" schools and colleges also (like the one that "GREEKtim" attended).

By his own testimony, this young man said that he wasn't aware of the issue and had very little knowledge about it, and instead of having a "united testimony" these men come out and "contest" what several genuine Bible believers said, and have probably succeeded in discouraging this young man to dig out the "truth" for himself.

These men are "gnat strainers" and they think their education is a "substitute" for a sincere belief in the Holy words of God - which neither one of them know (for sure) just exactly WHAT they are or WHERE they can be found.

Can you not you see that these men have no genuine interest in edifying the brethren? Instead all they do interject DOUBT, CONFUSION, and UNBELIEF practically every time they Post?

This young man came looking for information. I believe he is sincere, but instead of us all speaking the same thing, and being of the SAME MIND, all he has gotten is a confusing testimony from these "picky" GNAT STRAINERS!

How long is it going to take some of you to realize that SOPHISTS can NOT be reasoned with; and trying to deal with them is AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY? If you want to "dialogue" with them why not go over to the nest of vipers at FFF and "converse" with them to your hearts content?

I DON'T CARE HOW "sweeet" they come across, and I don't care how "engaging" or "pleasant" they may seem; their "good words and fair speeches" are meant to "deceive the hearts of the simple." [Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.] And the sooner they crawl back to the FFF nest of snakes, the sooner we will be able to have a united testimony pertaining to God's Holy words!

Do you not understand what a golden opportunity has just been missed because of this "smoooth", "slick", OPPORTUNIST ("GREEKtim") - who's only interest is in sowing seeds of DOUBT?

These "Christians" make me SICK! Whenever they can, that is whenever the opportunity presents itself, they slither out of their hole and "strike" with their "poisonous venom" - seeking only to INJURE or DESTROY whatever faith a young Christian may have in God's Holy word, without regard for the spiritual consequences!

Please think about what has just taken place! This is NOT about an "exchange of ideas"! This move on the part of "GREEKtim" is about SOWING DOUBT in the hearts of young Christians and DESTROYING whatever faith they might have in God's Holy word! WHO is it (in the Scriptures) that has said: "Yea hath God said"? What is going on is "devilish" and "perverse" and the sooner we IGNORE these people completely, the sooner they will crawl over to FFF and cry and moan and complain about how "mean" those folks are over at the AV1611 Bible Forums are.

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and AVOID them.