Political Commentator
Member
Do you consider the New King James Version to be a suitable translation of the Bible for students of Theology?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is the New King James Version a good translation of the Bible on a par with the Old KJV?
- Thread starter Political Commentator
- Start date
Do you consider the New King James Version to be a suitable translation of the Bible for students of Theology?
I do. It is my translation of choice since it can be used alongside the old king James. The updated words are a big help.
First Baseman
Retired athlete
It's a good translation, not sure if it works for students taking Theology classes.
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
The NKJ translates the New Testament text of Erasmus (slightly revised) like the original KJ, while many other translations use modern texts, based on a wider variety of manuscripts. It also keeps the same policy of rather literal translation.
Personally, I'd recommend the Revised English Bible or the New Jerusalem Bible. Both are scholarly and readable.
Personally, I'd recommend the Revised English Bible or the New Jerusalem Bible. Both are scholarly and readable.
convinced_friend
Liberal Quaker
I have recently started using the NKJV after using the KJV for most of my life (I've been several different religions over the years, but in the times that I was Christian I usually used the KJV). Recently I experimented with a few other translations, like the NRSV, the NIV2011, etc and finally settled on the NKJV because it has the wording, literary appeal, etc of the KJV without the archaic language. I don't think it matters that the manuscripts it's translated from aren't the best. If that made that much of a difference then that would mean that for most of the history of Christianity people were using the "wrong" Bible and didn't have the true Bible until these earlier (and doubtlessly better) manuscripts were discovered.
I know that the older manuscripts more accurately reflect the original, but I believe the thoughts in the Bible are what is divinely inspired, not necessarily the individual words.
I know that the older manuscripts more accurately reflect the original, but I believe the thoughts in the Bible are what is divinely inspired, not necessarily the individual words.
roger1440
I do stuff
The English language has changed a lot in the last 500 years.
"And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint" (KJV)
"Now Jacob cooked a stew; and Esau came in from the field, and he was weary" (NKJV)
I notice that this is posted in the Christianity DIR. May I ask why?