Preface to the New King James Version - Revision history

Beza 1598: /* See Also */

Beza 1598 — Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:51:42 GMT

Nick: /* See Also */

Nick — Mon, 01 Sep 2014 13:34:25 GMT

Nick: /* The New Testament Text */

Nick — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 11:54:07 GMT

The New Testament Text

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:54, 25 April 2011
Line 55:		Line 55:
	For the New King James Version the text used was the 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of the Biblia Hebraica, with frequent comparisons being made with the Bomberg edition of 1524-25. The Septuagint (Greek) Version of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate also were consulted. In addition to referring to a variety of ancient versions of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New King James Version draws on the resources of relevant manuscripts from the Dead Sea caves. In the few places where the Hebrew was so obscure that the 1611 King James was compelled to follow one of the versions, but where information is now available to resolve the problems, the New King James Version follows the Hebrew text. Significant variations are recorded in footnotes.		For the New King James Version the text used was the 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of the Biblia Hebraica, with frequent comparisons being made with the Bomberg edition of 1524-25. The Septuagint (Greek) Version of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate also were consulted. In addition to referring to a variety of ancient versions of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New King James Version draws on the resources of relevant manuscripts from the Dead Sea caves. In the few places where the Hebrew was so obscure that the 1611 King James was compelled to follow one of the versions, but where information is now available to resolve the problems, the New King James Version follows the Hebrew text. Significant variations are recorded in footnotes.

-	==The New Testament Text==	+	==The New Testament Text==
	There is more manuscript support for the New Testament than for any other body of ancient literature. Over five thousand Greek, eight thousand Latin, and many more manuscripts in other languages attest the integrity of the New Testament. There is only one basic New Testament used by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox, by conservatives and liberals. Minor variations in hand copying have appeared through the centuries, before mechanical printing began about A.D. 1450.		There is more manuscript support for the New Testament than for any other body of ancient literature. Over five thousand Greek, eight thousand Latin, and many more manuscripts in other languages attest the integrity of the New Testament. There is only one basic New Testament used by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox, by conservatives and liberals. Minor variations in hand copying have appeared through the centuries, before mechanical printing began about A.D. 1450.

Nick: /* Purpose */

Nick — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:54:36 GMT

Purpose

←Older revision		Revision as of 12:54, 19 June 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Purpose==		==Purpose==
-	In the preface to the [[1611 AD\|1611]]]] edition, the translators of the [[Authorized Version]], known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of [[William Tyndale]] and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the [[English]] versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the [http://textus-receptus.com/w/mediawiki-1.13.2/index.php/Portal:Biographies#King_James_Version_Translators\|King James scholars], the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the [[Holy Bible]], [[New King James Version]], as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.	+	In the preface to the [[1611 AD\|1611]] edition, the translators of the [[Authorized Version]], known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of [[William Tyndale]] and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the [[English]] versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the [http://textus-receptus.com/w/mediawiki-1.13.2/index.php/Portal:Biographies#King_James_Version_Translators King James scholars], the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the [[Holy Bible]], [[New King James Version]], as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the [[Authorized Version]] of the Holy Scriptures.

	==A Living Legacy==		==A Living Legacy==

Nick at 12:54, 19 June 2010

Nick — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:54:02 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 12:54, 19 June 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Purpose==		==Purpose==
-	In the preface to the 1611 edition, the translators of the Authorized Version, known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of [[William Tyndale]] and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the English versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the King James scholars, the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the Holy Bible, New King James Version, as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.	+	In the preface to the [[1611 AD\|1611]]]] edition, the translators of the [[Authorized Version]], known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of [[William Tyndale]] and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the [[English]] versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the [http://textus-receptus.com/w/mediawiki-1.13.2/index.php/Portal:Biographies#King_James_Version_Translators\|King James scholars], the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the [[Holy Bible]], [[New King James Version]], as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.

	==A Living Legacy==		==A Living Legacy==

Nick: /* New King James Footnotes */

Nick — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:52:06 GMT

New King James Footnotes

←Older revision		Revision as of 12:52, 19 June 2010
Line 73:		Line 73:

	==New King James Footnotes==		==New King James Footnotes==
-	Significant explanatory notes, alternate translations, and cross-references, as well as New Testament citations of Old Testament passages, are supplied in the footnotes.	+	Significant explanatory notes, alternate translations, and cross-references, as well as [[New Testament]] citations of [[Old Testament]] passages, are supplied in the footnotes.

