Very well done Tim and thank you so much for the video. Another reason I may add to the ones you mentioned: No matter which denomination we belong, the NKJV flows very well. It's a classic in its own right.
Praise the Lord brother bless you quick question concerning the NKJV I noticed that the NKJV uses you for singular and plural pronouns wouldn’t this lead to inaccuracy
@@terrellking4174 -- It could, in a few passages, but that is a fault of modern English, which no longer distinguishes between singular and plural second-person pronouns, not a fault of the NKJV in particular. Marginal notes at those verses where it is not clear who 'you' refers to would be helpful.
For ages I couldn’t decide between NKJV and ESV as I really love reading them both but I really wanted to pick one or the other and spend several years deep diving into it instead of flip flopping between the two. So I put my dilemma into God’s hands and very quickly I was given my answer when I read Psalm 139:13 in the ESV. I love it when Our Lord shows me his sense of humour - he knew I would be so tickled by the thought of him sitting in his cosy chair knitting.
The NKJV was the first translation I read when I came back to Christ. I prefer to read the KJV now but the NKJV will always have a special place in my heart.
KJV and NKJV are tied for first place on my preference list. I was first introduced to the KJV in the church I was saved in. The church I attended for a few years later used the NIV, which I never really cared for. Then I started attending Calvary Chapel in Bellflower CA who used the KJV and it was at that time I accidentally purchased the NKJV! Fell in love immediately. :)
@@artifacthunter1472 -- Justification happens at a moment in time (though not everyone who is justified can tell exactly what moment that was; they just know that it took place). Sanctification takes place over time, and is a process. Glorification will happen at a moment in time.
Great video! Threw me for a loop on this one Tim. I was expecting one reason, and was at first surprised it was the myriad of available printings rather than the textual basis. Ended up with 4 reasons and you covered the text basis so well done. I’ve settled on the NKJ as my fav as well because it’s much easier to comprehend than it’s predecessor and includes the CT variant notes which are helpful to point out major differences with doctrinal implications.
The layout options was really the top reason because I already had familiarity with the NKJV so it wasn’t a huge leap. The other reasons are why the ESV couldn’t win me back even if they had better layouts.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsso true. Once I discovered the benefit of the supplied words in italics and excellent textual notes, plus the time-tested legacy of the TR basis, it was game over for me.
Thomas Nelson for the WIN, I agree they make amazing Bibles - I have that end of verse reference premier and it’s really good. Well I have several you shared, great Bibles 😁
Thanks for that explanation. I have been ESV for a very long time. One of the things as you mentioned, is I like that fact that they don't continuously update it. One you didn't mention, is I am a fan of the capitalization of the pronouns referring to God/Christ. Love that!
Hi Tim! I LOVE the NKJV translation also. I have practically every translation possible in my collection which I refer to time to time, but it seems like I always gravitate to the NKJV in all formats, especially in the Study Bibles etc. Thanks for the great review! God bless! 💜✝️🙏🏻😊
I didn’t grow up with the KJV, our church used the old RSV and switched to the NIV in the mid 80s, so the NKJV wasn’t something I was naturally drawn to. But I read through the translation during 2020, and the more traditional sounding language ended up being a comfort to me through everything that went on that year, so it will always have a place in my heart. Since then I’ve incorporated it into my reading and study on a more regular basis, and I’m glad I did. The stable text is big selling point for me, as well as the numerous, and usually affordable, number of editions that are available. Great video!
I like the NKJV as well. The textual notes I find to be very helpful. The Thomas Nelson study bible in NKJV is the best I have in its even handedness of explanations and possible interpretations.
I was KJV for years because I loved it, then went NKJV alongside that version because, as you say Tim, it flows so beautifully in line with the King James. For 2 years I have gone ESV having not read this version before, and I works for me yet I still keep my PSQ in New King James by my bedside because it is beautiful to hold and read and is still a favourite! Tim, I like how you whizzed through the descriptions of your bibles with no messing around! Thank you.
Enjoyed your NKJV video! I feel Ike the NKJV does offer the widest view on textual variants in that you see verses in the text that are often relegated to footnotes, and the NKJV notes tell you when a reading varies more often than other translations like the NASB. With the NKJV you won’t “miss” anything by accident and it seems the most like a good middle ground between traditional and modern leaning folks. I was surprised to hear you cite the options of editions as one of the main reasons, I always felt like the ESV has an largest selection of editions but I could be wrong. Thomas Nelson certainly does have some great options and the premier collection seems to be the best quality for the money I have seen for edge lined bibles.
Your reasons are perhaps the best recorded. For academia the NKJV doesn’t get a lot of love, perhaps due so many Bible colleges are wedded to the critical text, I don’t know. But to me the nkjv is the Swiss Army knife of bible translations. Good information.
NIV '84 was my only translation for many years. When I became Orthodox, I bought an Orthodox Study Bible. The NT was in NKJV, and NKJV was the base translation for OT (which was changed to conform to the Septuagint readings in places where NKJV and Septuagint differed). I developed a love and preference for NKJV through reading the OSB. Over time, I found the text, tight margins and bleedthrough of the OSB made for an uncomfortable reading experience, so looked for an NKJV that was more easy on the eye. I found it in the TN Giant Print Center Column Reference Bible. The font type, sewed binding, opaque paper, line matching and generous line spacing and margin spacing makes for such a comfortable, comforting read. This is now my main everyday reading bible. I still use the OSB for study and reading where the Septuagint differs from the Masoretic, but won't buy another one until it receives the TN "comfort print" font, spacing, line matching and paper quality upgrade.
Great stuff as always, Tim! I have a few NKjV’s , the study Bible, the McClaren, and an older TCR, but I really want my next NKJV to be premium bible. Looking at those options as we speak.
I also love the NKJV, Tim. And while I enjoy other translations as well, the NKJV is my go-to version. I particularly like that names of deity are capitalized and that supplied words are in italics. The NKJV is a worthy successor (supplement?) to the King James.
But italics mean emphasis in English. It took me a while to understand that. Whenever I read the the NKJV, I used to emphasise the words in italics until someone told me that it meant that these words were added for clarity and not original to the text. I was confused a bit cause I was always taught that italics means emphasis on written English Language and I was born the same year the NKJV was released.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews That was my mistake with the NKJV originally I have not made that mistake since. The first thing I now read is the preface of any Bible I have. The NKJV and the ESV are the two Bibles I own and used on a regular basis. I love them both, just prefer the ESV though.
Thanks for sharing your reasons why the NKJV is your favorite. I've spent some time with the NKJV a little last year and been using it as my primary this year. I'm really warming up to it. I love the LP Maclaren. I'm a single-column paragraph guy, but for some unknown reason, I really like the dual-column VbV of the Maclaren. I've tried to warm up to the ESV, but I just haven't gotten there yet.
I too love and use the NKJV. I recently had to replace my personal Bible (probably going to rebind) but I thought about exploring other translations but I just couldn’t get away from the NKJV. With that said, our family Bible time are in the CSB. Our children have a better time grasping it. I did notice what you said that the omitted verses are in the footnote rather than footnotes to the text. That was new to me. I prefer the Nkjv method.
I understand we all have our preferred translations for a variety of reasons, but I think we should agree most modern translations (NASB, ESV, CSB, NKJV, etc) are great! Just read the Word! I’m not a fan when someone says my translation (fill in the blank) is far superior… they’re all good for their own reasons. As someone that speaks multiple languages and interprets, you realize the fallacy in thinking one translation is the the “true” translation. Of course, there are bad translations out there, but not the big modern ones. I like the NKJV and have many friends who love it; I’m an ESV reader primarily though I bump around. ESV had better academic resources for what I needed (Greek/Hebrew) when I was in seminary, so I gravitated towards it more. Thanks for the video!
