Does the NKJV Change the TR?

SI Filings

“Why don’t my brothers who prefer the TR use the NKJV or MEV? And if they don’t like these options, why not create one that fits in that quadrant? [‘right’ text, easy words]” - Mark Ward

Discussion

The Proposed Puritan English Bible Revision of 1653

Douglas K. Kutilek

I recently posted to an internet discussion group the claim that none of the KJV’s contemporaries or those for many generations afterward had the temerity to affirm that the KJV was a perfect, flawless, unimprovable English Bible version as is claimed by some today. To the contrary, from the beginning, it was recognized as being flawed in numerous details, and certainly was susceptible to correction and improvement to bring it into closer conformity to the Bible text in the original Hebrew and Greek.

Discussion

To Make an Existing Translation Better, or to Make It Perfect? The Intention of the KJV Translators

Douglas K. Kutilek

Miles Smith, one of the principal translators and editors of the King James Version, writing in the name of all the translators, penned “The Translators to the Readers,” an eleven-page preface or introduction to the original edition of the KJV, which, sadly, has been omitted from most KJV editions for the past 350 years. Therein, on unnumbered page 9, he wrote [I normalize spelling]—

Discussion

Why I Switched from the NIV to the CSB (Christian Standard Bible)

SI Filings

“…does a good job balancing what the reader needs to know with the reader’s need to keep reading. They give the formal rendering if at all possible, but if not possible, they’ll give a functional rendering, often with a footnote about the formal translation.” - Word by Word

Discussion