The NKJV is the best of the modern versions, since it is not based on the critical Greek text. I wish we could recommend it, because I have great sympathy with the plight of those who read English as a second language and have trouble with the antiquation of the King James. As missionaries in South Asia, we have worked closely with such people for many years and many personal friends fall into this category, and the difficulty they have with the King James is very real.
Yet I cannot recommend the NKJV for the following reasons. Note particularly point number five.
- THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION (NKJV) IS A DECEPTION. The editors and translators of the NKJV claim that they are standing in the tradition of the men who originally produced the Authorized Version and who slightly revised it in the 18th century, that they are only updating outmoded language and that they remain firmly committed to the same Greek and Hebrew text as that underlying the original King James Bible. The advertisements for the NKJV would have readers believe that there are no textual changes and that the men who produced it love the old King James Bible. The Statement of Purpose issued by Thomas Nelson, publishers of the New King James Bible New Testament (1979), makes the following claim:
“Not to add to, take from, nor alter the communication intended by the original translators, but to convey that communication in 20th century vocabulary and usage.”
This says to me that the translators and producers of the NKJV are committed to the same text as that underlying the King James Bible, but this is not the case as we will see.
In the 1990s, we corresponded with the executive editor of the Old Testament portion of the NKJV, Dr. James Price. In April of 1996 he admitted to me that he is not committed to the Received Text, that he supports the modern versions, that he supports the modern critical Greek text, and that he himself is a textual critic:
“I am not a TR advocate. I happen to believe that God has preserved the autographic text in the whole body of evidence that He has preserved, not merely through the textual decisions of a committee of fallible men based on a handful of late manuscripts. The modern critical texts like NA26/27 [Nestles] and UBS [United Bible Societies] provide a list of the variations that have entered the manuscript traditions, and they provide the evidence that supports the different variants. In the apparatus they have left nothing out, the evidence is there. The apparatus indicates where possible additions, omissions, and alterations have occurred. … I am not at war with the conservative modern versions [such as the New International Version and the New American Standard Version]” (James Price, e-mail to David Cloud, April 30, 1996).
It is obvious that Dr. Price holds the standard eclectic text position that was popularized by Westcott and Hort in the late 1800s and that he is committed to modern textual criticism. By his own testimony, he has no commitment to the Received Text. He flippantly casts aside this historic, revival-producing text in favor of one that is often based on a handful of manuscripts of dubious authority (i.e., Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and a few others) that were rejected by Bible-believing churches for at least 1,500 years. Further, Dr. Price has accepted the myths that are promoted by textual criticism, such as the idea that the Received Text is supported only by a few late manuscripts. (For refutation of that myth, see our article “Is the Received Text Based Merely on a Few Late Manuscripts,” March 16, 2000, which can be found at the Way of Life web site and also in The Modern Bible Version Question-Answer Database (April 2005). Further, Dr. Price supports the corrupt New International Version, which not only is based on the wrong Greek text but also incorporates the dynamic equivalency method of translation.
With men like this in charge, it is not possible that the New King James Bible could be merely a simple revision of the KJV. I do not know of one man involved with the translation of the NKJV who had a conviction about the authority of the Old and New Testament texts underlying the KJV.
Dr. Price also told me that the NKJV translators did not solely follow the Masoretic Hebrew text in the Old Testament of the NKJV, but that they introduced textual changes. This is born out in the Preface to the NKJV, which says the New King James Bible modifies the Masoretic Hebrew with the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, “a variety of ancient versions,” and the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
At least some of the editors of the NKJV are committed to the so-called “Majority Text,” which makes significant departures from the Greek Received Text of the Reformation Bibles.