My favorite is the NKJV, but I still read my Cambridge KJV Personal Concord Reference the most. So maybe my favorite is actually KJV. Who knows, just grab one and read it.
I’ve been bouncing around translations a lot lately. NKJV, CSB, my ancient NIV84, NASB. I find pros and cons to all of them but I seem to always come back to my NKJV and CSB as the two I reference most. (Edit: I’m also a bit of a word nerd so I LIKE all “beholds” and “beseeching”. 😂) I wish I could afford the MacLaren large print blue text thin line as my main church Bible. Even though it’s inexpensive as far as good ones go ($50-$60 is what I find it for), living on a disability income puts it out of reach. 😑
Thanks for sharing your insights. As I’m watching this, I’m staring at my shelf where my NKJV MacArthur, Cultural Backgrounds, and Ancient/Modern Bibles are sitting. To be fair, it might be more accurate say that after Thomas Nelson did their initial revisions at the end of the 80s, there have not been any more changes nor are there any on the horizon except for maybe in the notes. Still I appreciated the video and your candor on the subject.
That’s why I mentioned the 80s instead of 1982. I know they worked out some bugs over the 80s. But they have since left it alone and have no intent on messing with it.
I had started with the KJV, basically as the first translation I’d ever read. Then went to the NASB95, which I did like especially how they capitalizes pronouns related to God, made understanding who was talking a lot easier. Then read into the NKJV, and it had the best of the NASB but similar and familiar wording to the KJV, so definitely held that one in high regard. Also, I’m not sure if there’s another translation out there that has translational notes like the NKJV does. You’re basically getting a KJV and a more modern translation in one bible. Win win on all fronts
I have switched from the KJV to the NKJV. I now have several but my favorite one when I just want to sit down and read is a single column paragraph format. It is so easy to read you forget about chapter and verse. It reads like a novel. When I want do some serious studies I have NKJV Study Bible. The extra commentary is perfect those times you need a little extra help understanding.
I like the NKJV because it italicizes the words that the translators added that were not in the original language but are needed for the flow of English.
That’s a whole lot of good reasons! Been trying to cross over to NASB but can’t seem to settle on any one translation, I keep bouncing with all of them. Grew up on the KJV & boy is it a stinker to change but I want better understanding. Gonna try NKJV again. Thanks for this video!
If you give the NKJV time, I think you’ll fall in love. A word of wisdom: Be sure to compare the NKJV to the Greek in the Strongs concordance or Blue Letter Bible, rather than comparing it to the KJV. That’s the mistake I see a lot of people making. They compare translations to the KJV rather than to the manuscript basis. Once you do, you’ll see the NKJV is every bit as accurate as the KJV. This has been my experience.
Personally, I couldn't really get into the NKJV, though I have no quarrel with anyone who likes and uses the NKJV of course since we're all brothers and sisters in Christ and translations are certainly nothing to fight over let alone divide over. Keeping that in mind, I prefer the KJV to the NKJV. Mainly because I think the NKJV kept the worser parts of the KJV and removed the better parts of the KJV. However, I prefer the ESV to both the KJV and the NKJV. That's because I think the ESV reverses the aforementioned: the ESV kept the better parts of the KJV tradition and removed the worser parts. Okay I might have just about angered everyone now! Apologies... 😢
My brother and I bought that "Wall Chart of World History" that's sitting on the bookshelf behind you for my dad many years ago. He too was a pastor. I don't think we ever opened it - have you?
If you use a KJV to compare certain verses you can get a better understanding of the NKJV. Sometimes it's hard to understand who "you" is unless you use a KJV to see if it's a T(singular) word you or a Y(plural) word you. The nkjv is better for the he/hims. If it's He or Him God it is capitalized in the nkjv but not the KJV. So sometimes it's hard to figure out who he/him is in the kjv.
I just returned to church after 10 years removed. Researching bible translations, stumbled on this video thinking he was gonna find some deep meaning faults in the ESV. Right out the gate “you just get so many more dope variants with the nkjv” lol love it
Hey! Welcome back fam! Yeah, I still love the ESV, and honestly any of these translations would be great: (KJV, NKJV, ESV, NIV, NLT, NASB). There are other good ones too, but those meet the major need. For me it comes down to, do I like the layout and the options. We are truly spoiled in the English language. Glad you’re back in church bro! That’s exciting.
I have an nkjv published in 1990 and the wording is different in a lot of places to the current nkjv. A few examples : Colossians 2:16 Old version- "Therefore let no one judge you...." New - "So let no one judge you...." Ephesians 3:21 Old - "to him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen." New - "to him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen" Psalm 27:3 Old - "Though an army should encamp against me, my heart shall not fear; Though war should arise against me, in this I will be confident" New - "Though an army may encamp against me, my heart shall not fear; Though war may arise against me, in this I will be confident" They may have updated it quietly hoping no one would notice
Ive used the esv alot but i really wanna use the nkjv since so many people i sometimes see happen to have the kjv. I guess a problem i have with modern translations is gender neutral language that the esv does have a bit but i have grown to not mind it as much, so this video was great insight on that front
Totally understand you coming to that position. I’m a KJV guy but I’ve warmed to the NKJV in the last year or two. I find the ESV’s popularity inexplicable-who wants to read that weird mangled English? And don’t get me started on Crossway’s rotten QC.
YES, the NKJV 😊. All your reasons are valid. I do not like that ESV has missing verses with notes. Leave in the verse & use foot notes. NKJV's language has good flow and since it is close to JKV makes it easy to use with Strong's numbers. I totally dislike the critical text. It is now NT 28 so with that many updates I am sure they don't know what the NT says. But the TR & Majority Test has always been the same.
I go to a Southern Baptist church and we use the CSB. But I use the NET, NKJV, and ESV while studying. Some of the word choices I’ve been noticing I like better in the NKJV. When going through testing out the CSB and NET I ran into 1 Samuel 16:14 where they used the word “evil” for the spirit God sent to King Saul. I saw it also in judges 9:23. Seemed like a poor word choice that might confuse some people. The ESV used “harmful spirit” which isn’t much better and NKJV used “distressing spirit”. Which sounds better than all the above to me to the intent. I told my wife about it saying God sent “evil spirits” and she looked at me like “huh”.
Didn't know that, but I agree the way the NKJV says it sounds better. Im waiting on my first reference bible, the Thomas Nelson NKJV. I ordered it after cancelling the Holman NASB2020 Reference Bible! 🥳
ESV is often difficult to read aloud IMO - so it's an excellent study bible but not as good for preaching. Just my opinion. If choosing between ESV and NKJV, I choose the NKJV every time for many of the reasons that you mentioned.
Hey Tim I really could use your help I’m looking for a Bible translation that uses the Hebrew and Greek words in a English written Bible. I’m trying to find a Bible that says all the names of God and uses the Hebrew word rāqīaʿ for firmament for example do you know what Bible translation I’m looking for?
I’m not KJV only but I do revere it as the final authority in terms of English translations. However the NKJV is good to get an understanding. My only complaint against KJV is that it’s like trying to read a 15th century Shakespeare play.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I understand, it’s just for me personally the KJV can be a little hard to read. The English in it is very old. I’m not knocking it , I do love it but at times I have to compare both the KJV and NKJV to get an understanding.
