Why Dumb Down the Bible? 12 Objections to Authorized
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 лип 2024
- Authorized Ch 6 • I have heard many objections to the argument in my book. But I have answers.
0:00 Intro
0:23 #1 Why dumb down the Bible? Would you translate Shakespeare?
3:00 #2 The KJV sounds like the word of God, unlike the modern versions.
5:07 #3 Didn’t the KJV translators choose timeless language on purpose?
6:55 #4 Doesn’t the KJV preserve the important distinction between singular and plural second-person pronouns ("thee" vs. "ye")?
8:55 #5 Sure the English language has changed: it has gotten worse.
11:29 #6 Today’s Bible translations drop the important practice of including italics.
13:57 #7 The KJV is easier to memorize than modern versions.
14:43 #8 The KJV is a faithful, literal translation; other versions are more like paraphrases.
16:57 #9 The modern versions are based on corrupt Greek and Hebrew texts.
17:30 #10 The modern versions are copyrighted. They exist only for money.
19:17 #11 You are pushing modern-version onlyism, or only-not-KJV-ism.
21:59 #12 Methinks thou dost protest too much. The problem isn’t really that bad. You make it sound like the whole KJV is unreadable.
🎁 Help me end Bible translation tribalism, one plow boy at a time:
✅ / mlward
✅ buymeacoffee.com/mlward
📖 Check out my book, Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible:
amzn.to/2r27Boz
🎥 Watch my Fifty False Friends in the KJV series:
• 50 False Friends in th...
👏 Many, many thanks to the Patreon supporters who make my work possible!
Name, James Duly, Robert Gifford, Lanny M Faulkner, Lucas Key, Dave Thawley, William McAuliff, Razgriz, James Goering, Eric Couture, Martyn Chamberlin, Edward Woods, Thomas Balzamo, Brent M Zenthoefer, Tyler Rolfe, Ruth Lammert, Gregory Nelson Chase, Ron Arduser, Caleb Farris, Dale Buchanan, Jess English, Aaron Spence, Orlando Vergel Jr., John Day, Joshua Bennett, K.Q.E.D., Brent Karding, Kofi Adu-Boahen, Steve McDowell, Kimberly Miller, A.A., James Allman, Steven McDougal, Henry Jordan, Nathan Howard, Rich Weatherly, Joshua Witt, Wade Huber, M.L., Brittany Fisher, Tim Gresham, Lucas Shannon, Easy_Peasy , Caleb Richardson, Jeremy Steinhart, Steve Groom, jac, Todd Bryant, Corey Henley, Jason Sykes, Larry Castle, Luke Burgess, Joel, Joshua Bolch, Kevin Moses, Tyler Harrison, Bryon Self, Angela Ruckman, Nathan N, Gen_Lee_Accepted , Bryan Wilson, David Peterson, Eric Mossman, Jeremiah Mays, Caleb Dugan, Donna Ward, DavidJamie Saxon, Omar Schrock, Philip Morgan, Brad Dixon, James D Leeper, M.A., Nate Patterson, Dennis Kendall, Michelle Lewis, Lewis Kiger, Dustin Burlet, Michael Butera, Reid Ferguson, Josiah R. Dennis, Miguel Lopez, CRB, D.R., Dean C Brown, Kalah Gonzalez, MICHAEL L DUNAVANT, Jonathon Clemens, Travis Manhart, Jess Mainous, Brownfell, Leah Uerkwitz, Joshua Barzon, Benjamin Randolph, Andrew Engelhart, Mark Sarhan, Rachel Schoenberger
I understand.. thanks for the tip.. again I apologize.. if my words seemed harsh.. bible translations.. and trying to understand what God really said is one of my passions.. I need to pray to have more.. passion and tolerance.....