-	Important textual variants in the Old Testament are identified in a standard form.	+	Important textual variants in the [[Old Testament]] are identified in a standard form.

-	The textual notes in the present edition of the New Testament make no evaluation of readings, but do clearly indicate the manuscript sources of readings. They objectively present the facts without such tendentious remarks as "the best manuscripts omit" or "the most reliable manuscripts read." Such notes are value judgments that differ according to varying viewpoints on the text. By giving a clearly defined set of variants the New King James Version benefits readers of all textual persuasions.	+	The textual notes in the present edition of the New Testament make no evaluation of readings, but do clearly indicate the manuscript sources of readings. They objectively present the facts without such tendentious remarks as "the best manuscripts omit" or "the most reliable manuscripts read." Such notes are value judgments that differ according to varying viewpoints on the text. By giving a clearly defined set of variants the [[New King James Version]] benefits readers of all textual persuasions.

-	Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:	+	Where significant variations occur in the [[New Testament]] [[Greek]] manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:

	1. NU-Text. These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously in "The New Testament Text." They are found in the Critical Text published in the twenty-sixth edition of the [[Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament]] (N) and in the [[United Bible Societies’ third edition]] (U), hence the acronym, "NU-Text."		1. NU-Text. These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously in "The New Testament Text." They are found in the Critical Text published in the twenty-sixth edition of the [[Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament]] (N) and in the [[United Bible Societies’ third edition]] (U), hence the acronym, "NU-Text."

Nick: /* The Style */

Nick — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:20:31 GMT

The Style

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:20, 29 May 2009
Line 24:		Line 24:
	Students of the Bible applaud the timeless devotional character of our historic Bible. Yet it is also universally understood that our language, like all living languages, has undergone profound change since 1611. Subsequent revisions of the King James Bible have sought to keep abreast of changes in English speech. The present work is a further step toward this objective. Where obsolescence and other reading difficulties exist, present-day vocabulary, punctuation, and grammar have been carefully integrated. Words representing ancient objects, such as chariot and phylactery, have no modern substitutes and are therefore retained.		Students of the Bible applaud the timeless devotional character of our historic Bible. Yet it is also universally understood that our language, like all living languages, has undergone profound change since 1611. Subsequent revisions of the King James Bible have sought to keep abreast of changes in English speech. The present work is a further step toward this objective. Where obsolescence and other reading difficulties exist, present-day vocabulary, punctuation, and grammar have been carefully integrated. Words representing ancient objects, such as chariot and phylactery, have no modern substitutes and are therefore retained.

-	A special feature of the New King James Version is its conformity to the thought flow of the 1611 Bible. The reader discovers that the sequence and selection of words, phrases, and clauses of the new edition, while much clearer, are so close to the traditional that there is remarkable ease in listening to the reading of either edition while following with the other.	+	A special feature of the New [[King James Version]] is its conformity to the thought flow of the 1611 Bible. The reader discovers that the sequence and selection of words, phrases, and clauses of the new edition, while much clearer, are so close to the traditional that there is remarkable ease in listening to the reading of either edition while following with the other.

-	In the discipline of translating biblical and other ancient languages, a standard method of transliteration, that is, the English spelling of untranslated words, such as names of persons and places, has never been commonly adopted. In keeping with the design of the present work, the King James spelling of untranslated words is retained, although made uniform throughout. For example, instead of the spellings Isaiah and Elijah in the Old Testament, and Esaias and Elias in the New Testament, Isaiah and Elijah now appear in both Testaments.	+	In the discipline of translating biblical and other ancient languages, a standard method of transliteration, that is, the English spelling of untranslated words, such as names of persons and places, has never been commonly adopted. In keeping with the design of the present work, the King James spelling of untranslated words is retained, although made uniform throughout. For example, instead of the spellings Isaiah and Elijah in the [[Old Testament]], and Esaias and Elias in the [[New Testament]], Isaiah and Elijah now appear in both Testaments.

	King James doctrinal and theological terms, for example, propitiation, justification, and sanctification, are generally familiar to English-speaking peoples. Such terms have been retained except where the original language indicates need for a more precise translation.		King James doctrinal and theological terms, for example, propitiation, justification, and sanctification, are generally familiar to English-speaking peoples. Such terms have been retained except where the original language indicates need for a more precise translation.