@@johnnyb7628I hate the way KJV reads. 😂 This ain't the 1600s anymore, unless we get the deloreon up to 88 mph. I do have the KJV though! My main bible I was using was ESV. I have ESV study Bible, ESV Bible, CSB study Bible, KJV, NLT, NIV (hardly ever use, was gifted), Geneva (hardly use, was gifted), NKJV ray comfort study Bible, and I'm waiting on my FIRST NKJV Thomas nelson reference bible to come, originally I ordered the NASB 2020 Reference Bible, but cancelled that today and got the Thomas Nelson NKJV reference bible. I felt since I have the CSB, the NASB2020 wasn't necessary? Plus, the Thomas Nelson reference Bible in NKJV (verse the NASB2020 holam I was getting) seemed nicer, with more perks. 🤷
I wish we had such an excellent translation in the German language. The Luther Bible has been revised but not with the great result of the NKJV. Greetings from the land of Martin Luther
I love the NKJV. 15 years ago I got so frustrated becausev Nelson produced such poor quality Bibles. It seems like they were the worst. These days they are producing quality Bibles that I think have better paper, then many of the premium brands.
Agree no updates it’s great - makes KJV/ NKJV classics! I am coming from a KJV background and NKJV is a great transition 🙏🏾❤️ I also like NASB 77 or 95 as a transition from KJV. But I always keep NKJV around for study and it’s what I take to church although personally i prefer reading KJV because I like how it sounds.
The NKJV was first released in 1982 and was updated in 1984. The edition of the NKJV you are not reading is the 1984 edition. It's my second favourite Bible translation though.
Please can anyone help me with this question I have. Why is it that some people put the KJV over the NKJV? People often say the NKJV is false and misleading because it does more than update the language, and go on to say the NKJV translators removed many different words which changes the text. Another criticism that is thrown at the NKJV is the text itself. Many people say, "It is not based on the same Hebrew, Greek, and Aramic text". These types of criticism strongly come from KJV onliest people. Personally,I love the KJV but the language and wording makes it hard to understand. It takes time to understand how the KJV bible is written. NKJV updates the language to make the KJV readable and understandable. Here is my question. Are the critics that say the NKJV true in regards to the basis of the text Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic as the KJV? Someone help me please. Also, if you have any information about the NKJV translation, please let me know.
Both translations are based on the Textus Receptus so they are not different in that regard. The NKJV has simply updated the language of the KJV and that is all. KJV only folks are believing a tradition that is not grounded in reason so it's just an opinion they assert on others. Don't fall for their tactics and go ahead read God's Word in whichever translation suite you best!
The NKJV does use more than just the Textus Receptus for the translator notes, but in actual translation it sticks pretty closely with the TR. I think it strikes a perfect balance. It has a functional equivalent philosophy, which means they try and get it word for word as possible to include whatever original function the word was supposed to have at the time.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsI actually think the Majority Text is the better manuscript and the Textus Receptus aka the Received Text is not the same as the Majority Text.
1. It’s stable. 2. As much as some hate and deny this, the fact is that the date and origins of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are still under scrutiny. 3. The TR has the witness of the early church fathers, the reformation, the puritans, etc. If it was good enough for Luther, Spurgeon, Wesley, Moody, Wigglesworth, Whitefield then… I think we’ll be just fine with it too.
@@justfollowjesus7216Amen the others have too many updates !! Give me a classic “stable” KJV/NKJV 😁 Plus Thomas Nelson is doing a great job keeping affordable quality editions with their comfort print available. Lots of readable options to for folks who need clear, bold, easy to read text.
Traditional text lineage - thoroughly cross referenced with more recently accepted critical text notes, mostly smooth read but the odd or vague portions have nuance and entendre you're supposed to explore, left alone almost 100% since 1982 (slightly longer than I've been alive), read letter text, there are a lot of things like italics red letter and careful wording to render specific passages to the best fidelity among multiple source documents and though less obvious than the NASB - I believe it's smoother and no less ambitious. It oftentimes reads similar to the ESV, excepting the red letter and lack of capitalized deific pronouns people miss, no attempt to rectify gender neutrality with gender accuracy and definitely nothing woke. It's a little too vague or "clean" at occasion (Ezekiel, Malachi, Jeremiah gross points come to mind). AND for whatever reason Thomas Nelson got serious about partnering with/copying/undercutting custom manufactures to upgrade it to the max... I don't believe in one to rule them all but it's my control sample. It did everything ESV did back when Conan, Rambo and Beastmaster were current, now it's remastered by 2/K Denmark.
I like the NKJV 1) verse by verse in many copies 2) capitalized God pronouns 3) sounds like the KJV, but not as archaic. The NKJV is my second to NIV. They balance each other out. My premier one is the Humble Lamb Shepherd. I also own Thomas Nelson ones.
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times. You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12) The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time. And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes. The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611. That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul. The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be. It literally is a matter of life and death.
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times. You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12) The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time. And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes. The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611. That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul. The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be. It literally is a matter of life and death.
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL Why does someone have a problem with my comments and keep removing them? My words are true. Even if they weren't, why censor them?? Let the reader judge. As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times. You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12) The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time. And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes. The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611. That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul. The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be. It literally is a matter of life and death.
I am happy with no updates, but I also have no issue with man not always meaning biological males. Gender accuracy and gender neutrality are two different things.
The text of the NKJV is not entirely stable. I have a copy I purchased in the early 80s when it first came out, and a copy I bought about ten years ago, and the two do not read the same at Hebrews 1:1.
Everyday i say we should standardize 1 translation of the bible, preferibly the KJV or NKJV, all these bible translations cause people to read the bible less and more division and more biblical illiteracy. This is not a good thing.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews wouldnt really say it cause us to be blessed if our knowledge, understanding, and memorization of the scriptures dropped dramatically because of these different translations. But i guess we'll agree to disagree.
I'm Catholic, so I believe the best English translation is the RSV-2CE. I also believe the NKJV is the best Protestant translation, and I wish an NKJV-CE existed. 😅 There are now both an ESV-CE and a KJV-CE, but not an NKJV-CE
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Thank you for that suggestion! I hadn't heard about that Bible before. I'd also even settle for an NKJV with a separate Apocrypha section.
@@freakylocz14I think the Orthodox study Bible does have the apocrypha? (Not 100% sure but I think) It has the old testament based on the Septuagint and the new testament in NKJV. I almost got it, but went with a Thomas Nelson NKJV Reference Bible for my first reference bible. Waiting on it to come.
I use the Orthodox Study Bible. Love the footnotes. Nice to have the full canon. I will say the introduction at the beginning might come off as biased against Catholicism (as it was written for Orthodox) but if you get past that I would recommend it.
There is no two column Thinline without corner references. There is no inside column reference in paragraph format. There is no wide margin with bottom references. There is no single column with bottom references. My first reason is not bogus. Nelson prints better editions.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews -- Wait a while, and such editions will be produced. But still, that should have been last, not first on your list, because layout is so much less important than the textual, readability, and compatibility with the KJV reasons. As a translation the NKJV is superior to the ESV overall, and that alone is enough reason to prefer it.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews -- You might want to indicate that in the description. Viewers are likely to think that the reason you spend the most time on is the most important to you.
@gregb6469 you seem to have a good grasp on what you want to see. If you have talent with a camera I’d really encourage you to start a channel. That’s why I did it. I didn’t see content I wanted so I made it myself!
