Quote:
Originally Posted by sastark Quote:
Originally Posted by AV1611 Quote:
Originally Posted by sastark The New King James Version is not based on the Nestle-Aland manuscripts, but on the TR. | A popular misconception  | Sorry, I don't follow. What I said (the NKJV being based on the TR) is a popular misconception? |
This is something asserted by those who practically speaking are King James Onlyists who see any deviation from the KJV as evidence that the NKJV is not based on the TR. It it based on the Scrivener text although it may not follow it every single time. See
this post by a strong KJV advocate who maintains intellectual honesty in his defense of the KJV.
If the NKJV is wrong by all means say so, but don't claim it is based on Nestle-Aland when that is clearly not the case. Such claims may convince the credulous, but will do more than almost anything else to drive away those who have some modicum of knowledge about textual issues.
__________________
Chris
Member at
Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA
Beware of a religion without holdfasts. But if I get a grip upon a doctrine they call me a bigot. Let them do so. Bigotry is a hateful thing, and yet that which is now abused as bigotry is a great
virtue, and greatly needed in these frivolous times. I have been inclined lately to start a new denomination, and call it "the Church of the Bigoted." Spurgeon