May the Lord fill us all with his Spirit so that love, joy, peace, gentleness, faithfulness, and goodness come out of our mouths (and keyboards!) all the time!
brother I cannot thank God enough for you and the insight you provide....especially us in third world countries where English is a second and sometimes a 3rd language and yet we have KJV as the only option. this has raised emaciated Christians, who just love the stylistic old language, but understand nothing, and no wonder many African pastors are teaching confounded doctrines that can make one's theological head spin.....and with the attack on the NIV which is the most marketed bible in Africa.....we are in serious trouble.....how I wish the ESV could really push its translation in Africa....we would be better for it.....God bless you my brother...!
That's sad. =( I'm praying now! I would rather see the NIV predominate in Africa than the KJV.
It irks me when people say "well anyone can understand the KJV. I've been reading it for over 20 years and can understand it." Just because someone is familiar with the KJV and can understand it, that doesn't mean a baby Christian will.
Right! And just because they understand it doesn't mean they do… =|
You are a badly needed breath of fresh air. Your suggestion to read the WHOLE translation is what is so sadly lacking among professing Christians today. So few people have read the WHOLE bible.
Many thanks! I'll never forget when I first read the NT. It was so amazing as a teenager (16-17) to see that all the stories and discourses and memory verses I'd encountered in totally separate silos came in an order and fit into contexts.
I am, of course, late-to-the-party of watching this video, but Mark, this was so well explained! Thank you. I totally agree. I like how you mentioned in another video that translations are complements of each other.
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you for addressing these concerns! Through yourself, and others like you, I've begun to learn so much more about the Bible through other translations. My love for the KJV runs deep, but that closing phrase hit me hard "An accurate Bible that isn't readable isn't really accurate because it didn't get God's Words into your language." That's quite the profound statement, though I may substitute "translation" for "Bible," were I to offer a nit-picky piece of advice.
You’re right, Shelby. Future viewers: hear what he says in what I said!
before you keep going on that line of logic.. read the original manuscripts in Greek or Hebrew.. then see how you feel.... KJV is the closest to these... and .. amyone who states the KJV is not readable.. either is Not trying very hard.. or just cannot read.....So what if one has to use a dictionary now and then or bible helps or commentaries.. to understand a verse.. many bibles have cross references study notes.. or alternative words in margins.. at least this way.. one does not have to throw out the baby with the bath water...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I get where you're coming from, however not every bible reader wants to stop every 5 minutes to look up Greek and Hebrew original manuscripts. We just want to read the bible! I think you're being rather judgmental to suggest that ". amyone who states the KJV is not readable.. either is Not trying very hard.. or just cannot read..." is a little harsh. Your typo corrected: anyone.
Oh! How you have helped me with this conundrum. The mind can be spun in this issue.
Thank you.
Happy to help!
@@markwardonwords How would you rate NIV 2011 as reader's/devotion Bible as compared to NLT?
I’m new to your channel, and I love the subject matter of your videos. Thank you for helping us all learn more about God’s word.
You are very welcome! There are many, many more videos to enjoy! All free!
After about a decade of agonizing over and researching this issue-KJV vs modern translations; TR/Byzantine manuscripts vs Alexandrian manuscripts-this video, including the series of others you’ve made, are some of the best I have ever seen. Thank you for so clearly and graciously addressing the many issues and arguments surrounding this ‘debate.’ May God continue to bless you in your work for the Kingdom!
This is encouraging, Marshal. I pray for the Lord to give you mercy and wisdom as you seek him for years to come.
I should have said: please let me know if there's any way I can help you.
@@markwardonwordsI appreciate your time and concern in presenting your points and come across sincerely. Thank you. In this short video, you gloss over the CT vs RT issue. I never knew this issue existed because it is misrepresented commonly and no one, including my pastors did not know about it. Although I may agree with many of your points, I have found numerous problems/errors I had struggled with were resolved when I finally understood the difference and saw the differences in the greek versions. I gave up my NIV and use the KJV now. I encourage you to not read about this topic from a CT guy's perspective, but get the explanation from a real RT proponent. I think this issue is more important to any kjv reader than the topics you bring up as it it more foundational. I'd rather struggle with archaic words than not have God's words. Or maybe you have researched the problem... either way, thank you for your care are putting your thoughts and wisdom down on paper and in video form.