In 1982, Thomas Nelson published “The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text.” The editors, Zane Hodges and Arthur Farstad, were also key players in the New King James Version. There are almost 1900 differences between the Received Text and the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text. The deletion of 1 John 5:7 is an example. The translators of the Authorized Version accepted this passage as inspired Scripture and kept it in the English Bible. (1 John 5:7 was in the English Bible beginning with the Wycliffe Bible of the late 1300s.) The editors of the NKJV, on the other hand, do not believe 1 John 5:7 is Scripture, and they have omitted the passage from the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text, together with dozens of other portions of Scripture and hundreds of words, and they have cast great doubt upon this verse in the NKJV with an inaccurate marginal note. These men are definitely not committed to the Received Text or the King James Bible. Their goal is to modify it to bring it into line with their various theories of textual criticism, which err by taking into consideration only the Greek manuscript evidence and ignoring the three other important sources of evidence, ancient translations, writings of ancient church leaders (the “church fathers”), and the ancient lectionaries.
The Hodges-Farstad textual modifications were not introduced into the text of the New King James Bible, but the fact that such men are its authors is a loud warning to those who believe the Greek Received Text is the preserved Word of God.
(A list of the omissions and changes proposed by the “majority text” view can be found in the back of the Interlinear Bible by Jay Green. A good refutation of the majority text position is available in Jack Moorman’s book The Majority Text, which is published by Bible for Today, Collingswood, NJ, 800-564-6109.) See also the report “Examining the Hodges-Farstad Majority Greek Text” at www.wayoflife.org
- THE NKJV MAKES THOUSANDS OF UNNECESSARY CHANGES. There are an estimated 100,000 changes, averaging 80 per page. This was probably done for copyright purposes.
- THE NKJV MAKES MANY ERRONEOUS DEPARTURES FROM THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
Following are some examples:
MATTHEW 7:14
KJV “Because STRAIT is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.”
NKJV “Because narrow is the gate and DIFFICULT is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.”
The word “difficult” in the NKJV (and “narrow” in the KJV) is a translation of the Greek thilbo. Strong’s Concordance defines it as “to crowd (literally or figuratively).” In the KJV, this Greek word is translated “afflict,” “narrow,” “throng,” “suffer tribulation,” “trouble.” When referring to a path, it means that one’s way is restricted. Regardless of what it could be translated in other passages, it is the context of a word that always defines its meaning, and the context of Matthew 7:14 is salvation. We know from other passages that salvation is not difficult. Jesus said that salvation requires coming to God as a child (Lk. 18:17), but if salvation were difficult, as the NKJV says, it would not be possible for a child to be saved. The Bible describes salvation in terms of coming (Mt. 11:28), drinking (Jn. 4:10), eating, (Jn. 6:35), and taking a gift (14 times in N.T., Eph. 2:8-9). These are not difficult things.
As the KJV rightly says, the gate to salvation is strait and narrow. The terms are basically synonyms, meaning that the sinner must humble himself and put his trust in Jesus Christ alone, that there is only one narrow way to God. The world at large despises this One Way and follows the broad road to destruction.
The NKJV translation creates doctrinal error by making the reader think that salvation is difficult. That fits the false gospels that are preached by so many groups today. They teach that the sinner must trust Christ PLUS do many other things. Contrary to the warning in Romans 11:6, they intermingle works and sacraments with grace. That does indeed create a difficult salvation, because the sinner must do many things or he will not be saved, but it is a false gospel. The door that Jesus opened for us with His own blood is strait and narrow, but, praise God, not difficult. All the sinner must do is enter by faith; he must simply reach out his hand and receive God’s lovely Gift that the Savior has purchased for him (Eph. 2:8-9). The erroneous NKJV translation also fits in with a Lordship salvation doctrine that confuses justification with sanctification, salvation with discipleship.
MATTHEW 20:20
KJV “Then came to him the mother of Zebedee’s children with her sons, WORSHIPPING HIM, and desiring a certain thing of him.”
NKJV “Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Him with her sons, KNEELING DOWN and asking something from Him.”
