Post Reply 
Translational Inconsistencies
03-24-2010, 03:03 PM
Post: #51
RE: Translational Inconsistencies
Mark I use the NKJV as my "book" bible for use at home and KJV as my PC version.
I personally believe it is a sound translation and is based largely on the KJV and thus Textus Receptus.And compared to many of the versions out there it does tend to stick more accurately to what the word actually means and not instead change the meaning to enable the reader to better understand what the word was trying to convey.Id much rather have literal accuracy than paraphrases to supposedly help me better understand what was meant.

That being said there are in some places where the changes made have altered the meaning slightly, for example


Mat 20:20 ThenG5119 cameG4334 to himG846 theG3588 motherG3384 of Zebedee'sG2199 childrenG5207 withG3326 herG848 sons,G5207 worshippingG4352 him, andG2532 desiringG154 a certain thingG5100 ofG3844 him.G846
The NKJV reads

Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him with her sons,kneeling down and asking something from him.(NKJV)

The changing here occurs in the translation of the word proskuneo

G4352
προσκυνέω
proskuneō
Thayer Definition:
1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
2) among the Orientals, especially the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
3a) used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
3a1) to the Jewish high priests
3a2) to God
3a3) to Christ
3a4) to heavenly beings
3a5) to demons
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G4314 and a probable derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand)


To me kneeling down doesnt accurately express what the word proskunoe intends and I much preferred the KJV translation.
This is one of the things Im wary of when reading the bible so I am aware that there are shortcomings to it but its something that doesn't really make much of a difference to me when reading the Bible for my own use.
If I really need to be clear about what a verse means because I find myself caught in controversy surrounding it I would then compare the verse with the KJV and in case of Tanak would check the hebrew and reliable lexicons or in case of the NT check the greek and also reliable lexicons.

One useful feature of the NKJV is that it does list manuscript variations in the margins so if youre dealing with a controversial verse you don't need to find another bible to look it up.The information is given in the margins.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-24-2010, 04:22 PM
Post: #52
RE: Translational Inconsistencies
THis is from my Bible comparison charts article:
Topical Bible Version Comparison Charts
http://www.seekgod.ca/chart.htm


Quote:Update: 2007>Please note that a few people have stated the following:

"The argument against corrupted text is one that is very close to my heart. I have heard the argument that NKJV is based on Westcott and Hort or the NU as it is also called and I have seen no evidence of this. They do list it in the side reference, as well as being the first to include the Majority Text readings. While this may be distracting, it does not label either as the "best" or the "oldest". "

Another wrote: "...if you read the introduction the NT is actually translated from the TR (like the KJV) while the footnotes indicate NA readings, as well as Byzantine readings. This way people who read this or that Bible are able to see why they're different (for differences which are caused by the underlying text used). ..."

Quote:According to the Preface and information from NKJV and Thomas Nelson, Inc.:

The NKJV revisers followed the essentially literal method of translation used in the original King James Version, which the NKJV Preface calls "complete equivalence." Regarding the Old Testament>The Masoretes preserved the Scriptures for five hundred years in a form known as the Masoretic Text. The Masoretes, led by the family of ben Asher continued the legacy of the earlier scribes. The ben Asher text, by the twelfth century, was the only recognized form of the Hebrew Scriptures. The 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of the Biblia Hebraica, while also sourcing the Daniel Bomberg edition of 1524-25, were used as well as The Septuagint (Greek) Version of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate for the Old Testament.

The King James New Testament was based on the Textus receptus which was first published in 1516, was also called the Received Text. "In the late nineteenth century, B. Westcott and F. Hort taught that this text had been officially edited by the fourth-century church, but a total lack of historical evidence for this event has forced a revision of the theory. It is now widely held that the Byzantine Text that largely supports the Textus Receptus has as much right as the Alexandrian or any other tradition to be weighed in determining the text of the New Testament."

Regarding contemporary translations, most have relied on a few manuscripts found in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. These translations have depended on Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus which are older. The Greek translation of these manuscripts, including related papyri, is what the Alexandrian Text are based upon. Since the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus disagree with each other in many points, some are rejecting them as a sound source.

Most new versions and and contemporary translators have followed "a Critical Text"," which depends heavily upon the Alexandrian type of text." However, many have begun to abandon the Critical Text in favor of the Majority Text." The NKJB sourced both the Critical and Majority texts and showed the variations in the footnotes. According to the publisher, "fully eighty-five percent" of the NT text is the same as the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian and the Majority Texts. The footnotes state the differing passages and also appear to objectively state the source of the variations. They note the variations as coming from NU-Text, meaning from the Alexandrian or Egyptian text, sourced from the Critical Text. That was published by the United Bible Society and known as the Nestle-Aland Greek NT (26th edition). The M-Text shows variations from the Majority or traditional text.

In other words, the NKJB sourced all available manuscripts and while trying to adhere to the original meanings of the KJB, it provided variations which should be noted and evaluated based on the source of the variations. > end update

You can look in the comparison charts also for comparison of NKJV.

Vic
SeekGod.ca

3John 1:4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.
Isaiah 40:31 But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)