New King James ERRORS

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New King James ERRORS

    New King James ERRORS

    The NKJV removes the word "hell" 23 times! And how do they make it "much clearer"? By replacing "hell" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

    Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "hell"?

    Genesis 2:18: The NKJV ought to make Hillary Clinton proud: "And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make a helper COMPARABLE TO HIM"

    Genesis 22:8: One of the greatest verses in the Bible proclaiming that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh: "God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:" The NKJV adds that little word "for": "God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering" And destroys the wonderful promise! Where'd they get their little "for"? From the NASV!

    Genesis 24:47: The "old" KJV reads: "I put the earring upon her face". But the NKJV has different plans for beautiful Rebekah: "I put the nose ring on her nose". Where did it get the ridiculous idea to "cannibalize" Rebekah? Just take a peek at the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!

    Ezra 8:36: The KJV reads, "And they delivered the king's commissions unto the king's lieutenants. . ." The "much clearer" NKJV reads, "And they delivered the king's orders to the king's satraps. . ." Who in the world thinks "satraps" is "much clearer" than lieutenants? The NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV - they do! They put in the same "much clearer" word!

    Psalms 109:6: removes "Satan". (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV).

    Matthew 7:14: change "narrow is the way" to "difficult is the way". There's nothing "difficult" about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, "For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light." THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!

    Matthew 12:40: change "whale" to "fish" (ditto NIV) I don't guess it matters (what's the truth got to do with it?), the Greek word used in Matthew 12:40 is ketos. The scientific study of whales just happens to be - CETOLOGY - from the Greek ketos for whale and logos for study! The scientific name for whales just happens to be - CETACEANS - from the Greek ketos for whale!

    Matthew 18:26 & Matthew 20:20: The NKJV removes "worshipped him" (robbing worship from Jesus) (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    Mark 13:6 & Luke 21:8: removes "Christ" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    John 1:3: change "All things were made BY him;" to "All things were made THROUGH Him" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

    John 4:24: change "God is a spirit" to the impersonal, New Age pantheistic,"God is spirit" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    John 14:2: (NKJV 1979 edition) change "mansions" to "dwelling places" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    John 14:16: change "comforter" to "helper"(refers to Holy Spirit) (NASV)

    Acts 4:27, 30: change "holy child" to "holy servant" (refers to Jesus) (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Acts 12:4: change "Easter" to "Passover" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    Acts 17:22: changes "superstitious" to "religious" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Acts 24:14: change "heresy" to "sect" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Romans 1:18: change "hold the truth" to "suppress the truth" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Romans 1:25: change "changed the truth" to "exchanged the truth" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Romans 5:8: change "commendeth" to "demonstrates" (NIV, NASV)

    Romans 16:18: change "good words and fair speeches" to "smooth words and flattering speech" (NIV, NASV, NRSV)

    1 Cor. 1:21: change "foolishness of preaching" to "foolishness of the message preached" (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV) There's nothing foolish about the gospel of Jesus Christ. Unless you're not saved! 1 Cor. 1:18 says: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish FOOLISHNESS. . ." I wonder where that leaves the translators of the NKJV, NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV?

    1 Cor. 1:22: change "require" to "request" (NASV)

    1 Cor. 6:9: removes "effeminate" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

    1 Cor. 9:27: change "castaway" to "disqualified" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    2 Cor. 2:10: change "person of Christ" to "presence of Christ" (NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    2 Cor. 2:17: With all the "corruptions" in the NKJV, you'd expect 2 Cor. 2:17 to change. IT DOES! They change, "For we not as many which CORRUPT the word of God" to "For we are not, as so many, PEDDLING the word of God" (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    2 Cor. 5:17: change "new creature" to "new creation" (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

    2 Cor. 10:5: change "imaginations" to "arguments". Considering New Age "imaging" and "visualization" is now entering the church, this verse in the "old" KJV just won't do. (NIV, RSV)

    2 Cor. 11:6: change "rude in speech" to "untrained in speech" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    Gal. 2:20: omit "nevertheless I live" (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

    Phil. 2:6: (NKJV 1979e.) change "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" to "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped". (robs Jesus Christ of deity) (NIV, NASV, RSV)

    Phil. 3:8: change "dung" to "rubbish" (NIV, NASV, NRSV)

    1 Thess. 5:22 change "all appearance of evil" to "every form of evil" (NASV, RSV, NSRV)

    1 Timothy 6:5: The NKJV changes "gain is godliness" to "godliness is a MEANS OF gain". There are NO Greek texts with "means of" in them! Where, oh where, did they come from? Care to take a wild guess? YOU GOT IT! The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!