Corey, thank you for watching-and for writing! I am all too aware of the CT vs TR issue. I've written on it at some length on the academic level and a little on the popular level. I've read both sides over many years (even literally two days ago). I simply don't believe that the Bible tells us clearly how to do textual criticism; good men can differ over it. But it does tell us clearly in 1 Cor 14 that edification requires intelligibility. Vernacular translation is therefore the issue I'd prefer to discuss. In my book I use my own godly professor Randy Leedy's arguments from this article to explain why I shouldn't have to talk about the TR: blog.logos.com/2016/12/differences-biblical-manuscripts-scare-christians/
My work in Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible and on this channel is officially neutral on textual criticism. Someone can prefer the TR and still agree wholeheartedly with my case. The NKJV and MEV use the TR and yet also use contemporary English. Thanks again for watching and for writing clearly and honestly.
This was excellent. It helped me grasp the reasons for reading other versions.
Praise God!
Greaaaat video brother! Shared it with my brethren! Thank you Mark!
Awesome! Thank you!
God bless you, Mark. God has chosen you for a big and difficult task. But if you are victorious, you will be bringing together the Body of Christ together in a time when it’s being divided. Your victory will be for the understanding of the Word and the promotion of the Gospel. …. praying for you and your ministry. (Pardon my poor English…lol)
Many thanks for these exceptionally kind words.
Mark, thank you so much for your videos concerning the KJV. I really enjoy your teaching--and your humor :)
That's very encouraging-thank you for writing!
Wisdom, clarity and humility. Great presentation. You’re really doing valuable work here.
Thank you for the kind words!
Well done! I enjoyed your book and really enjoyed this video! Very good points. Very thought provoking.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Can you make your book in audio CD book please, I read your book but want this to listen in my car..
Scripture should be understandable while still being true to the original meaning. I like using different versions of the bible-- more formal for study, more dynamic for just reading. But using both formal and dynamic versions is such a good thing to really understand.
Excellent! Fully agreed!
On the copyright thing, whenever a KJV-Onlyist brings that up to me, my response to him or her is almost always "Move to the UK and attempt to publish a KJV without getting sued. Good luck."
Right!
Wish I could give this 2 thumbs up!!
I think you just did! ;)
Another great video! Love the voice acting!!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Mark, thank you for these videos.
👍👍👍👍👍
My pleasure, brother.
Love your passion for truth! and your desire to teach it!
May the Lord help us both to have that passion the rest of our lives!
@@markwardonwords I have a lot of passion.. I try to study the bible 3 to 4 hours a day,, and this has taught me the KJV is the most reliable and truest.. I have also started teaching myself some Greek and Hebrew.. since I'm retired... this how I have found time to de bunk any anti KJV talkers... I am sorry to disagree with your view about updating the KJV.. but most translations destroy it they.don't update it....check out these passages..
Acts 17:22
Romans 12:1
Job 4:17
Revelation 4:11.. and compare just for starters to see what I am getting at..... and some versions don't even include "I am the Alpha and the Omega" opener of Revelation 1:8....
but I will not get into all the study I have done regarding omitted verses from various translations.. some contain footnotes at the bottom.. but does this validate translators omitting. the verses from the lines of bible text?...
Thank you, Mark. God bless and thank you for emphasizing the need to eliminate "dead words and false friends." Intelligibility trumps tradition at all times. Language change has brought the need for modern translations to a point of necessity.
Thank you!
It’s the British acting establishment that keep Shakespeare going and preserve the language. There would be no theatre 🎭 in my country without him 😂🤣
And good for them! Shakespeare deserves his reputation. Who am I to disagree? I'd just like to experience his plays (I've watched dozens and been in two, sort of) without having to constantly scratch my head.
Just reading the description, and the first objection you answer is "Would you translate Shakespeare." Honestly, yes, and I do. I used No Fear Shakespeare during my high school years and I have never regretted it.
