NKJV

type: translation abbreviation: NKJV full_name: New King James Version publisher: Thomas Nelson year_first: 1979 (NT) / 1982 (full Bible) year_current: 1982 textual_basis: Textus Receptus (NT) / Masoretic Text (OT), with footnotes showing critical-text and majority-text variants translation_philosophy: complete equivalence (formal equivalence) created: 2026-05-28 updated: 2026-05-28 tags: [translation, bible-translation, modern-english, textus-receptus, formal-equivalence, thomas-nelson, kjv-family] aliases: ["NKJV", "New King James Version", "New King James", "KJV updated"]

Quoted in

New King James Version (NKJV)

A modernization of the 1769 KJV that preserves the underlying Textus Receptus (NT) and Masoretic Text (OT) while updating archaic English, "thee," "thou," "dost," and "hath" give way to contemporary equivalents, word order is regularized, and punctuation is brought into line with modern conventions. The NKJV is the bridge translation for readers who want the KJV's textual tradition without its Elizabethan grammar. Its most distinctive feature, unusual among modern translations, is transparent footnoting of Textus Receptus, Majority Text, and critical-text variants at every point of divergence.

History

Thomas Nelson Publishers commissioned the project in 1975. The stated rationale was twofold: to make the KJV's literary and textual heritage accessible to modern English readers, and to provide a conservative alternative to translations that had shifted to the Alexandrian critical text, particularly the RSV (1952) and NIV (1973 NT; 1978 full). Arthur Farstad was appointed general editor. The New Testament was published in 1979; the full Bible in 1982. A team of 130 scholars worked across seven years. Thomas Nelson retained commercial rights; the NKJV has no scholarly committee ongoing, unlike the NIV's Committee on Bible Translation, so the text has not been revised since 1982.

The project was explicitly framed as preservation rather than revision. Farstad argued that the KJV's translators had used the best available texts and that subsequent Reformation-era use had confirmed the TR tradition. The NKJV does not make that claim as strongly as KJV-only advocates do, it includes variant footnotes rather than suppressing critical-text readings, but its textual choice aligns with the traditionalist camp.

Translators

General editor: Arthur Farstad, who also co-edited the New Testament in the Original Greek: Majority Text Version with Zane Hodges (1982/1985), Farstad was a committed Majority Text scholar, though the NKJV NT follows the Textus Receptus (specifically the 1894 Scrivener edition), not the Majority Text per se. The two traditions largely overlap but diverge at a few dozen points.

James Price served as executive editor for the Old Testament. Other notable contributors included Earl Radmacher (president of Western Conservative Baptist Seminary) and Robert Sloan. John MacArthur served as a consulting editor. The theological tradition of the team was broadly conservative evangelical, Baptist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, dispensationalist, and Reformed scholars participated. No single denomination or confessional tradition controlled the translation, though KJV-only advocates and mainline Protestants were both absent.

Textual Basis

OT: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (the standard critical edition of the Masoretic Text), same underlying Hebrew as the KJV and the majority of modern translations. Occasional Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls readings are noted in footnotes.
NT: Textus Receptus, specifically F.H.A. Scrivener's 1894 edition, which reconstructs the Greek text that underlies the 1611 KJV (and its subsequent revisions through 1769). This is not identical to the Majority Text; it includes some readings found only in late manuscripts used by Erasmus.
Variant footnotes: The NKJV marks three textual traditions at disputed points:
NU, the Nestle-Aland / United Bible Societies critical text (26th/27th ed. NA, 3rd/4th ed. UBS), the eclectic text used by ESV, NIV, NASB, and most modern translations.
M, the Majority Text (Robinson-Pierpont / Hodges-Farstad), representing the Byzantine manuscript tradition's reading where it differs from both TR and NU.
When no footnote appears, all three traditions agree.

This footnoting practice is genuinely rare. Most translations either follow the critical text silently or follow the TR silently. The NKJV is one of the few that lets readers see the full textual map at each contested location.

Translation Philosophy

Farstad coined the term "complete equivalence" to describe the NKJV's approach. In practice this is formal equivalence: each word in the source is represented in the target, syntax follows the original as closely as natural English allows, and idiomatic smoothing is minimized. It is slightly freer than the NASB95 at the word level but more literal than the NIV or CSB.

Two KJV conventions are retained deliberately:

Italics for words added to complete English sense but absent from the source text (e.g., the verb "to be" supplied in clauses where Greek/Hebrew has none). This is a transparency marker: readers can see what the translators added.
Capitalized pronouns for deity, He, Him, His, Who, Whose when referring to God or Christ. This is an interpretive decision not present in the source languages (Greek and Hebrew have no capitalization system). It aids devotional reading but can prejudge exegetically contested pronouns (e.g., Psalm 22 or Isaiah 53 passages where "he/his" may or may not be messianic is already decided for the reader).

Strengths

Preserves the KJV's textual tradition (TR/MT) in fully readable modern English, the clearest path for readers who value the received-text tradition but cannot process Elizabethan syntax.
Transparent three-tradition footnoting (NU / M / TR) is a genuine scholarly virtue missing from most pew Bibles. Informed readers can see exactly where the text differs and in which direction.
Formal equivalence makes it serviceable for word studies and doctrinal precision, especially for users in TR-tradition churches who cannot use ESV or NASB without switching textual bases.
Widely available in study-Bible formats: the MacArthur Study Bible, Spirit-Filled Life Bible (Jack Hayford), Jeremiah Study Bible, and others are published in NKJV, giving it strong institutional support.
Prose cadence retains much of the KJV's rhythmic quality, which matters for churches that want liturgical feel without the archaic vocabulary barrier.
Accepted across a broad conservative-evangelical coalition, Baptists, charismatics, Reformed, and Pentecostals all use it without denominational friction.

