|
Christians who have obeyed God and
proven all things have avoided the 'yea hath God said?' modern 'bible
versions.' Their determination to receive with meekness the true engrafted word
which is able to save their souls has sorely
vexed the One World Church planners.
Their solution to the remnant Christian who holds fast
the form of sound words in the King James Bible is the New King James
[Transitional] Version.
The New King James Version New
Testament is allegedly based on the same manuscripts as the King James--the
Textus Receptus. However, it includes
notes for every textual difference between it and the Majority and Critical
Text. The NKJV's extensive
footnotes suggest words and phrases that are found in
the modern versions. These footnotes, which are displayed
at the bottom of the pages of a book
the translators falsely claim is the fifth revision of the King James 1611, serve as a
bridge to the modern 'bible' versions. The NKJV preface reveals their plan to
use footnotes
to entice King James Bible believers into becoming
textual
critics:
It was the editors' conviction that the use
of footnotes would encourage further inquiry by readers. They also
recognized that it was easier for the average reader to delete something he
or she felt was not properly a part of the text than to insert a word or
phrase which had been left out by the revisers.
(Quote source: History of the King James
Bible, page 1235
of the the New King James Version, copyright 1979, 1980, 1982)
Copyright Law
Necessitates Substantial Changes
In spite of the fact that the
derivative copyright law requires that a derivative work (in this case the NKJV)
must be different enough from the original (the King James Bible) to be regarded
as a 'new work' or must contain a substantial amount of new material,
the publisher's use of the term, "Textus Receptus" has deceived many former King
James Bible Christians into accepting the NKJV.
Is it possible the New King
James copyrighted 'bible' version was consistently translated from the same
manuscripts the King James translators used and yet be so different from the King
James Bible that it is regarded as a new work?
No.
Here are a few examples of NKJV
New Testament verses which contain words that follow the corrupt Greek text.
NIV Translators on NKJV
Translation Committee
In
view of the fact that half of the NKJV translation committee favored the
Westcott-Hort Greek text, it makes sense that so many words in the NKJV conform to those
found in false bible versions:
"Dr. Arthur Farstad, chairman
of the NKJV Executive Review Committee which had the responsibility of final
text approval, stated that this committee was about equally divided as to
which was the better Greek New Testament text-the Textus Receptus or the
Westcott-Hort. (1)
Thomas Nelson Publishers are not
committed to the Traditional Text. Among other 'versions,' of what is being
passed off as God's word, they published the
American Standard Version, (a revision of the Westcott-Hort 1881 English Revised
Version) and the Revised Standard Version. (See:
Thomas Nelson Published Other Corrupt
Versions.)
The New King James Version is a mixture of light and
darkness:
The New King James is just a
compromise between the liberal, perverted Bible versions floating
around and the rock-solid, accurate and preserved words of God, the King
James Bible. (2)
A little leaven in one's bible
'version' will eventually spiritually leaven the whole Christian.
Since the new
Minority-Text-based versions cause divisions and offences
contrary to the
doctrine which you have learned from your King James 1611 Bible, be a doer of the Word
and avoid them.
(See: Romans 16:17)
notes:
(1)
What is
Wrong With the New King James Version? by David W. Daniels
https://www.chick.com/battle-cry/article?id=Whats-Wrong-With-the-New-King-James
(2) ibid
return to:
New King James Version and the One World
Church |