This article prefers the NKJV and NAS95. However, the article does not address the gross errors of the NKJV that I presented in my article (even though it admits that the NKJV is not even a perfect translation). But again, the article does not explain the gross misleading errors in the NKJV that is false doctrine that can lead a person to think the wrong thing about the faith. The article also appears to refer to the originals were perfect, and inspired. So according to this article: There is no perfect Bible today. Therefore, the READER has to decide what the Word of God is to fill in the gaps based on what they believe is the best manuscripts when the reader cannot really possibly know Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek like original authors did. The article is basically saying no perfect Bible exists and it can only exist by your own human effort to piece together what God possibly said.
The article does not also address the problem of the footnotes in the NKJV, as well (Which can mislead a person to trust the Nestle & Land text - Critical Text). The article fails to understand that even the NKJV subtly favors the Critical Text not only by doing this with the footnotes but it also does so in the text itself (Departing from the Tradition Text, i.e. Received Text, or the Textus Receptus).
Please show me in God’s Word where the prophets and the apostles thought the same way. They didn’t. God’s people according to Scripture never sought to compile the lost words of God in order to have a perfect Word. They already had the perfect words from God and they just believed them. In fact, God’s Word says that His words would not pass away. In one form or another we always had His words that would be perfect. Every word of God is pure. The problem with Textual Criticism thinking (that says only the originals were perfect) is that you can spend your whole life trying to reconstruct what God said by trying to learn the languages and trying to find the best manuscripts when God would rather have you to get busy believing what His Word says and in obeying what it says. This is the deception of Textual Criticism in that it wastes your time to find the Bible when we already have it.
Life is short and don’t waste your time trying to piece together what God said.
Just as God’s people in Scripture are recorded as having His word, we should expect God does not change and is not a respecter of persons and He provided His words for us today, too.
In addition, the KJB says His words are in a book on multiple occasions.
This means His Word is not existing in thousands of manuscripts.
The Bible does not teach His Word exists amongst piecing together thousands of manuscripts.
Again, YOU the reader must decide what is true and what is not true in God’s Word.
YOU become the authority ultimately when you are trying to piece together what God said.
But how would you know which translation changes God’s Word the least if you don’t have a perfect Bible to compare it with?
So the reasoning in this point is flawed.
The Berean Patriot article also mentions a Bible Translation Philosophies Chart that points to the differences between a word for word translation, a thought for thought translation, and a paraphrase translation.
While I am aware there do appear to be these differences, the chart is ultimately a pointless exercise because this is man’s way or approach still of trying to find the Word of God when we already have it. There is no need to try and piece together what God said and waste our entire lives in that process when we should be busy simply in believing God’s Word by faith and obeying it.
The Berean Patriot also criticizes the KJB based on its presupposition that there is no perfect Bible in existence:
Again, if you have no perfect Bible, then how do you know what is correct or wrong to begin with?
The article criticizes the KJB for using “sons” instead of “children.”
But sons and children mean the same thing.
So this is what I would call straining out gnats.
But the article favors the NKJV when there are again vomit worthy changes in the NKJV as shown in the article I provided (that Berean Patriot does not address).
The Berean Patriot article also criticizes the KJB for not using the word “hades.”
However, word hades is actually defined as a mythical place.
Again, this article addresses this.
Design and create a professional website with the Wix website builder. Choose from customizable templates and design, then select the features that your business needs.
brandplucked.webs.com
(Note: Again, keep in mind that I do not share Will Kinney’s viewpoint that the Lake of Fire as being a place of eternal punishment).
The Berean Patriot article also addresses the KJB’s archaic language as being a problem.
But Jesus spoke in parables and He said, “Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” (Matthew 13:11).
In fact, Jesus opened the understanding of the Scriptures to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus.
Why would Jesus need to do that if clarity of the Scriptures was to be read like a novel or children’s book?
Yes, I believe God wants us to use Modern English Translations so as to help update the 1600’s English in the KJB, but yet the Modern bibles cannot be our final word of authority because they change doctrines, and water down the deity of Christ, the blood atonement, etcetera. It is also equally problematic to go on quest to act like you know the original languages or to find the right manuscripts to piece together God’s Word wasting your whole life in search for His perfect Word when again… you can just live by faith in His Word today.
The Berean Patriot article also recommends or praises the NASB 95 as being one of the best translations.
However, they are being contradictory by saying this. How so?
Well, the author appears to favor 1 John 5:7 (of which he supported in another article he wrote), and yet 1 John 5:7 is the only one that explains the Godhead (Trinity) which is removed in the NASB 95. The NASB is also based on the Critical Text or the Nestle and Aland Text. This is within the sea of the other Modern Translations that all corrupt God’s Word on a massive and sick level. Please refer back to my
Post #820 of the other thread to see what doctrines are changed in Modern Bibles (That you did not address). You act like the NASB and NKJV are free from error, and yet they are not. The textual basis upon which they rest is corrupt.
These are big elephants in the room that the Berean Patriot article is not addressing.
They do not even know that the translations they think are best are based on corrupted work by those who were into Catholicism.
The Nestle and Aland was supervised by the Vatican. A FACT (you can check for yourself).
The Nestle and Aland is based to a great degree on Westcott and Hort’s work.
Westcott and Hort had expressed their disdain for evangelicalism and their favor of Catholic practices.
Alexandrian manuscripts were used for most all Modern Translations.
Alexandria is the birth place of Arianism (Which is why we see an attack on the Trinity and the deity of Christ in Modern Bibles).
