In October 2025, a member of the Textus Receptus Academy,[i] named John, created a poll about the accuracy of and difference between the KJV and the NKJV in the text of Luke 6:10a. These verses read:
- AKJV: And looking round about upon them all, he said unto the man…
- NKJV: And when He had looked around at them all, He said to the man…
The purpose seemed ostensibly to defend the NKJV rendering. According to that author, “The KJV has Jesus speaking while looking. The NKJV has Jesus speaking after looking.” In the poll he asked respondents to vote, “Which is correct?” The poll options were: The KJV is correct; The NKJV is correct; both are correct; both are incorrect.
According to the creator of the poll, the right answer was “both are correct.” I agreed with this as the answer, but not for the same reason he gave: “We don’t know for sure the timing—either one is possible and it could be accurately rendered either way.” Actually, I even agree with the last part of that statement, that either understanding is accurate, based on the Greek. He teased out the fact that the aorist participle περιβλεψάμενος can translated either as antecedent (prior) to or as contemporaneous (simultaneous) with the action of the main verb. This is correct. However, in the end, I believe that John and many others of the polled missed it. When he wrote that “both are correct” what he actually meant was that both are possible correct translational renderings. He did not actually mean that “both are correct” because he went on to say “Historically, only one of the two actually happened.” In other words, he is saying either only simultaneous action happened or antecedent action happened. Both can’t be true. So, he explanation was somewhat contradictory.
However, when I say that both are correct, I am saying that Luke 6:10a in the KJV and NKJV actually mean the same thing in English. “Looking round about upon them all” (in English) is a present participle clause.[ii] Often, present participle clauses show two actions that happen at the same time. Apparently the poll creator and several others were laboring under the false conception of that being the only way a present participle clause can be used. That first explanation is a short and simple answer that does not include all the facts. Present participle clauses are used in the English language in at least six different ways: to describe simultaneous action, to show cause for an action, to give the result of an action, to add information about the subject of the main clause, adjectivally, or even to replace a full relative clause. Here are a couple of examples of how the present participle clause might be used in ways that are not simultaneous action.
- Opening the envelope, I found two train tickets.
- Running late, I missed the train.
In the first case the present participle clause expresses an action that happens in close proximity to, but just before another action (rather than simultaneous). The second case shows cause. The point is not that I was simultaneously running late while missing the train, but that I missed the train because I was running late. We speak and write this way, and are capable of understanding this way, if not set on an agenda. I believe that John’s not understanding the various uses of the present participle clause led him to assume that the meaning of Luke 6:10a in the King James and the New King James had to be mutually exclusive. Understanding the different uses of the present participle clause shows us we can understand the King James translation of Luke 6:10 as in the first example above – “looking” expresses an action that happens in close proximity to, but just before another action (rather than simultaneous). Jesus knew the thoughts of the onlookers, he asked them a question, and looked around at all of them. With no answer forthcoming, he addressed the man, “Stretch forth thy hand.” The looking occurred in very close proximity of time but immediately prior to his addressing the man with the withered hand. This interpretation will not only harmonize with the context of Luke 6:6-11, but it also harmonizes with the parallel passage in Mark 3:1-6.
Mark 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man…
An interpretation that does not the realize the harmony of Luke 6:10 and Mark 3:5 is incorrect and unacceptable. To me, this poll seemed to be an argument only for the purpose of arguing. Straining at a gnat, John swallowed a camel.
No comments:
Post a Comment