Right! Agreed!
"I kiddeth not" )5:59) is the sort of thing you get when you add 'eth' to a verb in hopes of sounding classical. That only works, however, in the third person present.
Now that one I did know. =) I got permission from UA-cam to include a little humor and wordplay in this videos!
Awesome video. I agree 100% and admit now, after listening to your false freiends that I have not understood as well as I'd presumed. The LSB has made bible reading not only more enjoyable than the KJV, which I'd never thought possible, but has made me understand so much more of God's word, every single day!
Nice work, Ploughboy, or are you Plowboy.....the latter I see.
1 Corinthians 14:26
What is then, brothers? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has a translation. Let all things be done for edification. (LSB)
Let all things be done for edification! Yes!
Mark, you are well informed and I appreciate your love for the readability and understandability of the Bible. You have said many things that are worth seriously considering. You posed the question, “How are people supposed to look up words they don’t even realize they’re misunderstanding?” Can’t these words be footnoted in a KJV study Bible? It would seem to be the best way to preserve the version one prefers and loves rather than feeling persuaded to switch to an updated translation. Additionally, dictionaries are ways in which we learn the richer meanings of words. Lastly, reliable commentaries are abundant online. These are a few suggestions that are easily available to the plowboy. I think it’s inaccurate for a KJVO to claim translations are “dumbing down”. However, learning to study the KJV will certainly help one “brighten up” their understanding and history of the English language, of which I believe has helped you to become a better scholar in Biblical languages. I will admit, I believe there are better, and more reasonable, arguments for using the KJV than the ones traditionally supplied by the IFB. I hope we cover some of those together. 👌
Jeremy, what a gracious comment! It's been nice to "meet" you in recent weeks, and I do hope we can cover some of those arguments together, perhaps in person once that is allowed in our state!
I'm actually in substantial agreement with you here: I'm always happy to see someone improving their knowledge of historical English, or of gaining facility in the Elizabethan English of the KJV. I also think that there is at least one well made edition of the KJV that glosses a lot of my "false friends" in the margins-the Trinitarian Bible Society Westminster Reference Bible. I'm not a huge fan of its typography (I prefer single-column and [especially] paragraphed text), but it's a serious and classy effort, and those notes are good.
My problem is-and I'll cover this in a final wrap-up video to my Fifty False Friends series-that in all my years… Wait a minute. Let me ask you, who've been in KJV circles longer than I: how many people have you ever seen carrying an edition of the KJV that includes glosses for my "false friends"? Back when I was in a KJV-Only church, I don't recall seeing a single one, though I admit I didn't check every Bible! What I have always seen, and seen to this day in my own church, is the classic Oxford KJV edition with double columns, where every verse is a paragraph and no glosses are in the margin.
In other words, the KJV study edition you propose could really help, but I don't see hardly anyone *doing* it. I don't see pastors promoting it. I don't see laypeople asking for it. But I haven't been in KJV-Only circles in 23 years-have things changed?
@@markwardonwords I think more KJV churches would use a KJV that include glosses if they were available and affordable for their pew edition. This would be a good way to help those churches who prefer the KJV rather than try to move them away from it. Do you think this is a worthy project?
@Jeremy Scott DeSpain, I somehow missed this comment till now… I think that would indeed be a worthy project! I was very nearly contracted to produce a Bible like this.
Thanks for this video I learned a lot from it particularly those who criticize your book.Do you know whether the KJV 1769 edition is copyrighted if it is who owns the copyright?I heard a recorded lecture that the Authorized King James Version is not copyrighted,why will you subject the Word of God to copyright I just can recall the name of the speaker.Do you agree with this statement or not?Thanks in advance for your response.
I've dealt with this in some detail here: byfaithweunderstand.com/2019/07/29/answering-a-few-more-objections-to-authorized-part-1-the-modern-versions-are-copyrighted-theyre-in-it-for-the-money/
Thanks Pastor Mark for this very important information about the KJV.So the truth is the Authorized Version is copyrighted after all,which means the lecturer that I heard was lying or ignorant about the KJV being copyrighted or just a trick to prove a point against using the modern Bible translation.