The NKJV was my first Bible and I used it until 2021 when I discovered and started using the ESV and have been using it ever since. I never liked the capitalised pronouns for diety, that's not proper English and I don't buy this that it shows reverence to God. I would have preferred that the NKJV would have been translated from the Majority Text instead of the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus has some readings that are only found in it and not in the Majority Text, which the NKJV does highlight in its footnotes. The other reason I switched to the ESV is the red letters. NKJV Bibles are almost always red letter except for the premium Bibles and I absolutely HATE red letters. I'm not a fan of the blue letters either. Also, I've never been able to find an NKJV Bible without references, not all Bibles need to be a reference Bible and I can find that in the ESV. Crossway has many editions of the ESV and I can find the one I want. While I could overlook the textual basis of the NKJV because of their notes system, and I can almost overlook the capitalized pronouns for diety, I cannot over the red letters. If there was a black letter NKJV without references but have the full set of translation footnotes, I'd be happy with that. I can find exactly that in the ESV without the capitalized pronouns. I like the translation of the NKJV, but I cannot find one that works me, I can definitely find that in the ESV easily. Both are great translations and I do have an NKJV Large Print Thinline Reference I got as a replacement for the Preaching Bible. For me the ESV has a very good set of footnotes, it could have more, but what it does have is good enough, I can alwaya add my own in the margins. There are so many ESVs to choose from, you can find one to fit your preference. Another thing I prefer with the ESV is its incorporation the deadsea scrolls and septuagint writings. One example is Psalm 145, it is an acrostic pslam but on most translation the Hebrew letter nun is missing, the ESV has the it at the end of verse 13 with a footnote that explains it. The one thing for sure that is NKJV outshines the ESV in is its layout. The NKJV had the best layout of any Bible translations I know of. You see the prose, the letters, poetry laid out the way they are supposed to. I will stick with the ESV until someone makes a Bible with its New Testament based on the Majority Text.
@@jdc1264 So the original writers of the Bible then showed no reverence to God because they didn't capitalized references to diety. Nor did the Bible translators prior to the NASB which was the first translation to capitalise pronouns for diety. All these years, all these people were irreverent as per your belief. It is not proper English and the irony of it all is that they are supposed to be putting the Bible in everyday contemporary English. Same thing with italicized words. Italics in English means emphasis and the italicized words are supposed to be words that are not original to the translation. Oh the irony. The KJV does not use capitalisation for pronouns referring to diety either.
I’d just like to insert the originals were in Greek and Hebrew and this being in English also emphasized English speaking nuances. For example the capitalization of a pronoun of a deity. It’s easier for an English audience to grasp it when the deity is capitalized. It’s not necessary, but it is nice.
The problem with capitalization is that it forces the translator to become an interpreter. The NKJV (erroneously, in my view) uses caps 2 Thes 2:7, supporting the dispensational interpretation that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit removed at the "rapture". There are many other possible interpretations, and the Holy Spirit inspired ambiguity is lost with the caps. Such an affectation is a part of neither the autographs nor the KJV and shouldn't have been in the NKJV either. An excellent translation nonetheless.
I'm with you on both red letters and caps. Regarding the former, not only is it unnecessary, given quotation marks, and a recent feature not supported by the autographs, but it also reinforces the misperception that Jesus' quotes are somehow more inspired than the rest of Scripture (2 Tim 3:16). How many times have people tried to justify a sin by saying that Jesus never condemned it, as if the rest of the Bible doesn't count? As my brother's pastor wisely stated, "They're ALL his words!". Amen. The NKJV remains an outstanding translation, though.
@@sbs8331 the KJV is the proper translation. They didn't leave out words and whole verses or change verses completely like the other perversions do. God is obligated to preserve His word. All of the other perversions screw it up entirely. Do you think God wants someone to add or take away from his word? You can translate the KJV from English to any other language just fine. It's when you completely take out words, verses, and change the words is when you run into trouble. This isn't complicated.
@@sbs8331 for example in the nkjv is says we are "slaves of God" and the KJV says we are "servants to God" when comparing the same exact verse. Are we slaves or are we servants? Big difference.. see how many differences you can find.
I've been studying the NKJV for over 25 years. Everything I've memorized is in the NKJV. I love other translations too, but NKJV is my main squeeze.
Very well done Tim and thank you so much for the video. Another reason I may add to the ones you mentioned: No matter which denomination we belong, the NKJV flows very well. It's a classic in its own right.
Indeed!
Praise the Lord brother bless you quick question concerning the NKJV I noticed that the NKJV uses you for singular and plural pronouns wouldn’t this lead to inaccuracy
@@terrellking4174 -- It could, in a few passages, but that is a fault of modern English, which no longer distinguishes between singular and plural second-person pronouns, not a fault of the NKJV in particular. Marginal notes at those verses where it is not clear who 'you' refers to would be helpful.
For ages I couldn’t decide between NKJV and ESV as I really love reading them both but I really wanted to pick one or the other and spend several years deep diving into it instead of flip flopping between the two. So I put my dilemma into God’s hands and very quickly I was given my answer when I read Psalm 139:13 in the ESV. I love it when Our Lord shows me his sense of humour - he knew I would be so tickled by the thought of him sitting in his cosy chair knitting.
The NKJV was the first translation I read when I came back to Christ. I prefer to read the KJV now but the NKJV will always have a special place in my heart.
Thou shall be blessed! 🙂🙏
ua-cam.com/video/U85CXY7y8Qg/v-deo.htmlsi=UFCKlUABpYdTgrDm
Why would you prefer an archaic translation over one in the English you use every day?
@@gregb6469 Because I appreciate the beauty of the original English. Also for the reason posted in the video in the comment above.
@@gregb6469it’s faithful in a world of Bibles that use unfaithful manuscripts today under the false guise of said manuscripts being “older”
KJV and NKJV are tied for first place on my preference list. I was first introduced to the KJV in the church I was saved in. The church I attended for a few years later used the NIV, which I never really cared for. Then I started attending Calvary Chapel in Bellflower CA who used the KJV and it was at that time I accidentally purchased the NKJV! Fell in love immediately. :)
Being saved is not a moment in time I thought you read your Bible. It’s the process from beginning to end.
ua-cam.com/video/U85CXY7y8Qg/v-deo.htmlsi=UFCKlUABpYdTgrDm
@@artifacthunter1472 -- Justification happens at a moment in time (though not everyone who is justified can tell exactly what moment that was; they just know that it took place). Sanctification takes place over time, and is a process. Glorification will happen at a moment in time.
Great video! Threw me for a loop on this one Tim. I was expecting one reason, and was at first surprised it was the myriad of available printings rather than the textual basis. Ended up with 4 reasons and you covered the text basis so well done. I’ve settled on the NKJ as my fav as well because it’s much easier to comprehend than it’s predecessor and includes the CT variant notes which are helpful to point out major differences with doctrinal implications.
The layout options was really the top reason because I already had familiarity with the NKJV so it wasn’t a huge leap. The other reasons are why the ESV couldn’t win me back even if they had better layouts.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews gotcha, thanks!
@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsso true. Once I discovered the benefit of the supplied words in italics and excellent textual notes, plus the time-tested legacy of the TR basis, it was game over for me.
Thomas Nelson for the WIN, I agree they make amazing Bibles - I have that end of verse reference premier and it’s really good. Well I have several you shared, great Bibles 😁
Thanks for that explanation. I have been ESV for a very long time.
One of the things as you mentioned, is I like that fact that they don't continuously update it.
One you didn't mention, is I am a fan of the capitalization of the pronouns referring to God/Christ. Love that!
Good observation! I like that too.
Hi Tim! I LOVE the NKJV translation also. I have practically every translation possible in my collection which I refer to time to time, but it seems like I always gravitate to the NKJV in all formats, especially in the Study Bibles etc.
Thanks for the great review! God bless! 💜✝️🙏🏻😊
Yes I agree with you there NKJV is my go to when studying the Bible and the translation I often choose for study Bibles as well
I love the amount of footnotes, the traditional text, and the translation stability.
You have chosen ... wisely.
I didn’t grow up with the KJV, our church used the old RSV and switched to the NIV in the mid 80s, so the NKJV wasn’t something I was naturally drawn to.