In this connection, the translators of the NKJV commit the same error as the translators of the NIV. The Greek word translated worship in this verse is proskuneo, which is the same word translated “worship” in other passages referring to the worship of Jesus Christ. In the KJV, it is never translated anything other than worship. Eleven times in the KJV, the Gospels tell us that Christ was worshipped (Mt. 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9,17; Mk. 5:6; Lk. 24:52; Jn. 9:38). This, of course, is indisputable evidence that Jesus Christ is God, because only God can be worshipped (Ex. 34:14; Is. 42:8; Mt. 4:10; Acts 14:11-15; Re. 19:10). (There are two verses in the KJV that say that someone “knelt before” Christ–Mt. 17:14; Mk. 1:40)–but in those verses a different Greek word is used, the word gonupeteo.)
The modern versions weaken this testimony to Christ’s deity by translating only some of the proskuneo passages with the term “worship.” The NIV, for example, removes almost half of this witness to Christ’s deity, changing “worship” to “kneel before” in Mt. 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20; Mk. 5:6. The NKJV does not go as far, only removing one of these witnesses to Christ’s deity. But WHY remove any of them? It is the same Greek word. It means worship! This change in the NKJV is unnecessary and wrong and is a move toward the undependable and weaker direction of the modern versions.
HEBREWS 2:16
KJV – “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham” (Hebrews 2:16).
NKJV – “For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham” (Hebrews 2:16).
This change weakens the doctrine of Christ. The Greek says nothing about giving aid to. The Greek word is epilambanomai, which means to lay hold of, to seize, to catch, to take.
HEBREWS 3:16
KJV “For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.”
NKJV “For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?”
This change in the NKJV creates an error in the Bible, because the Old Testament plainly teaches that not all of the Israelites rebelled and provoked God. The KJV is right and the NKJV is wrong.
REVELATION 1:18
KJV “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of HELL and of death.”
NKJV “Re 1:18 “I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of HADES and of Death.”
This is one of the strangest changes that we have found in the NKJV. In 11 verses, the NKJV replaces the word “hell” with the word “hades,” as follows:
Mt. 5:22 — hell fire (gehenna)
Mt. 5:29 — hell (gehenna)
Mt. 5:30 — hell (gehenna)
Mt. 10:28 — hell (gehenna)
Mt. 11:23 — Hades
Mt. 16:18 — Hades
Mt. 18:9 — hell fire (gehenna)
Mt. 23:15 — hell (gehenna)
Mt. 23:33 — hell (gehenna)
Mk. 9:43, 45, 47 — hell (gehenna)
Lk. 10:15 — Hades
Lk. 12:5 — hell (gehenna)
Lk. 16:23 — Hades
Acts 2:27 — Hades
Acts 2:31 — Hades
1 Co. 15:55 — Hades
James 3:6 — hell (gehenna)
2 Pe. 2:4 — hell (tartaroo)
Re. 1:18 — Hades
Re. 6:8 — Hades
Re. 20:13 — Hades
Re. 20:14 — Hades
Hades is a transliteration of the Greek word, and it could be argued that it is not an error to use the actual Greek word instead of translating it, but that is not the point. The point is that there is no reason to change the word from hell to hades. English people know very well what hell is, but few know what hades is. The word “hades” has been translated “hell” in the standard English Bibles since the days of John Wycliffe in the 14th century. The change to “hades” does not make the Bible clearer. In this connection, the NKJV is certainly not easier to understand or read than the KJV.