Nick: /* Complete Equivalence in Translation */

Nick — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:19:52 GMT

Complete Equivalence in Translation

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:19, 29 May 2009
Line 12:		Line 12:

	==Complete Equivalence in Translation==		==Complete Equivalence in Translation==
-	Where new translation has been necessary in the New King James Version, the most complete representation of the original has been rendered by considering the history of usage and etymology of words in their contexts. This principle of complete equivalence seeks to preserve all of the information in the text, while presenting it in good literary form. Dynamic equivalence, a recent procedure in Bible translation, commonly results in paraphrasing where a more literal rendering is needed to reflect a specific and vital sense. For example, complete equivalence truly renders the original text in expressions such as "lifted her voice and wept" (Gen. 21:16); "I gave you cleanness of teeth" (Amos 4:6); "Jesus met them, saying, 'Rejoice!" (Matt. 28:9); and "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me?" (John 2:4). Complete equivalence translates fully, in order to provide an English text that is both accurate and readable.	+	Where new translation has been necessary in the [[New King James Version]], the most complete representation of the original has been rendered by considering the history of usage and etymology of words in their contexts. This principle of complete equivalence seeks to preserve all of the information in the text, while presenting it in good literary form. Dynamic equivalence, a recent procedure in Bible translation, commonly results in paraphrasing where a more literal rendering is needed to reflect a specific and vital sense. For example, complete equivalence truly renders the original text in expressions such as "lifted her voice and wept" (Gen. 21:16); "I gave you cleanness of teeth" (Amos 4:6); "Jesus met them, saying, 'Rejoice!" (Matt. 28:9); and "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me?" ([[John 2:4]]). Complete equivalence translates fully, in order to provide an English text that is both accurate and readable.

-	In keeping with the principle of complete equivalence, it is the policy to translate interjections which are commonly omitted in modern language renderings of the Bible. As an example, the interjection behold, in the older King James editions, continues to have a place in English usage, especially in dramatically calling attention to a spectacular scene, or an event of profound importance such as the Immanuel prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. Consequently, behold is retained for these occasions in the present edition. However, the Hebrew and Greek originals for this word can be translated variously, depending on the circumstances in the passage. Therefore, in addition to behold, words such as indeed, look, see, and surely are also rendered to convey the appropriate sense suggested by the context in each case.	+	In keeping with the principle of complete equivalence, it is the policy to translate interjections which are commonly omitted in modern language renderings of the Bible. As an example, the interjection behold, in the older King James editions, continues to have a place in English usage, especially in dramatically calling attention to a spectacular scene, or an event of profound importance such as the Immanuel prophecy of [[Isaiah 7:14]]. Consequently, behold is retained for these occasions in the present edition. However, the Hebrew and Greek originals for this word can be translated variously, depending on the circumstances in the passage. Therefore, in addition to behold, words such as indeed, look, see, and surely are also rendered to convey the appropriate sense suggested by the context in each case.

	In faithfulness to God and to our readers, it was deemed appropriate that all participating scholars sign a statement affirming their belief in the verbal and plenary inspiration of Scripture, and in the inerrancy of the original autographs.		In faithfulness to God and to our readers, it was deemed appropriate that all participating scholars sign a statement affirming their belief in the verbal and plenary inspiration of Scripture, and in the inerrancy of the original autographs.

Nick: /* Purpose */

Nick — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:19:20 GMT

Purpose

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:19, 29 May 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Purpose==		==Purpose==
-	In the preface to the 1611 edition, the translators of the Authorized Version, known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of William Tyndale and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the English versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the King James scholars, the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the Holy Bible, New King James Version, as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.	+	In the preface to the 1611 edition, the translators of the Authorized Version, known popularly as the [[King James Bible]], state that it was not their purpose "to make a new translation ... but to make a good one better." Indebted to the earlier work of [[William Tyndale]] and others, they saw their best contribution to consist in revising and enhancing the excellence of the English versions which had sprung from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. In harmony with the purpose of the King James scholars, the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation. They have perceived the Holy Bible, New King James Version, as a continuation of the labors of the earlier translators, thus unlocking for today’s readers the spiritual treasures found especially in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.