    1 Timothy 6:10: The NKJV changes "For the love of money is the root of all evil:" to "For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil". The words "KINDS OF" are found in NO Greek text in the world! Where did they get them? Straight from the NIV, NASV, NRSV!

    1 Tim. 6:20: change "science" to "knowledge" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    Titus 3:10: change "heretic" to "divisive man" (NIV)

    Hebrews 4:8 & Acts 7:45: "Jesus" is changed to "Joshua". (NIV, NASV, RSV)

    2 Pet. 2:1: change "damnable heresies" to "destructive heresies" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    1 John 3:16: remove "love of God"; (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    1 John 5:13: The NKJV reads: "These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may CONTINUE TO believe in the name of the Son of God." They add "CONTINUE TO" without any Greek text whatsoever! Not even the perverted NIV, NASV, NRSV and RSV go that far! A cruel, subtil (see Genesis 3:1) attack on the believer's eternal security!

    Rev. 2:13: change "Satan's seat" to "Satan's throne" (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

    Rev. 6:14: "Heaven" is changed to "sky" in (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)


    The NKJV removes the word "Lord" 66 times!

    The NKJV removes the word God 51 times!

    The NKJV removes the word "heaven" 50 times!

    In just the New Testament alone the NKJV removes 2.289 words from the KJV!

    The NKJV makes over 100,000 word changes!

  • #2
    What I've found interesting is that there are KJV only ists and NAS onlyists -- so -- which one Is the Only God's Word?

    Personally, I grew up with KJV because it was the only Bible available -- it was available in black or navy blue -- with or without Scoffield's notes. And his notes at the bottom of the Bible were considered almost as inspired as the Bible.

    Many years later I came across the NIV -- it was in paragraph form and - for me- much more reader-friendly. And then after That -- our then pastor - many churches ago - introduced the congregation to the New KJV. After that I changed from the NIV to the NKJV. It updated the vocabulary from the King's English to up-to-date English. Now I go back and forth from the older NIV to the NKJ and my husband has the KJV.

    I was just reading through the list of changes. some of them aren't all that different. Simply up-dating the vocabulary. And there are usually footnotes at the bottom of the page to indicate the changes. And 'changes' don't especially mean 'errors'.

    People need to be reading God's Word -- not books written to supplement the Bible.
    Comment>

    • #3
      Originally posted by Sue D. View Post
      People need to be reading God's Word -- not books written to supplement the Bible.
      I agree

      The Scandal of Biblical Illiteracy: It's Our Problem - AlbertMohler.com

      Type "biblical illiteracy" into a search engine, and you will get pages of articles similar to the above.

      Comment>

      • #4
        KJVOs start out with the presupposition that the KJV is the perfect translation, totally beyond reproach, and therefore anything which departs from it must be in "error".

        The only problem is that their pressuposition is baloney.

        Gone are the days when my parish priest could mock the evangelical attitude to the NIV as being the "Nearly Infallible Version." Nowadays, it is the KJV which is the Actually Infallible Version.
        Comment>

        • #5
          Originally posted by Calvarystudy View Post
          The "old" KJV reads: "I put the earring upon her face". But the NKJV has different plans for beautiful Rebekah: "I put the nose ring on her nose". Where did it get the ridiculous idea to "cannibalize" Rebekah? Just take a peek at the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!
          This has caught my attention, particularly. Yes, I had wondered,as well, "why the ring on hte nose"? I checked it out with my "The Chumash" (Hebrew Scripture of the Torah and Commentary): Abraham asked his most trusted servant to seek out a wife for Isaac "from the daughters of the Canaanites." Abraham overlooked the idol worship practices of the Canaanites because Abraham's family in Charan (Haran) worhipped idols. Anyway, jewelry was part of women's ornaments. They could have had piercings on the face (nose, eyebrows, lips,) and ears on any part or parts of the outer earlobe. Very interesting.
          Comment>

          • #6
            Originally posted by Sue D. View Post
            What I've found interesting is that there are KJV only ists and NAS onlyists -- so -- which one Is the Only God's Word?