The word משׁבעתי (at 7:40) actually means "my oath" with the FPP pronominal suffix yod.
Oops! Forgot to remove the pronominal suffix! Badi (= "my bad").
Hello Mark Ward. I have a question on Psalm 10:5. I hope you could help me understand this.
My friend, I've hit the place where I just can't answer all comments. I refer you to bestcommentaries.com and to your closest theological library! I WISH I could dig into every question! I have a TON of Psalms commentaries open in Logos right this minute as I work on another Psalm.
@@markwardonwords Thank you. I understand. I appreciate your help. Talk to you soon on UA-cam world.
I’m nearly 67 years old and like many my age grew up with the KJV, but when I first read a ‘modern’ translation, like the NIV 1984 etc it was as if a light had been turned on.
As long lasting as the KJV may be I found it not as enlightening as a modern vernacular version.
Personally I use the ESV as my current reading/study bible, but I also use the NASB, NKJV, CSB and NIV 1984 during study with reference to the KJV as a comparison.
Well said
Thank you!
Thank you.
You're welcome!
Would you recommend "the best" book written on the history of the English Bible? Thanks.
Hmm. Probably The Bible in English by David Daniel. www.amazon.com/dp/0300099304?tag=3755-20
@@markwardonwords I will check it out. Thank you.
There are sections of the Hebrew Old Testament that are deliberately positively crude and offensive - precisely because they were SUPPOSED to be crude and offensive to get the meaning and tone across. Sanitised versions eliminate that underly subtext.
Is it words that we give so much wait that it's transformation, mixest with faith that the God gives should traisform all that aply it to change us. Yes Words used to move me from glory to glory.
The plural thing can be easily solved by just rendering those areas as "you people," "you guys," or "you all." The KJV-Only argument for all the thous, yous, etc is completely moot.
It at least isn't worth the cost of using unfamiliar, archaic forms.
Sometimes an example from Arnold from Different Strokes is in line for false friends and unintelligible phrases
Watcha talkin bout Willis?
Right!
it requires effort to learn hebrew, greek, 1611 english, etc. Current students do use modern translations of shakespeare aside from annotated shakespeare. I already know plenty of 1611 english by reading all of the shakespeare plays. I could learn more 1611 english by reading annotated plays by the contemporaries of shakespeare such as christopher marlowe, ben jonson, robert greene, etc., if I live long enough.
The thing about those KJV inflected pronouns and verbs; which I love, is that most KJV readers don't know what they really mean. For example, most don't know that KJV's "you" is generally plural. Most don't know the difference between the nominative (thou) and objective (thee) cases. Quite frankly, I didn't know or appreciate this for the majority of my 30+ year KJV reading "career" until I learned German.
Agreed. I confess to being pretty weary of hearing, "We've GOT to stick with the KJV because of its second-person pronouns!" I have answered this argument with some detail, and I've never heard a single response that I can think of.
Brother Mark Ward I agree language should be used by common man's langauge for the bible
Right!
00:23 1.Why dumb down the Bible? Would you translate Shakespeare?
03:01 2.The KJV sounds like the word of God, unlike the modern versions.
05:08 3.Didn’t the KJV translators choose timeless language on purpose?
06:55 4.Doesn’t the KJV preserve the important distinction between singular and plural second-person pronouns ("thee" vs. "ye")?
08:56 5.Sure the English language has changed: it has gotten worse.
11:30 6.Today’s Bible translations drop the important practice of including italics.
14:00
7.The KJV is easier to memorize than modern versions.
14:43 8.The KJV is a faithful, literal translation; other versions are more like paraphrases.
17:00 9.The modern versions are based on corrupt Greek and Hebrew texts.
17:30 10. The modern versions are copyrighted. They exist only for money.
19:18 11. You are pushing modern-version onlyism, or only-not-KJV-ism.
