RESPONSE TO NKJV ARTICLE BY KIRKBRIDE BOARD OF REFERENCE MEMBER

[Distributed by Way of Life Literature's Fundamental Baptist Information Service. These articles cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites without permission from the author. The articles cannot be sold or placed by themselves or with other material in any electronic format for sale, but may be distributed for free by e-mail or by print. They must be left intact and nothing removed or changed, including these informational headers. This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our goal is not devotional. OUR PRIMARY PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR. If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular basis, e-mail us, tell us who you are and where you are located, and request to be placed on the list. Also include your postal address and the name of the church of which you are a member. Please note that we take up a quarterly offering to fund this ministry, and you will be expected to participate. Some of these articles are from the "Digging in the Walls" section of O Timothy magazine. David W. Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 15th year of publication. Subscription is $20/yr. The Way of Life web site is http://www.wayoflife.org/.]

September 7, 1997 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, fbns@wayoflife.org) - On September 6 we published an article entitled "The Doubt-Producing Margin of the New King James Version." We demonstrated that though the New King James Version claims to exalt the exact Received Text which underlies the King James Bible, that at least some of its translators are actually committed to the eclectic text which underlies the modern versions. Further, its margin is filled with the same doubt-producing notes which characterize versions such as the RSV, the NIV, and the NASV.

In response to this article we received the following e-mail from a man who identified himself as Rev. Joseph Broz, B.S. Theology & New Testament Greek Nyack College Nyack, NY, M.A.R. Christian Education, Board of Reference Kirkbride Bible Company. [Note, we don't support the use of Reverend as a title for a man, because it is used exclusively in the Word of God as a name for God--Psalm 111:9. If a man wants to take God's name as a title for his sinful self, that is his privilege, I suppose, but we cringe at the very thought of such a thing. One might as well be called "His Holiness" or "Holy Father."]

JOSEPH BROZ: "This whole article is a farce! You are citing errors in the United Bible Societies eclectic Greek New Testament -- Not the Greek text used to produce the New King James Bible. I know you are unaware that the Eastern Orthodox Church Bishops and priests who have been using New Testament Greek Scriptures in Greek for almost 2,000 years picked the New King James Bible BECAUSE it be represented their Greek manuscript evidence for the New Testament. Ninety-five percent of the oldest Greek manuscripts in existence today are in Greek Orthodox churches and monasteries! These manuscripts support EVERY word found in our KJV Bibles! This is a major gain for those of us that favor the traditional Greek text of the New Testament. You do not have to use the New King James Bible but you shot yourself in the foot by throwing rocks at it! More could be said about this but space and time would not permit. Those footnotes in the New King James Bibles help to point out WHY modern translations of the Bible have so many verses that are missing, words gone and doctrines of the faith altered."

REPLY FROM BROTHER CLOUD: I can assure you that your credentials do not impress me, and your attitude impresses me less. It appears to me that you have misunderstood my article entirely. I realize that those footnotes reflect the UBS text. I am not ignorant of anything you noted in your e-mail. Your attitude toward me appears to be very haughty in assuming my ignorance in such basic matters. The fact that the marginal readings cited represent corrupt readings is precisely why they should not be included in a Bible which claims to be based on the same Received Text which underlies the King James Bible. You said the footnotes "help to point out why modern translations of the Bible have so many verses that are missing, words gone and doctrines of the faith altered." Yes, they point that out to the tiny minority who are educated in these matters, but there is nothing in the NKJV which clearly explains to the average reader that those footnotes reflect readings which are corrupt. I stand by my article without hesitation. The NKJV is promoting doubt upon the preserved Word of God by its corrupt marginal readings.