The New Testament uses three terms for hell, gehenna, tartaroo, and hades. Gehenna is figurative reference to the burning of garbage in the valley of Hinnom, a valley of Jerusalem. Tartaroo, which is used only in 2 Pe. 2:4, refers to a chamber of hell in which rebellious angels are incarcerated, “the deepest abyss of Hades” (Strong). Hades, the most common New Testament word for hell, can sometimes refer to the grave (Acts 2:27, 31; 1 Co. 15:55) but it also refers to the fiery hell, as is evident in Luke 16:23, when the rich man died and “in hell [hades] he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”
Why did the NKJV translators change every reference to hades? It appears to be a change for change sake. Perhaps it falls into the category of changes that must be made in order to obtain a copyright for a new work. But it certainly plays into the hands of those who are watering down the doctrine of eternal, fiery hell. The Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example, who deny that hell is a place of eternal fiery punishment, prefer the term hades. So do the Seventh-day Adventists. In fact, many “evangelicals” are also denying or questioning the doctrine of hell. In 1993 Billy Graham said: “When it comes to a literal fire, I don’t preach it because I’m not sure about it. When the Scripture uses fire concerning hell, that is possibly an illustration of how terrible it’s going to be not fire but something worse, a thirst for God that cannot be quenched” (Graham, interview with Richard Ostling, Time magazine, Nov. 15, 1993). Robert Schuller said: “And what is ‘hell’? It is the loss of pride that naturally follows separation from God–the ultimate and unfailing source of our soul’s sense of self-respect” (Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, 1982, pp. 14-15). Others who deny the biblical doctrine of hell are Clark Pinnock, Herbert Vander Lugt of the Radio Bible Class (What Does the Bible Say about Hell, 1990), F.F. Bruce, Richard Quebedeaux, Kenneth Kantzer, former editor of Christianity Today, John R.W. Stott, George Ladd of Fuller Seminary, and J.I. Packer.
These are only a few examples of the significant changes that have been made throughout the New King James Version.
- THE NKJV DELETES THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SINGULAR AND PLURAL OF THE SECOND PERSON PRONOUN (THEE, THOU, THY, THINE VS. YE, YOU, YOUR).
Therefore, the NKJV gives up accuracy for modernity.
The Hebrew and Greek languages distinguish between the singular and plural of the second person pronouns. The King James Bible maintains this distinction by the consistent use of “thee, thou, thine, ye, you, your.” The pronouns beginning with “T” are always singular (i.e., thee, thou, thine), and the pronouns beginning with “Y” are always plural (i.e., ye, you).
Consider the following testimony about this:
“It is often asserted or assumed that the usage of the AV represents the speech of 300 years ago, and that now, three centuries later, it should be changed to accord with contemporary usage. But this is not at all a correct statement of the problem. The important fact is this. THE USAGE OF THE AV IS NOT THE ORDINARY USAGE OF THE EARLY SEVENTEENTH CENTURY: IT IS THE BIBLICAL USAGE BASED ON THE STYLE OF THE HEBREW AND THE GREEK SCRIPTURES. The second part of this statement needs no proof and will be challenged by no one. It is undeniable that where the Hebrew and Greek use the singular of the pronoun the AV regularly uses the singular, and where they use the plural it uses the plural. Even in Deuteronomy where in his addresses, and apparently for rhetorical and pedagogical effect, Moses often changes suddenly, and seemingly arbitrarily, from singular to plural or from plural to singular, the AV reproduces the style of the text with fidelity. THAT IS TO SAY, THE USAGE OF THE AV IS STRICTLY BIBLICAL” (Oswald T. Allis, “Is a Pronominal Revision of the Authorized Version Desirable?”).
We can see the importance of this with the following example from the New Testament:
JOHN 3:7
KJV “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
NKJV “Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’”
In the KJV, the English reader can discern that both a singular and a plural Greek pronoun are used in this verse. Jesus was saying, “Marvel not that I said unto thee [singular, referring to Nicodemus], Ye [plural, referring to all of the nation Israel and all people in general] must be born again.”
Because of the changes that were made in the NKJV toward the goal of sounding contemporary, this meaning is lost to the English reader in both the Old and New Testaments.
- THE MOST SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE WITH THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION IS THAT IT IS A BRIDGE TO THE MODERN VERSIONS.
The New King James Version is a bridge to the modern versions. Those who move away from the King James Bible to the New King James are lulled into a sense of security that they have moved merely to an updated and improved King James, but actually they are being brainwashed to be weaned away from the King James and its underlying Hebrew and Greek texts toward accepting the modern versions.