22:00 12. Methinks thou dost protest too much. The problem isn’t really that bad. You make it sound like the whole KJV is unreadable.
Hey, thanks! Cool! I really appreciate this.
The modern versions are copyrighted because a worker is deserving of their wages and the copyright expires after 100 years. Furthermore the word ye and thee can be singular and plural. For example singular to Nicodemus Ye (you) must be born again. To thee (you) O Lord l give thee (you) praise. Come unto me all ye (you) plural due to the word all. Furthermore there are other translations such as the Geneva bible 1561 and ASV 1901 that follow the precise trend of the KJV. Finally the KJV translators themselves declared it was not their intention to make a new translation but to make a good translation better. The KJV translators said the eight translations before theirs were all noble translations and the word of God.
(2 Samuel 23:2) "The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue." (Psalms 56:10) "In God will I praise his word: in the LORD will I praise his word." (Psalms 138:2) "I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name."
I believe all of those verses! Amen!
For those that don’t believe that one can love the KJV and not be KjV-Only, just look at the KJV translators.
Right!
Is there a modern translation that comes from textus receptus like KJB?....
Absolutely! The NKJV and MEV both come from the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the KJV.
It is as if 11 and 12 were made for me. You said a number of things in this video that resonate with me and should get more press, but first, my protest:
I made the argument #11 in a comment on another one of your videos. You answered in a way satisfactory to me so I did not persist. But if this is something you get frequently, can you blame people for thinking it? You could be more judicious, for example, in the naming of "false friends". With a name like that, your target audience of KJVO readers will go into "protect mode" and be less receptive at best and hostile at worst. All the insistence in the world about how much you love the KJV appears to your intended viewers as a smoke screen for a veiled attack when words like "false friends" are employed. Obviously it is a little too late to rebrand now, so I do not have any helpful suggestions on how to not alienate the subjects of your mission field, but I hope this helps explain why you have to fight as hard as you do to get any KJVO people to even look at them much less admit that they didn't know.
I'll write a separate comment for 12 assuming you don't block me (if UA-cam has that function) 😂
EDIT
Judas was Jesus' false friend. The mental imagry of a bloody betrayal is much worse than a semantic shift.
Second edit pertaining to objection 11: (I am definitely getting blocked😂)
20:50 - If you don't think the only [or] main bible version of a church should be the KJV then don't publish your FF study. It will be extremely useful tool that will allow people to understand their KJV bible correctly and therefore keep it.
If a word is unintelligable then it needs to be addressed and church is the perfect place to do it. FF should be addressed as they appear in the text of any sermon.
21:14 - I agree. Since I hold my position of KJVO as a matter of personal conviction, I would not push it on anyone else as dogma any more than I would any other personal conviction.
21:20 - Another good example of Acts 15v10 is trying to facilitate a bible study where there are multiple translations represented and thats all the people want to talk about.
21:59 - Blue Letter Bible is a great resource. Free and accessible to most of the world (not just the English speaking world) the BLB has helped me find many FF before I had ever even heard the term. I am no scholar. I did not attend bible college, I cannot read Greek or Hebrew. I think I qualify as a plowboy.
I appreciate this.
Too late to rebrand, yes!
If a given church uses my forthcoming book as a means of keeping the KJV, but they do so by successfully teaching their people "how to fish" as I do in the book, I won't be too disappointed! The point is reading Scripture with understanding, not (necessarily) reading a modern version.
Blue Letter Bible is indeed a great resource!
17th century English is very different than modern English languages change our language has changed even in the past 10 years
Right!
Plural "you"....
Should be translated as "Y'all " problem solved.
Y'all are welcome , Yankees.
That's it! =)
Or yintz Pittsburg slang
Or you’s guys
"This calls for Spirit-filled wisdom." - Mark Ward
This is the best thing you said in the entire video.
A big part of christian liberty is allowing each Spirit-filled believer to be Spirit led independent of what we think is best for them.
