Terry Watkins Accuses the NKJV of Removing the Words God, Lord and Changing 100,000 Words

Terry Watkin in his little paper The New King James Bible: Counterfeit[1] which I printed from the internet at www.av1611.org/nkjv.html on March 1, 2002[2] claims the NKJV removes the words God and Lord from the Bible (meaning the KJV) in certain places.

This is a very serious charge and one that should not be made lightly or without clear explanation. But this study shows that Terry Watkins deceives the simple. Specifically, here are the claims he makes:

The NKJV removes the word "Lord" 66 times!

The NKJV removes the word God 51 times!

The NKJV removes the word "heaven" 50 times!

In just the New Testament[3] alone the NKJV removes 2.289 words from the KJV!

The NKJV makes over 100,000 word changes!

Let’s examine his claims and see how real they are. We will work our way down the list and eventually get to all of them.[4] But before we begin, may I point out the fact that our Brother fails to tell us where a single one of these omissions occur. Does that seem a bit strange to you? But then I think you will understand why he did not cite a single reference long before you finish reading this paper!

Of course, the most serious charge is that the word “Lord” is removed 66 times so let’s take it first.

Let’s start out examining the NT where we will find the majority of the verses where the NKJV indeed did make several changes out of the 2,164 times the word “Lord” appears in the NT.

But before we begin, would you think that Lord and lord are equivalent words? I bet you are already miles ahead of me!

Using your KJV, check out Matthew 10:24, 25; 18:25, 26, 27, 31, 32, 34; 20:8; 21:40; 24:45, 46, 48, 50 and compare them with the NKJV. Get the idea? The NKJV uses “master” in most places when the comparison is master to servant. If you were in England in the 1600’s, a servant called his master by the title of “lord.” Can he be serious with his claim that the NKJV left out “Lord?”

Let me make it easy[5] on us all by telling you the KJV renders the Greek word κύριος as “Lord” 667 times, “lord” 54 times, “master” 11 times, “sir” six times, “Sir” six times, “owner’s” twice, “for the Lord’s sake” once and “of God” once[6] (Acts 19:20).

So far we have covered about 40 of the times “Lord” (or should we say “lord”?) is left out by that old wicked NKJV. Now let’s check the Old Testament.

The first instance we find is in Gen 27:29 where Isaac is blessing Jacob and said (NKJV) “Be master (lord) over your brethren.” --Also the same in v. 37. The next one is found in Gen 39:16 where Joseph is falsely accused by Potiphar’s wife. I will put the rest in this footnote for the hard core KJV Only researchers.[7]

Now, if you check all these occurrences, I think you will find some 56 places where the NKJV has removed “lord” (oops—Terry, did you say “Lord” or “lord?”). Now I truly may have missed 10 places that he found, after all, the words “lord” and “Lord” occur 21,814 times in the KJV Old Testament alone. But I rather think he is the one who could not count.[8] Computers don’t usually fail us if the data is there.

I hope you did not blink as I did and miss all those times where that old NKJV removed the word “Lord.” My Mother has been in heaven now for about 33 years but I think she would be saying something like “Liar, liar, pants on fire!”

Well, friends, if you liked how Bro. Watkins handled the word “Lord,” you are sure to love how he handles “God.”

Again, let’s begin with the New Testament where we find the English word “God” appearing 4,118 times in the KJV. By my count there are 21 instances out of his 51 probably occurring in the NT.

An examination reveals that these occurrences can easily be divided into three categories. First, there are those that occur as the result of a dynamic equivalence translation. Perhaps you have heard of that phrase before. It means that the translators used a current expression to render the thought. We hear a lot from the KJV Only crowd about how wicked that old NIV is because it uses dynamic equivalence but Solomon was correct when he wrote, “there is nothing new under the sun.” The more I have studied this the more obvious it has become that “what one translation does, they all do.” It is just a matter of frequency. And in these verses you will find that the KJV renders the thought, not the Greek.