Weaknesses

Follows the Textus Receptus, which means it prints in the main text several passages that text critics regard as later additions with weak or no early manuscript support. These are not bracketed or marked as doubtful in the main text (only noted in footnotes), which can mislead readers unfamiliar with the textual situation.
The 1982 text has never been revised. As critical text scholarship, manuscript discoveries, and lexicography have advanced in the past four decades, the NKJV has not updated. The NASB was revised in 1995 and 2020; the NIV in 1984, 2011; the ESV in 2007 and 2011. The NKJV is the most static of the major modern translations.
"Complete equivalence" is Farstad's proprietary term, not a widely recognized translation theory category. In practice the NKJV is formal equivalence, the label suggests more rigor than the distinction warrants and can confuse readers comparing translation philosophies.
Pronoun capitalization for deity is interpretively loaded. Where Hebrew or Greek pronouns are exegetically ambiguous, the NKJV's capitalization quietly resolves the ambiguity without signaling to the reader that a choice was made.
KJV-only advocates (e.g., D.A. Waite, Peter Ruckman's school) reject the NKJV as a corruption of the 1611 text because it departs from the KJV's exact wording in thousands of places, and because its variant footnotes implicitly legitimize the critical text. The NKJV thus satisfies neither the KJV-only camp nor readers who prefer critical-text translations, it sits in a middle ground that can feel marginalized from both sides.
Some archaisms survive the modernization pass, particularly in poetic books and Revelation, making the translation uneven in register compared to the ESV or CSB.

Notable / Problematic Verses

Several passages appear in the NKJV main text on the strength of the Textus Receptus but are absent from or bracketed in critical-text translations. The NKJV marks them with footnotes but does not flag them in the main text body itself.

1 John 5:7 (Comma Johanneum), "For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." The NKJV prints this in the main text. The Comma is absent from all Greek manuscripts before the 15th century and appears first in Latin. The NU footnote acknowledges the critical text omits it. This is the most debated single verse in the NKJV's TR inheritance.
Acts 8:37, Philip's question "Do you believe with all your heart?" and the Ethiopian's confessional reply are present in NKJV main text. Absent from NU text; found in late Western manuscripts and early church fathers' quotations, but not in the oldest Greek witnesses. The verse is a natural harmonizing expansion.
Mark 16:9-20 (longer ending), Printed in full without brackets. A footnote notes the NU omission and marks the text, but the casual reader encounters resurrection appearances and the Great Commission snake-handling passage as canonical without visual warning.
John 7:53-8:11 (pericope adulterae), The woman caught in adultery, including "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone," appears without brackets. A footnote notes the NU situation. The pericope is absent from the oldest manuscripts and was a known scribal insertion by Jerome's time.
1 Timothy 3:16, NKJV reads "God was manifest in the flesh" (TR: θεός). The NU text reads "He who was manifest in the flesh" (ὅς, a relative pronoun, not θεός). This is a textually and theologically significant difference: the TR reading directly asserts God's incarnation; the NU reading is a participial clause. The manuscript evidence is divided; most textual critics favor ὅς.
Revelation 22:14, NKJV: "Blessed are those who do His commandments." NU text: "Blessed are those who wash their robes." The TR reading here is found in later manuscripts; "wash their robes" has better early support and fits the book's baptismal imagery.
Romans 8:1, NKJV includes the longer reading, "who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit," as part of the main text. This phrase repeats verbatim from verse 4 and is absent from the oldest manuscripts; it appears to have been copied in by scribes harmonizing the verse with its context. The NU text ends at "in Christ Jesus."
Acts 9:5-6, The TR and NKJV include a longer Damascus road exchange, including "It is hard for you to kick against the goads" and Saul's asking "Lord, what do You want me to do?" This longer reading is absent from the oldest Greek manuscripts of Acts 9 (though a parallel version appears in Acts 26:14); it may have been harmonized into Acts 9 from later tradition.

In each case the NKJV's footnoting is honest, the NU and sometimes M variants are noted. The issue is that main-text placement signals a level of textual confidence these passages do not have.

Notable Users and Influence

The NKJV is most heavily used in conservative Baptist and Pentecostal/charismatic churches. John MacArthur's Grace Community Church and Grace to You ministry publish and teach from the NKJV; the MacArthur Study Bible (Thomas Nelson) is one of the most widely distributed study Bibles in evangelical circles and is keyed to the NKJV text. Jack Hayford's Spirit-Filled Life Bible brought it into charismatic use. The Jeremiah Study Bible (David Jeremiah) is also NKJV.

In terms of market share, the NKJV sits clearly below the NIV and ESV in contemporary evangelical usage but remains ahead of the NASB and well ahead of the NRSV in conservative church contexts. It benefits from being the only major modern English translation to combine contemporary readability with TR/Majority Text fidelity, which gives it a captured audience among TR-tradition churches that have moved away from 1611 KJV but will not adopt a critical-text translation.