To all christians engaged in version debates: Has it ever occurred to you to pray about which version God want's you to read? And if God directs you, can you actually follow his direction while being humble enough to acknowledge that God may not direct every believer exactly the same in every aspect of their lives?
Mark, I clearly differ with you on objection 12. I do not think English has changed enough to warrant the discarding of the KJV. This is the debate you want to have, but should we be having it? If every believer is indwelt by the Spirit of God and commanded to be Spirit led, isn't it up to each individual member of the body of Christ to honor Christ in the decision of which version to accept/reject? If so then you have answered your own objection by calling for Spirit-filled wisdom.
I am not sure we can or should legislate this.
Brother, I'm enjoying talking with you. You are very different from what I often receive.
Here's the thing: I *do* eagerly give individual soul liberty to English speakers to read the KJV. But I can't in good conscience give such liberty to them to a) build that preference into a doctrine and use it to separate from (and often condemn) other Christians; or b) use the KJV in the pulpit with no plans for change. I believe 1 Cor 14 speaks to the latter issue, and Gal 5:19-20 and other passages speak to the division caused by false doctrine. If all I were dealing with was a bunch of people who preferred to read the KJV individually but had zero problem with other believers reading other translations-well, I wouldn't be here, and you wouldn't even care enough to comment on my videos. =) You know it's a LOT more serious than that with a lot of Christians. I've seen KJV-Onlyists disown their children over the latter's use of modern versions. I've been told dozens or even hundreds of times that I'm not saved because I use modern versions. The problem is big. The problem is not a bunch of individuals who have a personal preference; the problem is a divisive and false doctrine that has infected many of Christ's local churches.
@@markwardonwords I appreciate the courteous interaction in spite of our differences. Disowning and assigning to hell are terrible and hopefully you do not think that I support either. As I see more of your content we will doubtless talk again. I pray for continued grace for and from each of us.
Pastor Mark,
As you can see, I am making my way through your videos. Have you ever read the Webster Bible? If not, I would be happy to send you a copy. I believe that Noah Webster did what you propose. If you would like a copy, please let me know. Your argument is very persuasive, and it holds merit, yet I have gotten through those issues by studying the Hebrew and Greek languages. If a word is hard to comprehend, I always go to the Hebrew or Greek for understanding. I am not KJVO, but I will always be KJV 1st. My issue is with the manuscript known as Codex Sinaiaticus. It is an absolute mess! If you have examined it, you know that it is so, yet my issues go deeper than just the many textual emmendations. The fact that the manuscript was written in a monastery, protected by Islam for over 1,000 years is earth shaking for me. I have ministered to Muslims for more than 30 years. They are hell bent on proving that our Bible was tampered with. I always tell them that it was, and i show them how it was Islam that perverted it.
Thank you for the work you do on these videos. I know first hand that it is not easy. Have a blessed day, in Jesus name!
Pastor Brett, the New King James Version and the Modern English Version both use the same underlying Hebrew and Greek texts as the King James. And they translate those texts into fully intelligible contemporary English, which means they meet the principle of 1 Corinthians 14, edification requires intelligibility. I recommend the NKJV and MEV to you.
I have heard of Noah Webster's Bible. Webster said two centuries ago what I'm saying today:
"Some words [in the KJV] have fallen into disuse; and the signification of others, in current popular use, is not the same now as it was when they were introduced into the version. The effect of these changes is, that some words are not understood by common readers, who have no access to commentaries, and who will always compose a great proportion of readers; while other words, being now used in a sense different from that which they had when the translation was made, present a wrong signification or false ideas."
If you get by in the KJV by studying the Hebrew and Greek, more power to you, brother! I strongly encourage you to continue! Studying those languages wasn't quite enough for me; I still have had to discover places where I didn't realize I was misunderstanding the English of the KJV-because of precisely the factors Webster mentions.
Here is one more comment for this video since it is in the title. It is more of an anecdote, but it is adequate to illustrate my point.