Some years ago down South you were likely on any given day to hear someone let out a “say it ain’t so!” Well, believe it or not, every culture seems to have an equivalent expression. For the British it was “God forbid!” For the Apostle Paul and the first century Greek speaking Christians it was μη γενοιτο! You can search these verses all day long but you will never find the Greek word θεος any where. The truth of the matter is it would be more correct for someone to say that the KJV added the word “God” to these verses.

Similar to this is the expression “would to God.” I am reminded of an expression my old teacher from the 5^th and 6^th grade use to say. “If wishes were horses, beggars could ride.” Well, Terry may wish that the NKJV kept the word “God” in the following verses but again it is our beloved KJV which added it.

And a third expression similarly translated by the KJV is found in 2 John 10 and 11—“God speed.” Again, the Greek word for God (θεος) is not found in this verse.

Then a second class is places where the KJV inserted the word “God” and acknowledged it with italics. Oh, yes, Bro. Terry counts those too. And why not when you believe that the KJV is fully inspired and that we no longer need the Hebrew and Greek?

Finally, in the NT there are several verses which are somewhat unique so we will examine them individually.

The first example is found in Matt 2:12 along with Matt 2:22 and Acts 12:22 with a similar expression in Heb 11:7. This verse has the NKJV using “divinely warned” in place of “warned of God…” The first thing you need to know is that there is only one Greek word here (the same in all four verses—a verb at that) and that the rendering is a translation of that one word. Again, the Greek word θεος is not found in these verses.

A second example of this class is found in Rom 11:4 where the NKJV has “divine response” in place of the “answer of God…” And in the verse we also cannot find the Greek word for “God” but instead find one Greek word which is translated “answer of God” by the KJV. Either group could have rendered this as “a godly response.” There is more than one way to translate this word and it does not mean that either is wrong.

And last we have another example in 1 Peter 3:20 where the NKJV has the “Divine longsuffering” in place of the “longsuffering of God…” AND HERE THE NKJV COULD HAVE DONE BETTER! In this one verse the word θεος (but in the genitive form) does appear. I personally would not have used the word “Divine” since the Greek word for God is found in this verse, even though it is a genitive form. But, you may want to know that the KJV renders this exact same Greek word (θεου) as “godly” in 2 Cor 1:13 and 11:2; 1 Tim 1:4 and 3 John 6. Second, the word Divine is an old way of speaking of God—the study of divinity is the study of God. Further, you should note that the NKJV capitalized Divine, indicating that they are referring to God.[9]

In the OT there are 9,976 occurences of God [or god] in the KJV English and we meet up with some of the same situations as in the NT. First, we have that same class of word where the thought is translated, not the literal Hebrew. Those renderings are “God forbid,” and “would God.” But in the OT we have an additional one, perfectly British but not OT Hebrew—“God save the King.” These three groups account by far for the majority of the changes.

Would God: Ex 16:3; Numbers 11:29; 14:2a, 2b; 20:3; Deut 28:67a, 67b; Judges 9:29; 2 Sam 18:33 and 2 Kings 5:3.

And, of course, what would you do with places where the KJV entry is in italics?

Judges 20:31. This one is a little more difficult, especially as it is tied with Judges 20:18, 26, 31 and 21:2. I would first draw your attention to the passage. The context says they were fighting in the “highway” and “in the field.” The NKJV then places parenthesis marks around the words “one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah.” That is, the NKJV treats the central part of this verse as being explanatory in nature and sets it off within parenthesis. This then clearly indicates that these highways led to Gibeah in one direction and either to “the house of God” (KJV) or to “Bethel” (NKJV).

Finally, there is just one and only one Hebrew word behind the words “house of God.” The word “Bethel” is a transliteration of this word. But evidently, this word can by association be rendered as the house of God.

This might be the type of situation someone would encounter if they were translating our word “Washington.” Our normal understanding of the word is to refer to our capitol, Washington, DC. But it is not uncommon to hear the reports on the nightly news say “Washington’s position is….” That is, we use “Washington” to also stand for our government. A translator might choose to use “the government” instead of “Washington” in such cases.