            Personally, I grew up with KJV because it was the only Bible available -- it was available in black or navy blue -- with or without Scoffield's notes. And his notes at the bottom of the Bible were considered almost as inspired as the Bible.

            Many years later I came across the NIV -- it was in paragraph form and - for me- much more reader-friendly. And then after That -- our then pastor - many churches ago - introduced the congregation to the New KJV. After that I changed from the NIV to the NKJV. It updated the vocabulary from the King's English to up-to-date English. Now I go back and forth from the older NIV to the NKJ and my husband has the KJV.

            I was just reading through the list of changes. some of them aren't all that different. Simply up-dating the vocabulary. And there are usually footnotes at the bottom of the page to indicate the changes. And 'changes' don't especially mean 'errors'.

            People need to be reading God's Word -- not books written to supplement the Bible.

            You are ASSUMING i am a "KJV only ist".

            If you "grew up" with the KJV, why change?

            the NIV is alleged to be "easier to read". But there are 2 problems with that.

            1) It has been proven that the KJV is easier to comprehend than the NIV
            2) Even if it WAS easier to read, WHAT are you reading? I would rather struggle reading the truth than easily read a lie.

            I notice you did not address ANY of the points in the original post.

            "up-dating" vocabulary? To mean completely different things?

            Are people too lazy to google a couple of KJV words? They words are very specific.

            Comment>

            • #7
              Originally posted by ThyWordisTruth View Post

              I agree

              The Scandal of Biblical Illiteracy: It's Our Problem - AlbertMohler.com

              Type "biblical illiteracy" into a search engine, and you will get pages of articles similar to the above.

              Yes, and no need for footnotes.
              Comment>

              • #8
                Originally posted by ThyWordisTruth View Post
                KJVOs start out with the presupposition that the KJV is the perfect translation, totally beyond reproach, and therefore anything which departs from it must be in "error".

                The only problem is that their pressuposition is baloney.

                Gone are the days when my parish priest could mock the evangelical attitude to the NIV as being the "Nearly Infallible Version." Nowadays, it is the KJV which is the Actually Infallible Version.

                First, you are assuming i am a KJVO.

                "The only problem is that their pressuposition is baloney."

                Why? Have YOU studied WHERE the translations came form? Their histories, WHICH manuscripts they used?


                "Gone are the days when my parish priest could mock the evangelical attitude to the NIV as being the "Nearly Infallible Version.""

                "parish priest"? I would not listen to such a person to begin with!

                Yes, the NIV is one of the WORST mistranslations out there. It REMOVES 64,576 words and had a lesibian on the translation committee.

                No translation is infallible. I use the KJV because it is the most accurate translation of the correct ANTIOCH text line.

                I notice that many people like you dont just dislike the KJV, but you HATE it.

                I see you did not address ANY of the points raised.
                Comment>

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Calvarystudy View Post
                  Why? Have YOU studied WHERE the translations came form? Their histories, WHICH manuscripts they used?
                  Modern translations are usually made from the Nestle-Aland text, and that in turn is compiled from a vast range of manuscript evidence that the KJV translators did not have available to them.


                  "Gone are the days when my parish priest could mock the evangelical attitude to the NIV as being the "Nearly Infallible Version.""

                  "parish priest"? I would not listen to such a person to begin with!
                  I bet you wouldn't. As it happens, he belonged to the evangelical wing of the Anglican Church.


                  No translation is infallible. I use the KJV because it is the most accurate translation of the correct ANTIOCH text line.
                  Absolute nonsense.


                  I notice that many people like you dont just dislike the KJV, but you HATE it.
                  Um, I use the KJV almost exclusively. I just don't entertain the crazed idea that it is "the most accurate" translation, because it isn't.

                  Comment>

                  • #10
                    I was just reading the article -- quite sad -- The Bible isn't really taken seriously by lots of people. It might be revered, but not read. Maybe some of that is due to higher education / high school level even, ridiculing the Bible. The U.S. probably has more Bibles in households than any other country -- but not read. People seem content to be illiterate. Some of it may be due to the evolutionary thought being pushed and Bible being laughed at. And there are lots of other belief systems in the U.S. that don't use the Bible. Christianity is Not popular.

                    Biblical teaching is reduced to 'God is love' -- He Is love -- but there's so much more to know. Maybe Bible literacy can be encouraged by each individual -- playing Bible trivia instead of watching TV? Learning can be Fun.
                    Comment>

                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Calvarystudy View Post


                      You are ASSUMING i am a "KJV only ist".