Kirk DiVietro, pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Franklin, Massachusetts, attended one of the Thomas Nelson planning meetings that prepared the way for the publication of the New King James. He testified to me that the Thomas Nelson representative plainly stated that their goal with the NKJV was to create a bridge to the modern versions, to break down the resistance of those who still revere the KJV. Following is Bro. DiVietro’s testimony as he gave it to me by e-mail on January 9, 2005: “Over 20 years ago I attended a pre-publication meeting of the NKJV held by the Thomas Nelson People and hosted by the Hackman’s Bible Bookstore in Allentown, PA. I am personal friends with the owners who took great delight in seating me next to the brother of the main translator of the NIV. The meeting was attended by over 300 college professors and pastors. At the meeting we were treated to a slide presentation of the history of the English bible and in particular the King James Bible and its several revisions. During the presentation of the NKJV the Thomas Nelson representative made a statement which to the best of my memory was, ‘We are all educated people here. We would never say this to our people, but we all know that the King James Version is a poor translation based on poor texts. But every attempt to give your people a better Bible has failed. They just won’t accept them. So we have gone back and done a revision of the King James Version, a fifth revision. Hopefully it will serve as a transitional bridge to eventually get your people to accept a more accurate Bible.’ Because of the years, and because I did not write it down, I cannot give you the speaker’s name and I cannot promise you that this is word for word correct, but the meeting so seared my spirit that I have never picked up and opened a NKJV. I can tell you that this is absolutely the substance and nearly the exact words of what was said.”
The footnotes in the NKJV are based on the Nestle-United Bible Society critical Greek text and thus create exactly the same kind of confusion and doubt you find in the modern versions. It tempts the readers to discount the authority of the passages that are questioned in footnotes. It also accustoms Bible students to accept the philosophy of picking and choosing between the readings of competing texts and versions. This greatly reduces the authority of the Bible.
The Nestle-Aland United Bible Societies critical Greek text (NU) follows the Westcott-Hort text of 1881 in removing or questioning dozens of entire verses and thousands of words that are in the Received Text. It is shorter than the Received Text by the equivalent of the entire books of 1 and 2 Peter. Those who believe the Received Text underlying the Authorized Version and other revered Protestant versions is the preserved Word of God reject the NU text as corrupted.
Though the editors of the NKJV claim they are honoring the Received Text with their New King James Bible, they have given credibility to the corrupted UBS text by placing its doubt-producing readings in the margin of their version.
The following study is based on the margin of the New King James Version, Thomas Nelson, copyright 1984.
44 ENTIRE VERSES ARE QUESTIONED IN THE MARGIN OF THE NKJV ON THE BASIS OF THE UNRELIABLE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES TEXT
Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 21:4; 23:14; 24:6
Mark 7:16; 9:44; 9:46; 11:26; 15:28; 16:9-20
Luke 17:36; 22:43; 22:44; 23:17
John 5:4; 7:53-8:11 Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29
Romans 16:24
1 John 5:7
PORTIONS OF 95 OTHER VERSES ARE QUESTIONED IN THE MARGIN OF THE NKJV ON THE BASIS OF THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES TEXT
MATTHEW
5:22 NU omits “without a cause”
5:27 NU omits “to those of old”
6:13 NU omits “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.”
9:13 NU omits “to repentance”
9:35 NU omits “among the people”
10:3 NU omits “Lebbaeus, whose surname was”
10:8 NU omits “raise the dead”
12:35 NU omits “of his heart”
13:51 NU omits “Jesus said to them”
15:8 NU omits “draw near to Me with their mouth, And”
18:29 NU omits “at his feet”
19:20 NU omits “from my youth”
20:7 NU omits “and whatever is right you will receive”
20:16 NU omits “For many are called, but few chosen”
20:22 NU omits “and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with”
20:23 NU omits “and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with”
22:13 NU omits “take him away, and”
23:3 NU omits “to observe”
25:13 NU omits “in which the Son of Man is coming”
26:60 NU omits “false witnesses”
27:35 NU omits “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.”