1 Sam 28:13. In this passage Saul consults with the witch of Endor when God does not answer him. In the midst of her session with him, she becomes afraid, prompting Saul to ask what she saw. Her response was that she saw “gods ascending out of the earth.” The NKJV renders this as “a[12] spirit ascending out of the earth.” The KJV renders this word as “God” 2346 times, “god” 244 times, “judge” five times (Ex 21:6; 22:8,9; 1 Sam 2:25), “GOD” once, “goddess” twice (1 Kings 11:5, 33), “great” twice (Gen 30:8; 1 Sam 14:15), “mighty” twice (Gen 23:6; Ex 9:28), “angels” once (Ps 8:5), “exceeding” once (Jonah 3:3), “God-ward + 4136” once, and “godly” once (Mal 2:15).

And I think that is all of them except one. In 1 Sam 12:22 the NKJV reads “…whether LORD will be gracious to me…” while the KJV reads “whether GOD will be gracious to me…” The footnote in the NKJV reads, “A few Hebrew manuscripts and Syriac read God.” I wish their footnote explained more but that is all.

And this brings us to our study of the word “heaven.” Would you believe that old NKJV Counterfeit Bible wants to take “heaven” out? Well, that is what Bro. Terry wants you to believe.

Rev 6:14 is the only NT change. In the KJV this verse reads “and the heaven departed…” Wonder if Bro. Terry is having trouble understanding plain English. The KJV plainly says “heaven” took off and left the earth. Oh, come on, Guys. Lighten up and have some fun!

Strong’s #6160: In Psalm 68:4 the KJV has “…extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH ..” while the NKJV has “…Extol Him who rides on the clouds,

Frankly, it is hard for me to make the connection here for eith “heavens” or “clouds” because the Hebrew word, which appears some 60 times, is translated as “plain” 42 times, “desert” 9 times, “wilderness” 5 times, “Arabah” twice (Joshua 18:18), “heavens” only here plus a couple of others. Note, Arabah is the name of the “hollow depression through which the Jordan flows from the Lake of Galilee to the Dead Sea.”[13]

Strong’s #1534: In Psalm 77:18 the NKJV switches “whirlwind” for “heaven.” But the Enhanced Strong’s Concordance says the KJV renders this word as “wheel” nine times, “heaven” once and “rolling thing” once. My guess is they are comparing it to the swirling of the clouds.

Strong’s #7834: In Psalm 89:37 the NKJV changes “heaven” to “sky.” Enhanced Strong’s Concordance says the KJV renders this Hebrew word as “cloud” 11 times, “sky” seven times, “heaven” twice, and “small dust” once.

Now frankly, I have a problem. You see Bro. Terry claims the old NKJV removed “heaven” 50 times but my computer and I could only find 10 places in all of the Bible. I am afraid I do not know what to say. Maybe he knows something I do not!

But I have a bigger problem than that. It should be obvious that heaven is still safe. Even in the NKJV you can still lay up your treasure there (Matt 6:20; 19:21; Mark 10:21; Luke 12:33; 18:22). The Kingdom of heaven has not come and gone—it, too, is still there (Matt 3:2 and 32 other places).

The fact is, I have a big problem. Terry Watkins on page 9 of his little paper proclaims in bold type face that the NKJV has done all these horrible things to the Word of God. But evidently I must be blind for I do not see it.

And last, he claims the NKJV removes some 2,289 words from the Bible (KJV) and makes 100,000 word changes.

All translators in all languages use more words than the original to translate a word from one language to another. This happens because many foreign words cannot be accurately rendered with one English word. The truth is, the NKJV does remove some words but by far the majority of these words are places where the NKJV uses less words to express an idea than does the KJV.

Some years ago I did a detailed study of 1 Peter, comparing the Greek with the KJV and NKJV. This is what I found. In the book of 1 Peter the KJV used 2,479 English words to render the 1,726 Greek words (using Scrivener’s TR). That amounts to about 43.6% more English words than Greek. The NKJV on the other hand used 2,412 words or about 39.7% more English words. But that also means, to use the language of Terry Watkins, that the NKJV “left out (at least) 67 words!