                      If you "grew up" with the KJV, why change?

                      the NIV is alleged to be "easier to read". But there are 2 problems with that.

                      1) It has been proven that the KJV is easier to comprehend than the NIV
                      2) Even if it WAS easier to read, WHAT are you reading? I would rather struggle reading the truth than easily read a lie.

                      I notice you did not address ANY of the points in the original post.

                      "up-dating" vocabulary? To mean completely different things?

                      Are people too lazy to google a couple of KJV words? They words are very specific.

                      Apparently I assumed wrongly.

                      I changed because the pastor at the church we went to at the time commented on the fact that the 'thee's and thou's ' of the old King's English were up-dated to 'you' / 'your' -- I hadn't known it existed until then. I found an inexpensive copy at the book section of the local Walmart.

                      I don't know who it is that 'proved' that --but the old NIV is easier to read. I enjoy reading -- it made the Old Testament more readable. The NIV is in paragraph form, which does make it more reader-friendly for me. And Why is the NIV - the older one a lie ?. I've heard warnings that the up-dated NIV is Not a good one. Your comments make you sound like an KJV only person. The KJV that is so very popular is the revised version of the 1st KJV.

                      I didn't realize that I needed to respond to Any of the many points.

                      I was just re-reading your 1st post -- you sound Very opinionated.

                      Okay -- you prefer to read the English that was used back in the days of King James 1 of England. Do you realize that the KJV was Not the first Bible that was printed? There were numerous others printed as complete Bible's long before King James 1 commissioned the group of people to put it together.

                      Oh,no, the NIV team had a Lesbian on the team of translators -- horrors. And I'll bet that you could tell every place that the Lesbian translator had part in translating. Was any member of the team having an affair?

                      Comment>

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sue D. View Post


                        Apparently I assumed wrongly.

                        I changed because the pastor at the church we went to at the time commented on the fact that the 'thee's and thou's ' of the old King's English were up-dated to 'you' / 'your' -- I hadn't known it existed until then. I found an inexpensive copy at the book section of the local Walmart.

                        LOL. your pastor is wrong. Thee and Thou are very specific words and they are there for a reason.

                        So, rather than google the meanings of Thee and Thou, you threw away your Bible? Thats quite sad.

                        So, thats just TWO words you needed to learn the meaning of.
                        Comment>

                        • #13
                          BTW I did Not throw away my Bible. And You are displaying quite an 'attitude'. The KJV is Not the only Bible around that is readable.
                          Comment>

                          • #14
                            Calvarystudy, you could be a little more of a gentleman and chivalrous to the lady (Sue).

                            God bless,
                            William
                            Comment>

                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Calvarystudy View Post
                              The NKJV removes the word "hell" 23 times! And how do they make it "much clearer"? By replacing "hell" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

                              Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "hell"?
                              It might not be clearer but it is more accurate. In the KJB the word "hell" is used to translate four words: "sheol" in the Old Testament and "hades", "gehenna", and "Tartarus" in the New.

                              In the Old Testament all the dead, both good and bad, went to a place called Sheol, which is the equivalent of Hades in the New Testament. In the account of Lazarus and the rich man, the rich man is said to be suffering in Hades, but he is able to see and communicate with Abraham and Lazarus, which shows they must have been in Hades too. They were in a different section, where they didn't suffer pain as the rich man did.

                              When Jesus was dying he promised the repentant criminal that he would be in Paradise with him that same day. In 2 Corinthians 12 Paul described Paradise as being in the third heaven. This shows that the death of Jesus made a difference in where the righteous go when they die.

                              The word Hell describes the place of eternal punishment, also called the lake of fire, where unrepentant sinners will spend eternity. None of them are there yet; they are still in Hades waiting for their final judgment, which is described in Revelation 20.

                              A lot of confusion and false teaching could have been avoided if the KJB translators had been more careful in what words they used.

                              The fact that Hades is found in Greek mythology doesn't prove that is doesn't really exist. After the flood there was a universal knowledge of what God had revealed and as Noah's descendants spread out over the earth and started false religions some of them retained some of the truths they had originally known. That is why you will find some truth in all religions. That is why the Greeks knew something about Hades even though their knowledge was not complete.
                              Clyde Herrin's Blog
                              Comment>
                              Working...
                              X
                              Articles - News - SiteMap