In a footnote in The New King James Version: In the Great Tradition (chapter 10, no. 9), Arthur Farstad, the general editor of the New King James translation, stated:
“Earlier, it was planned to use the majority text as the translation base for the NKJV New Testament. But deeper reflection led us to adhere to the traditional King James text and to reflect the majority text (M) in the notes along with the critical text (NU).”
However, Hebrews 3:16 appears to be a place where the New King James translation followed the majority text rather than the traditional King James text. In that place, the NKJV translation meaning follows the majority text placement of an accent mark and changes a statement to a question. Notice Hebrews 3:16 in these two translations.
- AKJV: For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
- NKJV: For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?
Notice the Greek text in the Textus Receptus tradition. The accent mark is over the epsilon in the last half of the word τινες (some).
- 1519: τινὲς γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν, ἀλλ’ οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ μωσεως
- 1550: τινὲς γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν, ἀλλ’ οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ Μωσέως.
- 1894: τινὲς γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν, ἀλλ’ οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ μωσεως
Now notice the Greek text in the majority and critical texts. The accent mark is over the iota in the first half of the word τινες (who).
- NUBS: τίνες γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν; ἀλλ' οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ Μωϋσέως;
- SBLG: τίνες γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν; ἀλλ’ οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ Μωϋσέως;
- HFMT: Τίνες γὰρ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν? ’Αλλ’ οὐ πάντες οἱ ἐξελθόντες ἐξ Αἰγύπτου διὰ Μωϋσέως?
Notice the Hodges-Farstad Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text has the accent that matches the way the NKJV is translated. The TR editions do not.
τίνες = who
τινὲς = some
James D. Price, a member of the New King James translation group, explains it this way, admitting that the NKJV does not here follow the Textus Receptus.
“With the accent on the first syllable, the word is the interrogative pronoun ‘who?’ as in the NKJV; with it on the last syllable, the word is the indefinite pronoun ‘some’ as in the KJV. Madden knows that the accent marks were not part of the autographic text nor of the earlier copies of the Greek Bible, including the early copies of the Bibles in the Byzantine tradition. Thus the accent mark on this word is an interpretive addition to the text that is not part of the original. Madden should also know that most of the Bibles in the Byzantine tradition have the accent on the first syllable, not the last. That is the case in the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text, and also in the Robinson-Pierpont text. This is also true in F. H. A. Scrivener’s edition of Stephen’s 1550 text. This means that the majority of Greek speaking churches understood the text the way the NKJV translated it.” James D. Price’s undated “Book Review” of Remarks on the New King James Version by D. K. Madden (Tasmania: D. K. Madden, 1989), p. 6
“However, this seems to be a rare exception, perhaps the only place, where the NKJV translators chose not to follow the minority reading of the Textus Receptus (TR). To the best of my knowledge, in all the other places the NKJV translators followed the TR, even when the TR reading was not supported by the majority of copies, sometimes by a very small number, or by no Greek authority at all. I can’t give the reason for this exception, unless they understood the KJV rendering to be inconsistent with the author’s line of reasoning.” James D. Price’s undated “Book Review” of Remarks on the New King James Version by D. K. Madden (Tasmania: D. K. Madden, 1989), p. 7
Price’s statement is that the NKJV translators usually followed the TR even in cases where the TR reading was the minority reading. (That seems a bit like a “duh” statement – since that’s what they claimed they were going to do.) Nevertheless this is an important admission – even though Price says it might be the only place where they didn’t follow the TR. When some of us KJV defenders make a similar claim, we get pushback like we are quacks and quirks. However, at least on this “rare exception,” James Price, a non-KJVO who worked on the NKJV project (albeit on the OT) agrees with us.
The NKJV Greek-English Interlinear with the Majority Greek text (Edited by Farstad and others, and published by Thomas Nelson, the publisher of the NKJV) shows the NKJV translation matching the Majority Text.
“The enemies of the NKJV have repeated this false charge seemingly without end, but they have failed to produce any legitimate examples of where the NKJV did not accurately follow the reading of the Textus Receptus. If such discrepancies are found, the NKJV would be corrected in the very next edition.” (The False Witness of G. A. Riplinger’s Death Certificate for the New King James Version, p. 18)
No comments:
Post a Comment