MARK
1:2 NU omits “Isaiah the prophet”
1:14 NU omits “of the kingdom”
2:17 NU omits “to repentance”
3:5 NU omits “as whole as the other”
3:15 NU omits “to heal sicknesses and”
4:4 NU omits “of the air”
6:11 NU omits “Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city”
6:36 NU omits “bread; for they have nothing to eat”
7:2 NU omits “they found fault”
9:29 NU omits “and fasting”
9:45 NU omits “into the fire that shall never be quenched”
9:49 NU omits “and every sacrifice will be seasoned with salt”
10:24 NU omits “for those who trust in riches”
11:10 NU omits “in the name of the Lord”
12:4 NU omits “and at him they threw stones”
12:30 NU omits “This is the first commandment”
12:33 NU omits “with all the soul”
13:14 NU omits “spoken of by Daniel the prophet”
14:19 NU omits “And another said, ‘Is it I?’“
14:27 NU omits “because of Me this night”
14:70 NU omits “and your speech shows it”
LUKE
1:28 NU omits “blessed are you among women”
1:29 NU omits “when she saw him”
1:78 NU omits “shall visit”
4:4 NU omits “but by every word of God”
4:8 NU omits “Get behind Me, Satan”
4:18 NU omits “to heal the brokenhearted”
4:41 NU omits “the Christ”
5:38 NU omits “and both are preserved”
6:10 NU omits “as whole as the other”
6:45 NU omits “treasure of his heart”
7:10 NU omits “who had been sick”
7:31 NU omits “And the Lord said”
8:45 NU omits “and those with him”
8:45 NU omits “and You say, ‘Who touched Me?’“
8:54 NU omits “put them all out”
9:54 NU omits “just as Elijah did”
9:55 NU omits “and said, ‘You do not know what manner of spirit you are of’“
9:56 NU omits “For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them”
10:35 NU omits “when he departed”
11:2 NU omits “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven”
11:4 NU omits “But deliver us from the evil one”
11:11 NU omits “bread from any father among you, will he give you a stone? Or if he asks for”
11:29 NU omits “the prophet”
11:44 NU omits “scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites”
11:54 NU omits “that they might accuse Him”
17:3 NU omits “against you”
17:9 NU omits “him? I think not”
19:5 NU omits “and saw him”
20:23 NU omits “Why do you test Me?”
20:30 NU omits “took her as wife, and he died childless”
22:30 NU omits “in My kingdom”
22:31 NU omits “And the Lord said”
22:64 NU omits “struck Him on the face and”
22:68 NU omits “Me or let Me go”
22:23 NU omits “and of the chief priests”
23:34 NU omits “Then Jesus said, Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do”
23:38 NU omits “written and in letters of Greek, Latin, and Hebrew”
24:1 NU omits “and certain other women with them”
24:42 NU omits “and some honeycomb”
JOHN
3:13 NU omits “who is in heaven”
3:15 NU omits “not perish but”
4:42 NU omits “the Christ”
5:3 NU omits “waiting for the moving of the water”
5:16 NU omits “and sought to kill Him”
6:11 NU omits “to the disciples, and the disciples”
6:22 NU omits “which His disciples had entered”
6:47 NU omits “in Me” 8:6 NU omits “as though He did not hear”
8:9 NU omits “being convicted by their conscience”
8:10 NU omits “and saw no one but the woman”
8:59 NU omits “through the midst of them, and so passed by”
9:11 NU omits “the pool of”
10:26 NU omits “as I said to you”
11:41 NU omits “from the place where the dead man was lying”
12:1 NU omits “who had been dead”
17:12 NU omits “in the world”
19:16 NU omits “and led Him away”
ACTS
2:23 NU omits “have taken”
2:37 NU omits “to the church”
7:30 NU omits “of the Lord”
7:37 NU omits “Him you shall hear”
<hr>
By David Cloud (first published March 9, 2003)
You can visit his website here //www.wayoflife.org/