But a long time ago I learned that perspective is everything. What if you were a first century, Greek speaking Christian? From his perspective he would say that the KJV added 753 words to the Sacred Text! So when someone tells you, this version or that version left out or added words, why not put yourself back in the time of the writer, the first century. If you do that, I can assure you that every version ADDS!

Before we pass on to the next section, let me give you just a couple of examples of how the NKJV “left out” these 2,289 words.

One of the words the NKJV left out is found in 1 Peter 1:7 where the word “and” is missing between the words “praise” and “honor.” (see also 2:1). Now before you KJV Only types get all lathered up with excitement, perhaps you would like to know that the KJV itself does not render the Greek word και some 354 times! In 1 Peter you can find the missing and in 2:6, 20; 3:7; 4:1, 13. Or, maybe you would feel better if that old wicked NKJV used an ampersand (&) in place of “and.” Just see 1 Peter 1:25 in the 1611 KJV reprint. And you may be interested to know that this same conjunction is translated “also” by the KJV in 2:6 but left out by the NKJV. Does that bother you? Well, will it still bother you if, when you check the real KJV (1611 edition), you find that they also did not render the Greek word here?

And you can find another example of how the NKJV used less words in 1 Peter 1:21. The KJV reads “raised him up…” while the NKJV has “raised Him...” thus saving one word or (to make Bro. Terry happy) the NKJV removed one word.

But perhaps a better example is found in 2:10 where the KJV has “in time past” while the NKJV has “once.” This Greek word #4218 (ποτε) is translated “once” by the KJV in Romans 7:9 and Gal 1:23. Check your Strong’s Concordance. Here the NKJV economizes with one word for three.

Finally, another way our Brother fluffs the count is by counting every place where the NKJV drops the “eth” ending (as in beholdeth) and when the NKJV capitalizes the words for Deity (as in Him, rather than him). It’s a pure guess on my part but I suspect dropping this senseless count would alone reduce that 100,000 number by 5,000.

This paper has gone on long enough but there is so much, oh, so much more that needs to be addressed about our Brother’s paper. For one he cites with approval a Dr. Cathy Burns on page 4. But when I looked up this lady on the web and went to her site, the first thing that smacked me in the face was an article titled, “Can Our Names Be Blotted Out?” And the very first paragraph under the title reads:

The belief in eternal security is probably the most dangerous theory in the world. The reason why I believe this is so is because people can be made to feel sure of heaven even though they continue to live in sin and are really headed for hell.[14]

Brothers, the Bible challenge is for us to be like the Bereans (Acts 17:11). Sadly, we have many good men who read a simple tract but fail to examine it closely to see the truth. Terry’s proposition is that the NKJV is a counterfeit Bible, and to be avoided at all costs. But I submit to you that, even though he makes many other charges in his latest version, he has failed and failed miserably to prove his point. Consider this:

o I’ve given you plenty of references and explained how you can check my work.

· He relied on gullibility to prove his point—knowing 99% of the people would never check him out.

o I’m not asking you to trust me. I’m asking you to be a Berean and check out what I have done.

What troubles me is that very few even have the slightest idea whether the NKJV is good or bad because these men have so muddied the water that most will never examine it. I think it is time to throw out the junk criticism and take a good look.

In Acts 19:20 we do have an example where the NKJV made a serious change—going from “Word of God” to “Word of the Lord”—the only place where we can agree with Watkins that the NKJV changed the word “God.” But there is an explanation.

Consider this article from As I See It [9:8] titled "Acts 19:20: A Test-case for Translation Evaluation" by Doug Kutilek:

In Acts 19:20, the Textus Receptus editions individually and collectively read “ho logos tou kuriou,” that is “the word of the Lord.” F. H. A. Scrivener, in his The New Testament in Greek According to the Text Adopted in the Authorized Version (Cambridge: University Press, 1881) provides indispensable assistance at this point. Scrivener’s work was a reconstruction of the presumptive Greek text followed by the KJV translators (which had never before been put in print). [In other words Doug is saying that we have no copy of the Greek text the KJV translators used; Scrivener’s is the presumptive copy]. Scrivener made a meticulous examination of printed Greek texts extant [means “still in existence”] as of 1611: the Complutensian Polyglott Greek text (1514), all 5 editions by Erasmus (1516, 1519, 1522, 1527, 1534), the texts of Aldus (1518), Colinaeus (1534), the four Stephanus editions (1546, 1549, 1550, 1551), the Antwerp Polyglott Greek (1572), and all five of Beza’s editions (1560, 1565, 1582, 1589, 1598) [of course, the Elzevir editions of 1624, 1633 and 1641 are irrelevant at this point, since they came after the KJV, though they apparently read the same at Acts 19:20 as all the other editions mentioned]. Scrivener’s labors led him to conclude that the 1598 Beza edition (5^th) of the Greek NT was that most closely followed by the KJV men. However, Scrivener located some 250 places in the NT where that Greek text was not followed [emphasis, mine]. In 190 of these, the reading of one of the other Textus Receptus editions was apparently followed. In an appendix, Scrivener notes the precise locations and editions where the KJV departs from Beza’s 1598 for some other TR edition (pp. 648-655). Acts 19:20 is not one of the places listed since all TR editions agreed in reading “the word of the Lord” like the Beza 1598 edition. That is established fact.

However, in an additional list, Scrivener gives 60 readings where the KJV followed NO printed Greek text available to them, and therefore departed from all TR editions. The KJV’s preferred authority in these places? The Latin Vulgate! And among these 60 non-TR readings is Acts 19:20, for here, the KJV, against all TR editions, presupposes a Greek reading “ho logos tou theou,” that is, “the word of God.” (Let it be noted, the Trinitarian Bible Society 1980 reprint of Scrivener’s text behind the KJV NT omits a number of features of Scrivener’s edition, including this important appendix showing KJV departures from the 1598, and from all TR editions. It does, however, read as Scrivener’s text, i.e. “the word of the Lord”).

The reading “the word of the Lord” found in all TR editions is also the reading of the great majority of extant Greek manuscripts (there is a minor question of word order that we may here bypass), and as a consequence it is the reading in The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, edited by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad (Nelson, 1985. 2nd edition). Likewise reads The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont (Chilton Book Publishing, 2005). Further, all the prominent textual critics of the 19^th century agree that the Textus Receptus reading here is right--, Griesbach, Scholz, Lachman, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Wordsworth and even Westcott and Hort. So agree 20^th century text-editors as well--Nestle, Aland, the UBS committees, et al.[15]

What Kutilek is showing here is that the change from “Lord” to “God” in this passage had nothing at all to do with the Greek. All Greek manuscripts read “Lord” in the passage except Scrivener’s text which was composed in the late 1880s and was “composed” using only Greek manuscripts available at the time of the KJV 1611 and supplemented with reverse translating from the Latin in some instances.

Most readers of the KJV have little knowledge of the effects of the Catholic Church upon the KJV. Let it be said that the KJV translators themselves were but one step removed from being Catholics, that their training and heritage for the most part would have been very close to that of Catholics. It was not until Elizabeth I became queen in 1558 or shortly thereafter that the Anglican Church supplanted the Catholic Church in England. And even then changes would have been slow.

The Catholic Latin Vulgate’s influence on the KJV can be seen in places like the use of “charity” instead of “love,” or the KJV’s use of Diana instead of Artemis in Acts 19:24-35, by such phrases as “nothing doubting” (H. P. Cameron, A History of the English Bible, p. 153), or by the insertion of the phrase “of God” in 1 John 3:16 (in italics in the KJV) but found in the Latin Vulgate while NOT found in all versions leading up to the KJV.

The interested reader should also consult an informative volume titled, The Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible, by James G. Carleton, originally published by Oxford Press in 1902 but now available as a print-on-demand book (Amazon for about $25).

Finally, I would add only one addition to Kutilek’s comments. Most of the reading that Scrivener found relating to the Latin Vulgate were not added by the KJV 1611 translators but instead come down from Tyndale who as you may know worked from the Latin, not the Greek. Scrivener’s list may be found on page 263 of Appendix E, in The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), Its Sussequent Reprints and Modern Representations.

