Nkjv

[novcncy]

In the writings of Bible scholars, I have always read that there are
no doctrinal positions affected by the differences in the source texts.

I mostly agree with you. A good example is 1 John 5:7. The doctrine of the trinity is solid without it, but it's absence from the minority text is a substantial difference. The doctrine is still the same. Sorry bout that, and thanks for clarifying it.

What DOES make a doctrinal difference is the theology of the translators and the effect it has on their work.....but that's for another time...

 

[RichardT]

Before I became a KJVO, just this alone turned me way off of the NKJV. And my old NKJV is still collecting dust in my closet.

"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."

- Mr. DiVietro

The purpose of the NKJV was to create a bridge between the preserved word of God and the modern westcott / hort perversions.

 

[FallingWaters]

What DOES make a doctrinal difference is the theology of the translators and the effect it has on their work.....but that's for another time...

Right.

 

[FallingWaters]

Before I became a KJVO, just this alone turned me way off of the NKJV. And my old NKJV is still collecting dust in my closet.

... we all know that the King James Version is a poor translation based on poor texts. ...They just won’t accept them. ... a transitional bridge to eventually get your people to accept a more accurate Bible."

- Mr. DiVietro

The purpose of the NKJV was to create a bridge between the preserved word of God and the modern westcott / hort perversions.

Do you realize you are admitting you are one of the people who would rather keep a poor translation based on poor texts,
than accept a newer, more accurate translation.
Why is that something to be proud of?

You need to stop thinking of the UBS4/NA27 as being the modern Wescott/Hort.
The Wescott/Hort is not respected by modern day conservative Bible scholars.