But I read through the translation during 2020, and the more traditional sounding language ended up being a comfort to me through everything that went on that year, so it will always have a place in my heart.
Since then I’ve incorporated it into my reading and study on a more regular basis, and I’m glad I did. The stable text is big selling point for me, as well as the numerous, and usually affordable, number of editions that are available.
Great video!
I like the NKJV as well. The textual notes I find to be very helpful. The Thomas Nelson study bible in NKJV is the best I have in its even handedness of explanations and possible interpretations.
I was KJV for years because I loved it, then went NKJV alongside that version because, as you say Tim, it flows so beautifully in line with the King James. For 2 years I have gone ESV having not read this version before, and I works for me yet I still keep my PSQ in New King James by my bedside because it is beautiful to hold and read and is still a favourite! Tim, I like how you whizzed through the descriptions of your bibles with no messing around! Thank you.
I started out reading the NKJV and I've used the KJV,ESV,NASB, CSB,NIV,NLT and recently the LSB but I always come back to the NKJV I also like the KJV
Great video! Thank you, Tim.
Enjoyed your NKJV video! I feel Ike the NKJV does offer the widest view on textual variants in that you see verses in the text that are often relegated to footnotes, and the NKJV notes tell you when a reading varies more often than other translations like the NASB. With the NKJV you won’t “miss” anything by accident and it seems the most like a good middle ground between traditional and modern leaning folks. I was surprised to hear you cite the options of editions as one of the main reasons, I always felt like the ESV has an largest selection of editions but I could be wrong. Thomas Nelson certainly does have some great options and the premier collection seems to be the best quality for the money I have seen for edge lined bibles.
Your reasons are perhaps the best recorded. For academia the NKJV doesn’t get a lot of love, perhaps due so many Bible colleges are wedded to the critical text, I don’t know. But to me the nkjv is the Swiss Army knife of bible translations. Good information.
Thanks for sharing some great insights!
No matter what, I always come back to NKJV.
GREAT VIDEO -- FANTASTIC TOPIC -- GOD BLESS
Thank you for your comments on the New King James Bible, Tim. You have described the reasons it has become my primary version for daily reading.
NIV '84 was my only translation for many years. When I became Orthodox, I bought an Orthodox Study Bible. The NT was in NKJV, and NKJV was the base translation for OT (which was changed to conform to the Septuagint readings in places where NKJV and Septuagint differed). I developed a love and preference for NKJV through reading the OSB.
Over time, I found the text, tight margins and bleedthrough of the OSB made for an uncomfortable reading experience, so looked for an NKJV that was more easy on the eye. I found it in the TN Giant Print Center Column Reference Bible. The font type, sewed binding, opaque paper, line matching and generous line spacing and margin spacing makes for such a comfortable, comforting read.
This is now my main everyday reading bible. I still use the OSB for study and reading where the Septuagint differs from the Masoretic, but won't buy another one until it receives the TN "comfort print" font, spacing, line matching and paper quality upgrade.
Great stuff as always, Tim!
I have a few NKjV’s , the study Bible, the McClaren, and an older TCR, but I really want my next NKJV to be premium bible. Looking at those options as we speak.
Glad I watched this. Interesting take!
I also love the NKJV, Tim. And while I enjoy other translations as well, the NKJV is my go-to version. I particularly like that names of deity are capitalized and that supplied words are in italics. The NKJV is a worthy successor (supplement?) to the King James.
But italics mean emphasis in English. It took me a while to understand that. Whenever I read the the NKJV, I used to emphasise the words in italics until someone told me that it meant that these words were added for clarity and not original to the text. I was confused a bit cause I was always taught that italics means emphasis on written English Language and I was born the same year the NKJV was released.
That’s where reading the note to the readers is helpful. The KJV does the exact same thing.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews That was my mistake with the NKJV originally I have not made that mistake since. The first thing I now read is the preface of any Bible I have. The NKJV and the ESV are the two Bibles I own and used on a regular basis. I love them both, just prefer the ESV though.
I have the personal size full color NKJV study bible in the second edition, really is enjoyable to read and study.
Thanks for your videos. I also love the NKJV and totally agree with regard to the Nelson bibles. I love NASB and ESV but am sick of updates......
Thanks for sharing your reasons why the NKJV is your favorite. I've spent some time with the NKJV a little last year and been using it as my primary this year. I'm really warming up to it. I love the LP Maclaren. I'm a single-column paragraph guy, but for some unknown reason, I really like the dual-column VbV of the Maclaren. I've tried to warm up to the ESV, but I just haven't gotten there yet.
My green limited edition TN large print thinline has become my edc , thanks for sharing
NKJV !!!!! Yep! Love it. Calvary Chapel girl. 👍🙏🏻🥁
Great video I enjoyed it
I too love and use the NKJV.
I recently had to replace my personal Bible (probably going to rebind) but I thought about exploring other translations but I just couldn’t get away from the NKJV.
With that said, our family Bible time are in the CSB. Our children have a better time grasping it.
I did notice what you said that the omitted verses are in the footnote rather than footnotes to the text. That was new to me. I prefer the Nkjv method.
I understand we all have our preferred translations for a variety of reasons, but I think we should agree most modern translations (NASB, ESV, CSB, NKJV, etc) are great! Just read the Word! I’m not a fan when someone says my translation (fill in the blank) is far superior… they’re all good for their own reasons. As someone that speaks multiple languages and interprets, you realize the fallacy in thinking one translation is the the “true” translation. Of course, there are bad translations out there, but not the big modern ones. I like the NKJV and have many friends who love it; I’m an ESV reader primarily though I bump around. ESV had better academic resources for what I needed (Greek/Hebrew) when I was in seminary, so I gravitated towards it more. Thanks for the video!
I like the NASB95 and the NKJV
KJV/NKJV all day for me.
My favorite is the NKJV, but I still read my Cambridge KJV Personal Concord Reference the most. So maybe my favorite is actually KJV. Who knows, just grab one and read it.
I use David Jeremiah NKJV, and LOVE it!
I love love love the NKJV bible!
The problem in America is NOT a lack of Bibles but a lack of people who actually READ the Bibles they have in their own homes.
Didn’t you just make this same comment on another video?
Good thing Tim reads his bibles.
I’ve been bouncing around translations a lot lately. NKJV, CSB, my ancient NIV84, NASB. I find pros and cons to all of them but I seem to always come back to my NKJV and CSB as the two I reference most. (Edit: I’m also a bit of a word nerd so I LIKE all “beholds” and “beseeching”. 😂)
I wish I could afford the MacLaren large print blue text thin line as my main church Bible. Even though it’s inexpensive as far as good ones go ($50-$60 is what I find it for), living on a disability income puts it out of reach. 😑
Thanks for sharing your insights. As I’m watching this, I’m staring at my shelf where my NKJV MacArthur, Cultural Backgrounds, and Ancient/Modern Bibles are sitting.
To be fair, it might be more accurate say that after Thomas Nelson did their initial revisions at the end of the 80s, there have not been any more changes nor are there any on the horizon except for maybe in the notes.
Still I appreciated the video and your candor on the subject.
That’s why I mentioned the 80s instead of 1982. I know they worked out some bugs over the 80s. But they have since left it alone and have no intent on messing with it.
I grew up on the kjv and fell in love with the nkjv about 10 years ago
ua-cam.com/video/U85CXY7y8Qg/v-deo.htmlsi=UFCKlUABpYdTgrDm
NKJV for the win!
NKJV is currently my fav bc its the closest to the Majority Text. Really hoping the MSB goes to print.