[1] I am not sure where he got most of his information but clearly most of the KJV Only advocates copy someone. Perhaps it comes from Ruckman or Riplinger but I noticed today (9-8-08) that James L. Melton in his web article, The NKJV: A Deadly Translation, uses the exact same figures.

[2] On March 27, 2008 I verified that it is still there although it may have undergone some changes. The section I am addressing in this paper is still a part of his paper. And again tonight, January 8, 2012, I checked and it is still there. And now, August 30, 2016.

[3] Please remember, he means the KJV New Testament, which, to him, is the only genuine Bible. No Greek allowed!

[4] Tonight while looking for something else I stumbled across a chart in The Language of the King James Bible, by G. A. Riplinger, p. 146, with these same charges in exactly the same order!

[5] But for those who are gluttons for punishment here are the others: Mark 6:21 (nobles); Mark 10:51 (Rabboni—compare John 20:16); Mark 12:9 (owner); Luke 12:36, 37, 43, 45, 46, 47 (master); Luke 14:21, 22, 23 (master); Luke 16:3, 5, 8 (master); Luke 19: 16, 18, 20, 25; Luke 20:13, 15 (owner); John 13:16 (master); John 15:15, 20 (master); Gal 4:1 (master);

[6] See Appendix A.

[7] Judges 19:26, 27 (master); 1 Sam 16:16 (master); 1 Kings 18:8, 11, 14 (master); 2 Kings 5:3 (master); 2 Kings 7:17 (officer); 2 Kings 9:11 (master); 2 Kings 18:23 (master); Ezra 10:3 (master); Isaiah 22:18 (master’s) and Dan 4:36 (nobles).

[8] For instance he may have counted Psalm 96:13 and 98:9 where the NKJV moves the final phrase to the previous verses, that is to Ps 96:12 and 98:8 respectively. If you do not have a copy of the NKJV, let me explain. Psalms is poetry, so they shift the phrase “before the Lord” to the end of verse 12 (or verse 8) to make the verses line up. No big deal here unless the chapter and verse numbers of the KJV are also inspired!

[9] Somewhere years ago I read a KJVO article critical of the NKJV for capitalizing the word “Satan” but they did that for a far different reason that capitalizing words referring to God. Here they do it because our English rules specify capitalizing any word that is a “proper noun.” Since Satan is his name, English rules call for it to be capitalized. And, yes, sometimes I want to break that rule! But the NKJV is up-to-date on its English rules, using “who” in place of “which” after a person (“…the people who sat in darkness” not “the people which sat in darkness” in Matt 4:16 and hundreds of other examples) although there are some instances where they may not have considered the name as a proper name. For instance in Rev 13 the dragon (probably considered descriptive and not one of his proper names) is not capitalized but note that “Child” in Rev 12:5 is capitalized, not because it is a proper name but because “Child” refers to Christ.

[10] In one of the KJV Only publications the author severely chastises the NKJV with the accusation that they use the Latin Vulgate for their readings. (I have not been able to find where I read this but one day I hope to add the reference for you). They point to the Preface of the NKJV, specifically to the line which reads, “The Septuagint (Greek) Version of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate were consulted.” So why were the NKJV translators “consulting” the Latin Vulgate? Maybe to see where the KJV got its reading! But is this worse than the KJV’s translators who, according to Grady (Final Authority, p. 159) also had the Latin Vulgate “resting on the translators’ table…”, especially considering that these men were experts in the Vulgate and used numerous readings direct from it rather than the Hebrew and Greek?

[11] In a later article we will address the issue of the KJV’s use of dynamic equivalent renderings—and there are not just a few of them.

[12] The Hebrew word is el·o·heem, which is always plural but is translated as “God” 2,346 times. In other words this Hebrew word confirms to us that God is three in one.

[13] Easton, M. G. Easton’s Bible Dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1893.

[14] Printed from the web on March 27, 2008 at www.jesus-is-lord.co.za/Lifeline/can_our_names_be_blotted_out.htm.

[15] The entire article is available on the web at http://www.kjvonly.org/aisi/2006/aisi_9_8_06.htm