	==A Living Legacy==		==A Living Legacy==

Nick at 19:59, 25 April 2009

Nick — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:59:14 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 19:59, 25 April 2009
Line 64:		Line 64:
	The King James New Testament was based on the traditional text of the Greek-speaking churches, first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus or Received Text. Although based on the relatively few available manuscripts, these were representative of many more which existed at the time but only became known later. 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.		The King James New Testament was based on the traditional text of the Greek-speaking churches, first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus or Received Text. Although based on the relatively few available manuscripts, these were representative of many more which existed at the time but only became known later. 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.

-	Since the 1880s most contemporary translations of the New Testament have relied upon a relatively few manuscripts discovered chiefly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Such translations depend primarily on two manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, because of their greater age. The Greek text obtained by using these sources and the related papyri (our most ancient manuscripts) is known as the Alexandrian Text. However, some scholars have grounds for doubting the faithfulness of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, since they often disagree with one another, and Sinaiticus exhibits excessive omission.	+	Since the 1880s most contemporary translations of the New Testament have relied upon a relatively few manuscripts discovered chiefly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Such translations depend primarily on two manuscripts, [[Codex Vaticanus]] and [[Codex Sinaiticus]], because of their greater age. The Greek text obtained by using these sources and the related papyri (our most ancient manuscripts) is known as the Alexandrian Text. However, some scholars have grounds for doubting the faithfulness of [[Vaticanus]] and [[Sinaiticus]], since they often disagree with one another, and Sinaiticus exhibits excessive omission.

	A third viewpoint of New Testament scholarship holds that the best text is based on the consensus of the majority of existing Greek manuscripts. This text is called the Majority Text. Most of these manuscripts are in substantial agreement. Even though many are late, and none is earlier than the fifth century, usually their readings are verified by papyri, ancient versions, quotations from the early church fathers, or a combination of these. The Majority Text is similar to the Textus Receptus, but it corrects those readings which have little or no support in the Greek manuscript tradition.		A third viewpoint of New Testament scholarship holds that the best text is based on the consensus of the majority of existing Greek manuscripts. This text is called the Majority Text. Most of these manuscripts are in substantial agreement. Even though many are late, and none is earlier than the fifth century, usually their readings are verified by papyri, ancient versions, quotations from the early church fathers, or a combination of these. The Majority Text is similar to the Textus Receptus, but it corrects those readings which have little or no support in the Greek manuscript tradition.
Line 81:		Line 81:
	Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:		Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:

-	1. NU-Text. These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously in "The New Testament Text." They are found in the Critical Text published in the twenty-sixth edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible Societies’ third edition (U), hence the acronym, "NU-Text."	+	1. NU-Text. These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously in "The New Testament Text." They are found in the Critical Text published in the twenty-sixth edition of the [[Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament]] (N) and in the [[United Bible Societies’ third edition]] (U), hence the acronym, "NU-Text."

-	2. M-Text. This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text from the traditional text, as also previously discussed in "The New Testament Text." It should be noted that M stands for whatever reading is printed in the published Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, whether supported by overwhelming, strong, or only a divided majority textual tradition.	+	2. M-Text. This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text from the traditional text, as also previously discussed in "The New Testament Text." It should be noted that M stands for whatever reading is printed in the published [[Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text]], whether supported by overwhelming, strong, or only a divided majority textual tradition.

-	The textual notes reflect the scholarship of the past 150 years and will assist the reader to observe the variations between the different manuscript traditions of the New Testament. Such information is generally not available in English translations of the New Testament.	+	The textual notes reflect the scholarship of the past 150 years and will assist the reader to observe the variations between the different manuscript traditions of the New Testament. Such information is generally not available in English translations of the [[New Testament]].

-	Copyright 1997, Thomas Nelson, Inc.	+	Copyright 1997, [[Thomas Nelson]], Inc.

	==See Also==		==See Also==
	[[New King James Version]]		[[New King James Version]]

←Older revision		Revision as of 14:51, 11 March 2016
Line 93:		Line 93:

	[[Category:New King James Version]]		[[Category:New King James Version]]
		+
		+	{{Donate}}

←Older revision		Revision as of 13:34, 1 September 2014
Line 91:		Line 91:
	==See Also==		==See Also==
	[[New King James Version]]		[[New King James Version]]
		+
		+	[[Category:New King James Version]]