I had started with the KJV, basically as the first translation I’d ever read. Then went to the NASB95, which I did like especially how they capitalizes pronouns related to God, made understanding who was talking a lot easier. Then read into the NKJV, and it had the best of the NASB but similar and familiar wording to the KJV, so definitely held that one in high regard. Also, I’m not sure if there’s another translation out there that has translational notes like the NKJV does. You’re basically getting a KJV and a more modern translation in one bible. Win win on all fronts
I have switched from the KJV to the NKJV. I now have several but my favorite one when I just want to sit down and read is a single column paragraph format. It is so easy to read you forget about chapter and verse. It reads like a novel. When I want do some serious studies I have NKJV Study Bible. The extra commentary is perfect those times you need a little extra help understanding.
I like the NKJV because it italicizes the words that the translators added that were not in the original language but are needed for the flow of English.
Agreed, NKJV is a far superior translation in my opinion. Ive always loved the KJV/NKJV.
I made the same switch for the same reason you did.
That’s a whole lot of good reasons! Been trying to cross over to NASB but can’t seem to settle on any one translation, I keep bouncing with all of them. Grew up on the KJV & boy is it a stinker to change but I want better understanding. Gonna try NKJV again. Thanks for this video!
If you give the NKJV time, I think you’ll fall in love.
A word of wisdom:
Be sure to compare the NKJV to the Greek in the Strongs concordance or Blue Letter Bible, rather than comparing it to the KJV.
That’s the mistake I see a lot of people making. They compare translations to the KJV rather than to the manuscript basis.
Once you do, you’ll see the NKJV is every bit as accurate as the KJV. This has been my experience.
@@justfollowjesus7216 thank you, I’ll do that.
Personally, I couldn't really get into the NKJV, though I have no quarrel with anyone who likes and uses the NKJV of course since we're all brothers and sisters in Christ and translations are certainly nothing to fight over let alone divide over.
Keeping that in mind, I prefer the KJV to the NKJV. Mainly because I think the NKJV kept the worser parts of the KJV and removed the better parts of the KJV.
However, I prefer the ESV to both the KJV and the NKJV. That's because I think the ESV reverses the aforementioned: the ESV kept the better parts of the KJV tradition and removed the worser parts.
Okay I might have just about angered everyone now! Apologies... 😢
Nice!
My brother and I bought that "Wall Chart of World History" that's sitting on the bookshelf behind you for my dad many years ago. He too was a pastor. I don't think we ever opened it - have you?
I’ve used it a few times.
Tim, are there any NKJV's that you are aware of that have the same pagination in several different sizes, like giant print, personal and compact?
No. They aren’t.
If you use a KJV to compare certain verses you can get a better understanding of the NKJV. Sometimes it's hard to understand who "you" is unless you use a KJV to see if it's a T(singular) word you or a Y(plural) word you. The nkjv is better for the he/hims. If it's He or Him God it is capitalized in the nkjv but not the KJV. So sometimes it's hard to figure out who he/him is in the kjv.
I am a huge advocate of comparing translations to get the best understanding of the text.
I just returned to church after 10 years removed. Researching bible translations, stumbled on this video thinking he was gonna find some deep meaning faults in the ESV. Right out the gate “you just get so many more dope variants with the nkjv” lol love it
Hey! Welcome back fam! Yeah, I still love the ESV, and honestly any of these translations would be great: (KJV, NKJV, ESV, NIV, NLT, NASB). There are other good ones too, but those meet the major need. For me it comes down to, do I like the layout and the options. We are truly spoiled in the English language. Glad you’re back in church bro! That’s exciting.
i will definitely check out the v by v single column when it comes out
It’s out now.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews thank you
I have an nkjv published in 1990 and the wording is different in a lot of places to the current nkjv. A few examples :
Colossians 2:16
Old version- "Therefore let no one judge you...."
New - "So let no one judge you...."
Ephesians 3:21
Old - "to him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen."
New - "to him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen"
Psalm 27:3
Old - "Though an army should encamp against me, my heart shall not fear;
Though war should arise against me, in this I will be confident"
New - "Though an army may encamp against me, my heart shall not fear;
Though war may arise against me, in this I will be confident"
They may have updated it quietly hoping no one would notice
It was updated in 1984.
Ive used the esv alot but i really wanna use the nkjv since so many people i sometimes see happen to have the kjv. I guess a problem i have with modern translations is gender neutral language that the esv does have a bit but i have grown to not mind it as much, so this video was great insight on that front
I am convinced back to the NKJV
Totally understand you coming to that position. I’m a KJV guy but I’ve warmed to the NKJV in the last year or two. I find the ESV’s popularity inexplicable-who wants to read that weird mangled English? And don’t get me started on Crossway’s rotten QC.
I like the weird English, but I get what you are saying. Ha ha.
YES, the NKJV 😊. All your reasons are valid. I do not like that ESV has missing verses with notes. Leave in the verse & use foot notes. NKJV's language has good flow and since it is close to JKV makes it easy to use with Strong's numbers. I totally dislike the critical text. It is now NT 28 so with that many updates I am sure they don't know what the NT says. But the TR & Majority Test has always been the same.
I’m not opposed to the critical text but I do believe the TR is under appreciated.
😂😂😂 “With that many updates I am sure they don’t know what the NT says.” Classic bro. 😂
I never understood why some people have so many bibles. I now am approaching over 100 bibles on my shelf and if I’m honest I don’t know why.
🤷 We like to collect stuff!? I got a collection in several of my "hobbies/interest" 😂 😮💨
I like NKJV in general......But experiencing a breath of fresh air with Geneva 1599 (really good....just take the reformer notes out)
I go to a Southern Baptist church and we use the CSB. But I use the NET, NKJV, and ESV while studying. Some of the word choices I’ve been noticing I like better in the NKJV.
When going through testing out the CSB and NET I ran into 1 Samuel 16:14 where they used the word “evil” for the spirit God sent to King Saul. I saw it also in judges 9:23.
Seemed like a poor word choice that might confuse some people. The ESV used “harmful spirit” which isn’t much better and NKJV used “distressing spirit”. Which sounds better than all the above to me to the intent.
I told my wife about it saying God sent “evil spirits” and she looked at me like “huh”.
Sent does not mean proceeded from. Keep that in mind.
Didn't know that, but I agree the way the NKJV says it sounds better. Im waiting on my first reference bible, the Thomas Nelson NKJV. I ordered it after cancelling the Holman NASB2020 Reference Bible! 🥳
ESV is often difficult to read aloud IMO - so it's an excellent study bible but not as good for preaching. Just my opinion. If choosing between ESV and NKJV, I choose the NKJV every time for many of the reasons that you mentioned.
Hey Tim I really could use your help I’m looking for a Bible translation that uses the Hebrew and Greek words in a English written Bible. I’m trying to find a Bible that says all the names of God and uses the Hebrew word rāqīaʿ for firmament for example do you know what Bible translation I’m looking for?
NJV is your closet option.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews thankyou I currently have 7 Bible can’t wait for my collection to get as big as yours
Mine is large because as a reviewer it is necessary. I don’t recommend spending the amount of money it would take to do that.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I bet it’s just cool
What Bible is the small compact NKJV mentioned in this video?
The one I showed is a compact Maclaren. The one I mentioned is a Compact Reference Paragraph Style.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews thank you
Any way we can get a link to that McLaren?
I’ve actually done a review of it and the link will be in the description. You can find it here: ua-cam.com/video/FjW4zvRm-ks/v-deo.html
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Thanks
Which version is the most accurate version? KJV or NKJV?
Both are outstanding.
I’m not KJV only but I do revere it as the final authority in terms of English translations. However the NKJV is good to get an understanding.
