What? NKJV notes and the Critical Text.

When folks say that there exist some critical text readings in the New King James translation, the claim is often dismissed as the rabid ravings of kooky KJV-“Onlyists”. But wait? What if a work published by the publisher of the NKJV (Thomas Nelson) and under the hand of the executive editor of the NKJV (Arthur Farstad) agrees? Are they unhinged as well?

Here are three verses (below), investigated in The NKJV Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (Arthur L. Farstad, Zane C. Hodges, Michael Moss, Robert Picirilli, Wilbur Pickering. Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1994). I discussed two of the same in “Are there Critical Text preferences in the NKJV?” (which see). I believe someone with the time to do the research will turn up more of the same kind of things. If you do not have the NKJV Interlinear, you can borrow it HERE.

2 Corinthians 4:14. KJV “by” versus NKJV “with”. On page 634 it says “with” is the NU reading (NU= Nestle-Aland, United Bible Society). NKJV follows the NU reading.

Jude 1:3. KJV “the” versus NKJV “our”. On page 835 it says “our” is the NU reading. NKJV follows the NU reading.

Revelation 6:11. KJV “robes” versus NKJV “robe”. On page 854 it says the plural is the TR reading. NKJV follows the singular of the NU rather than the plural of the TR.

---

Note: The main reason for this post is to demonstrate that even friends and promoters of the New King James translation are able to acknowledge some influence arising from the Critical Text.

Even Mark Ward has admitted, “There are six places in the NT—Luke 1:35; Col 3:17; Jude 3; and now 2 Cor 13:14; 4:14; 2 John 1:7—that Kent [Brandenburg] has brought to my attention, places in which I cannot square the rendering in front of me with the generally literal approach of the NKJV translators and with Scrivener’s text at the same time.”