| Vol. 56 | 12 January 2003 | No. 11 |
THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION REVISITED
In July of 1995 I wrote an article on the New King James Version entitled “The Second Best Translation.” The basic thrust of that article stands. In my judgment, the King James Version remains the best of all the versions on the market today due to its faithfulness and my familiarity with it. My mother read this Bible to me as a boy. I have meditated upon its words and memorized from it. It is the Bible I use in my preaching and teaching. It is my companion from early in the morning and throughout the day. I have read other translations, but all pale in comparison to the venerable and reverent Authorized Version. I do not intend to exchange it for another.
When I am asked about the New King James Version, I state that it is second to the King James Version. It does not use “thou,” “thy,” “thee,” and “thine” as the King James and American Standard of 1901 do. Though I prefer when men lead prayers that they would use “thee” and “thou” in addressing God, the omission of such does not mean the one leading is less reverent. I grew up hearing these so-called sacred pronouns used in prayer to God, but the Greek New Testament does not make a distinction in pronouns in addressing God or man. I shall not be dogmatic about this.
The New King James Version, in the minds of some, is more easily read than the King James Version. It leaves off the “eths” on verb endings. This may be helpful to some who have difficulty in reading. Sometimes, the “eth” on the end of a verb indicates continuous action, but that is not always the case. I have read that the King James Version was written on the fifth grade level and the New King James Version was written on the sixth grade level. There are words in the New King James Version that may be harder to understand than the renderings in the King James, but the reverse might also be the case for some.
The Greek text of the New King James Version was based on a better text than the American Standard of 1901, but the NKJV was not based on the Majority Text as previously stated. The Textus Receptus, the same used as the basis of the King James Version, was the Greek text used. The renderings of other Greek texts are found in the footnotes of the NKJV that might be helpful at times in comparative studies.
The rendering of Galatians 2:16 in the King James Version is better than that of the New King James Version. The King James Version says, “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”
The New King James Version renders Galatians 2:16 this way: “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.”
In 1995, I argued that the translators of the NKJV used the locative case (in Jesus Christ) rather than the genitive case (of Jesus Christ). Robertson, in his gigantic grammar, states, “We have no right to assume in the N.T. that one case is used for another.” (p. 454). A good and dear friend, however, referred me to Robertson’s Word Studies In the New Testament which says that phrase is correctly rendered as an objective genitive, meaning “by faith in Christ Jesus.” The author gives another example of an objective genitive in Mark 11:22 that says “have faith in God.” The kind of genitive, however, is determined by the context, the relationship of the words to each other. Robertson says, “Each example is decided by its own context.”
Therefore, again we go back to the text (Gal. 2:16) and see what is under consideration. The subject is justification. Was Paul contrasting one’s being justified by the works of the Law of Moses with the faith, the system of faith, the gospel of Christ? On the other hand, was he contrasting one’s being justified by the works of the Law of Moses with that of faith in Jesus Christ? Robertson says the latter. It is understandable why he would say that. He was a Baptist and believed in salvation by faith only.
It is redundant for Paul to have said, “even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by faith in Christ.” It is more reasonable to believe that Paul had said, “even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Jesus Christ.” What is under consideration is a contrast between two systems, the law of Moses with the gospel of Christ. There were Judaizing teachers who were trying to bind the law of Moses upon the Gentile Christians (Acts 15:1). Paul, as he does in Romans and elsewhere, shows the superiority of the gospel of Christ over the Law of Moses. Thus, the apostle Paul was using the genitive of possession, i.e., the faith of Jesus Christ, that is the system of faith belonging to Jesus Christ, as the gospel of Christ.
Some criticisms of the New King James Version have been wrong. The replacement of “sexual immorality” for “fornication” in Matthew 5:32; 19:9; etc. is not a fatal doctrine. Regardless of which of these two translation is used, a definition, or explanation of the terms or term will have to be given on this point. Some have criticized the word “same” gift for “like” gift in Acts 11:17, but Thayer’s lexicon says that the Greek word means the “same.”
As far as I know, the New King James Version is the best modern version, but still second to the King James Version.