My only complaint against KJV is that it’s like trying to read a 15th century Shakespeare play.
I don’t see that at all.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I understand, it’s just for me personally the KJV can be a little hard to read. The English in it is very old. I’m not knocking it , I do love it but at times I have to compare both the KJV and NKJV to get an understanding.
@@johnnyb7628I hate the way KJV reads. 😂 This ain't the 1600s anymore, unless we get the deloreon up to 88 mph. I do have the KJV though! My main bible I was using was ESV. I have ESV study Bible, ESV Bible, CSB study Bible, KJV, NLT, NIV (hardly ever use, was gifted), Geneva (hardly use, was gifted), NKJV ray comfort study Bible, and I'm waiting on my FIRST NKJV Thomas nelson reference bible to come, originally I ordered the NASB 2020 Reference Bible, but cancelled that today and got the Thomas Nelson NKJV reference bible. I felt since I have the CSB, the NASB2020 wasn't necessary? Plus, the Thomas Nelson reference Bible in NKJV (verse the NASB2020 holam I was getting) seemed nicer, with more perks. 🤷
Lol I switched from the NKJV to the ESV. Any cool ESV rebinds you want to get rid of let me know lol 😊
I wish we had such an excellent translation in the German language. The Luther Bible has been revised but not with the great result of the NKJV. Greetings from the land of Martin Luther
I love the NKJV. 15 years ago I got so frustrated becausev Nelson produced such poor quality Bibles. It seems like they were the worst. These days they are producing quality Bibles that I think have better paper, then many of the premium brands.
Agree no updates it’s great - makes KJV/ NKJV classics! I am coming from a KJV background and NKJV is a great transition 🙏🏾❤️ I also like NASB 77 or 95 as a transition from KJV. But I always keep NKJV around for study and it’s what I take to church although personally i prefer reading KJV because I like how it sounds.
I also like the the 77. I have the 95 & 2020 is easy read but something like going home with the 77. ❤️🙏
The NKJV was first released in 1982 and was updated in 1984. The edition of the NKJV you are not reading is the 1984 edition. It's my second favourite Bible translation though.
Please can anyone help me with this question I have. Why is it that some people put the KJV over the NKJV? People often say the NKJV is false and misleading because it does more than update the language, and go on to say the NKJV translators removed many different words which changes the text. Another criticism that is thrown at the NKJV is the text itself. Many people say, "It is not based on the same Hebrew, Greek, and Aramic text". These types of criticism strongly come from KJV onliest people. Personally,I love the KJV but the language and wording makes it hard to understand. It takes time to understand how the KJV bible is written. NKJV updates the language to make the KJV readable and understandable. Here is my question. Are the critics that say the NKJV true in regards to the basis of the text Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic as the KJV? Someone help me please. Also, if you have any information about the NKJV translation, please let me know.
Both translations are based on the Textus Receptus so they are not different in that regard. The NKJV has simply updated the language of the KJV and that is all. KJV only folks are believing a tradition that is not grounded in reason so it's just an opinion they assert on others. Don't fall for their tactics and go ahead read God's Word in whichever translation suite you best!
@@AllforOne_OneforAll1689 Thanks brother
The NKJV does use more than just the Textus Receptus for the translator notes, but in actual translation it sticks pretty closely with the TR. I think it strikes a perfect balance. It has a functional equivalent philosophy, which means they try and get it word for word as possible to include whatever original function the word was supposed to have at the time.
NKJV #1 for life, HOORAY!!!! throw all the others away, except KJV, KJVER and YLT
The NET bible is the easiest to read and they show in the notes that they added words to make the text more clear while stating what the Greek reads.
Now days everyone is jumping boat and coming to the received text. Hmmm 🧐 I wonder why?
For me, it is because I think it’s alleged flaws are over exaggerated. In fact, it’s probably the better manuscript.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Exactly
@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsI actually think the Majority Text is the better manuscript and the Textus Receptus aka the Received Text is not the same as the Majority Text.
1. It’s stable.
2. As much as some hate and deny this, the fact is that the date and origins of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are still under scrutiny.
3. The TR has the witness of the early church fathers, the reformation, the puritans, etc. If it was good enough for Luther, Spurgeon, Wesley, Moody, Wigglesworth, Whitefield then… I think we’ll be just fine with it too.
@@justfollowjesus7216Amen the others have too many updates !! Give me a classic “stable” KJV/NKJV 😁 Plus Thomas Nelson is doing a great job keeping affordable quality editions with their comfort print available. Lots of readable options to for folks who need clear, bold, easy to read text.
Traditional text lineage - thoroughly cross referenced with more recently accepted critical text notes, mostly smooth read but the odd or vague portions have nuance and entendre you're supposed to explore, left alone almost 100% since 1982 (slightly longer than I've been alive), read letter text, there are a lot of things like italics red letter and careful wording to render specific passages to the best fidelity among multiple source documents and though less obvious than the NASB - I believe it's smoother and no less ambitious. It oftentimes reads similar to the ESV, excepting the red letter and lack of capitalized deific pronouns people miss, no attempt to rectify gender neutrality with gender accuracy and definitely nothing woke. It's a little too vague or "clean" at occasion (Ezekiel, Malachi, Jeremiah gross points come to mind).
AND for whatever reason Thomas Nelson got serious about partnering with/copying/undercutting custom manufactures to upgrade it to the max... I don't believe in one to rule them all but it's my control sample. It did everything ESV did back when Conan, Rambo and Beastmaster were current, now it's remastered by 2/K Denmark.
Where did you hear they may be updating the notes?
Seems one of their reps mentioned the possibility on a Facebook group. Can’t remember which one.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I would like the notes updated, but the notes only. We don't need any more changing text bibles.
The text is not going to be updated. Even the notes were only mentioned as a possibility.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews How out of date are the notes? Have we found anything important that recently?
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews There are groups?
You would totally beat Wildsmith and Frisch in a Translation Fantasy League.
🤣🤣
I like the NKJV 1) verse by verse in many copies 2) capitalized God pronouns 3) sounds like the KJV, but not as archaic.
The NKJV is my second to NIV. They balance each other out.
My premier one is the Humble Lamb Shepherd. I also own Thomas Nelson ones.
And another thing is the nkjv has never been updated
Technically it was in 1984. But I believe it was just correcting some typos and such.
I went back to the NKJV precisely because it is based on the TR.
It isn't. They lied to you.
@@bereanresearchoh and NOW they are telling us the truth with the "new versions" or with the KJV that has also been translated several times? 🤔
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL
As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times.
You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12)
The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time.
And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes.
The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611.
That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul.
The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be.
It literally is a matter of life and death.
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL
As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times.
You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12)
The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time.
And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes.
The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611.
That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul.
The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be.
It literally is a matter of life and death.
@@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL
Why does someone have a problem with my comments and keep removing them? My words are true. Even if they weren't, why censor them?? Let the reader judge.
As I said, someone LIED to that fellow - and to you, if you believe that the King James Bible has been translated several times.
You need to set your heart on LOVING the TRUTH, and then your eyes shall be OPENED to the TRUTH. (John 8:31-32; II Thess 2:10-12)
The King James Bible was ONLY translated ONCE. That was in 1611. All of the changes that were made after that translation were editions (edited) for printing errors and standardization of spelling. It was never translated a second time.
And, even in those changes, God knew that those changes were going to be made - that is why the math works out PERFECTLY even in the changes.
The King James Bible is MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT. NONE of the new versions are; they are all mathematically messes, in addition to being full of errors, omissions and contradictions, like I said. God put his name ONLY in the King James bible. The King James Bible was translated in 1611.
That is why Deut 16:11 is the 1611th occurrence of God’s name “LORD” in it. The text of that verse even says that he will put his name there. ALL of the new versions - including the NKJV - are poison to your soul.
The sooner you learn that, the better off you’ll be.
It literally is a matter of life and death.
The NKJV was produced before people decided God was sexist. They haven’t updated it, so you won’t have to get the “newer” version every other year.
I am happy with no updates, but I also have no issue with man not always meaning biological males. Gender accuracy and gender neutrality are two different things.
The text of the NKJV is not entirely stable. I have a copy I purchased in the early 80s when it first came out, and a copy I bought about ten years ago, and the two do not read the same at Hebrews 1:1.
There was one update in 1984.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews -- I think the earlier rendering of that verse is better.
The original NKJV is different from the current. The new is not better, in my opinion.
There were some minor corrections very early on.
Everyday i say we should standardize 1 translation of the bible, preferibly the KJV or NKJV, all these bible translations cause people to read the bible less and more division and more biblical illiteracy. This is not a good thing.
Perhaps with some people. But I appreciate multiple translations. The English language speakers are truly blessed.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews wouldnt really say it cause us to be blessed if our knowledge, understanding, and memorization of the scriptures dropped dramatically because of these different translations. But i guess we'll agree to disagree.
I'm Catholic, so I believe the best English translation is the RSV-2CE.
I also believe the NKJV is the best Protestant translation, and I wish an NKJV-CE existed. 😅 There are now both an ESV-CE and a KJV-CE, but not an NKJV-CE
Orthodoxy Study Bible is close.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Thank you for that suggestion! I hadn't heard about that Bible before. I'd also even settle for an NKJV with a separate Apocrypha section.
@@freakylocz14I think the Orthodox study Bible does have the apocrypha? (Not 100% sure but I think) It has the old testament based on the Septuagint and the new testament in NKJV. I almost got it, but went with a Thomas Nelson NKJV Reference Bible for my first reference bible. Waiting on it to come.
I use the Orthodox Study Bible. Love the footnotes. Nice to have the full canon. I will say the introduction at the beginning might come off as biased against Catholicism (as it was written for Orthodox) but if you get past that I would recommend it.
LSB
Both the NKJV and the ESV come in many similar editions, so your first reason is bogus. The other reasons are legitimate. I also prefer the NKJV.
There is no two column Thinline without corner references. There is no inside column reference in paragraph format. There is no wide margin with bottom references. There is no single column with bottom references. My first reason is not bogus. Nelson prints better editions.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews -- Wait a while, and such editions will be produced. But still, that should have been last, not first on your list, because layout is so much less important than the textual, readability, and compatibility with the KJV reasons. As a translation the NKJV is superior to the ESV overall, and that alone is enough reason to prefer it.
@@gregb6469 the order can be from least important to most important. You don’t spoil the best part of the video at the beginning.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews -- You might want to indicate that in the description. Viewers are likely to think that the reason you spend the most time on is the most important to you.
@gregb6469 you seem to have a good grasp on what you want to see. If you have talent with a camera I’d really encourage you to start a channel. That’s why I did it. I didn’t see content I wanted so I made it myself!
The NKJV was my first Bible and I used it until 2021 when I discovered and started using the ESV and have been using it ever since. I never liked the capitalised pronouns for diety, that's not proper English and I don't buy this that it shows reverence to God. I would have preferred that the NKJV would have been translated from the Majority Text instead of the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus has some readings that are only found in it and not in the Majority Text, which the NKJV does highlight in its footnotes. The other reason I switched to the ESV is the red letters. NKJV Bibles are almost always red letter except for the premium Bibles and I absolutely HATE red letters. I'm not a fan of the blue letters either. Also, I've never been able to find an NKJV Bible without references, not all Bibles need to be a reference Bible and I can find that in the ESV. Crossway has many editions of the ESV and I can find the one I want. While I could overlook the textual basis of the NKJV because of their notes system, and I can almost overlook the capitalized pronouns for diety, I cannot over the red letters. If there was a black letter NKJV without references but have the full set of translation footnotes, I'd be happy with that. I can find exactly that in the ESV without the capitalized pronouns. I like the translation of the NKJV, but I cannot find one that works me, I can definitely find that in the ESV easily. Both are great translations and I do have an NKJV Large Print Thinline Reference I got as a replacement for the Preaching Bible. For me the ESV has a very good set of footnotes, it could have more, but what it does have is good enough, I can alwaya add my own in the margins. There are so many ESVs to choose from, you can find one to fit your preference.
Another thing I prefer with the ESV is its incorporation the deadsea scrolls and septuagint writings. One example is Psalm 145, it is an acrostic pslam but on most translation the Hebrew letter nun is missing, the ESV has the it at the end of verse 13 with a footnote that explains it.
The one thing for sure that is NKJV outshines the ESV in is its layout. The NKJV had the best layout of any Bible translations I know of. You see the prose, the letters, poetry laid out the way they are supposed to. I will stick with the ESV until someone makes a Bible with its New Testament based on the Majority Text.
I disagree with you on everything you said. I’m sorry. It shows reverence to God and the deity. ESV is like a Yoda yoda.
@@jdc1264 So the original writers of the Bible then showed no reverence to God because they didn't capitalized references to diety. Nor did the Bible translators prior to the NASB which was the first translation to capitalise pronouns for diety. All these years, all these people were irreverent as per your belief. It is not proper English and the irony of it all is that they are supposed to be putting the Bible in everyday contemporary English. Same thing with italicized words. Italics in English means emphasis and the italicized words are supposed to be words that are not original to the translation. Oh the irony. The KJV does not use capitalisation for pronouns referring to diety either.
I’d just like to insert the originals were in Greek and Hebrew and this being in English also emphasized English speaking nuances. For example the capitalization of a pronoun of a deity. It’s easier for an English audience to grasp it when the deity is capitalized. It’s not necessary, but it is nice.
The problem with capitalization is that it forces the translator to become an interpreter. The NKJV (erroneously, in my view) uses caps 2 Thes 2:7, supporting the dispensational interpretation that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit removed at the "rapture". There are many other possible interpretations, and the Holy Spirit inspired ambiguity is lost with the caps. Such an affectation is a part of neither the autographs nor the KJV and shouldn't have been in the NKJV either. An excellent translation nonetheless.
I'm with you on both red letters and caps. Regarding the former, not only is it unnecessary, given quotation marks, and a recent feature not supported by the autographs, but it also reinforces the misperception that Jesus' quotes are somehow more inspired than the rest of Scripture (2 Tim 3:16). How many times have people tried to justify a sin by saying that Jesus never condemned it, as if the rest of the Bible doesn't count? As my brother's pastor wisely stated, "They're ALL his words!". Amen. The NKJV remains an outstanding translation, though.
No singular or plural pronouns? 😂😂😂
Not following this comment…
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews John 3:7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
Stick to the KJV is where God preserved his word.
Yada yada.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews cool dude just keep reading perverted versions of God's perfect word then.. see ya judgment day
@@robertboutin6232So I guess everybody before 1611 and everyone who doesn't speak English is in big trouble, huh?
@@sbs8331 the KJV is the proper translation. They didn't leave out words and whole verses or change verses completely like the other perversions do. God is obligated to preserve His word. All of the other perversions screw it up entirely. Do you think God wants someone to add or take away from his word? You can translate the KJV from English to any other language just fine. It's when you completely take out words, verses, and change the words is when you run into trouble. This isn't complicated.
@@sbs8331 for example in the nkjv is says we are "slaves of God" and the KJV says we are "servants to God" when comparing the same exact verse. Are we slaves or are we servants? Big difference.. see how many differences you can find.