My church is KJVO. It isn't an IN YOUR FACE kind of stance and it isn't in the church name or on the church sign, but it is in the constitution/by laws that speakers must use a KJV. There are usually never any issues regarding translations. About a month ago we allowed friends of ours who are considered "of like faith" to use our church for an all-night lock-in for the youth group. Several churches were represented and there was adequate supervision so what could go wrong?
The person who setup this event invited a guest speaker who was a youth pastor from a local assembly. I do not know this pastor and never visited his church, but when he spoke he told the kids that he would be using The Message in order to "dumb it down to their level" (his own words). It grieved me that this happened. I wish I had been there to help in the confusion that followed. Our kids got their first taste of the KJVO debate from someone who was hostile to the KJV. This event alone may have influenced my decision to search this out and eventually begin my own defense. The children who grow up in church and are taught to read the bible do not need to be caught up in debate. They just need to be shown a true faith that believes the bible. From my KJVO perspective this is a fight I did not start. We were here first. They brought the fight to us. But we are in it now. Hopefully without the trademark ignorance and arrogance that has historically characterized both sides of the debate.
One of the first comments I made on any of your videos included my opinion of Nathan Cravatt's disregard for the KJVOist standands. I feel in a similar way that our church was disregarded in the smearing of the bible (in front of a bunch of kids no less). This is not even a doctrinal issue, it is a standard. A group of like-minded believers agreed to a single standard for the sake of unity and made a place for people to attend who like the KJV. We do not condemn others who don't agree with our standand because it is OUR standard. We obviously think our standard is better, but we also expect others to think their standand is better. We can extend christian liberty as long as they do the same. Clowning the other side is not Christian.
I agree that what that man did was rude and uncalled for. And dumb!
But KJV folks weren't here first. ;) The principle we're all supposed to agree on was here first: the principle of the value of vernacular translation for the laity. In fact, even under your own method of analysis, the KJV wasn't here first. It was Tyndale or the Matthew Bible.
@@markwardonwords Sorry for being unclear.... I do not think the KJV was first English bible. "We were here first" was intended to reflect the mindset of the kids in our church who have only read KJV and saw it attacked.
For the record, we do understand the concept of FF and do faithfully teach proper modern understanding to the best of our ability as the Lord leads.
sorry bit the sentence in line 6 should read DIDN"t USE.. not DID USE
Got it!
Why don't u ever hear anyone say Niv. Only ism. Or rsv. Only ism or any other translation it's always the kjv that is attacked, that should tell u something I just don't understand why people have such a hard time believing that God could perfectly preserve his word he says he puts it above his own name if u can't trust him to preserve his word how can you trust him to save you !
If can't understand KJV you are lacking UNCTION
The KJV is an excellent translation-but if you're going to read it exclusively, you need to understand that it was translated into a form of English no one quite speaks or writes anymore. So there are going to be some places where you think you understand but, because of language change, you're going to miss the intent of the KJV translators. For help discerning when this is the case, I encourage you to check out my "Fifty False Friends in the KJV" series on UA-cam for help reading the KJV! ua-cam.com/play/PLq1Aq0ucgkPCtHJ5pwhrU1pjMsUr9F2rc.html
I do apologize if I come across sounding mean... but I have a passion.. for the word of God.. and too many times.. have I sat under and had sermons preached to me by those wishing Not to step on toes.. which I feel many modern translations.. try NOT to do.. so in modern translations.. there are such things as gender neutrality added..AND the words abomination fornication.. effeminate.. etc.. are removed because we try NOT to offend certain "communities".. I have people say ....well we have to love everyone...... which is true.. but I believe that this LOVE.. does not mean openly allowing what God calls sin.. to roam in our midst.. un preached against.. at the well Jesus loved the woman in John chapter 4.. but he did speak to her about her lifestyle...verse 18 "For thou hast has five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband... why did Jesus even mention this to her?.. was he trying to prove He knew all things?.. or was he reminding her of the sin of being with a man ( as wife to husband) without the sanctity of marriage..?... what I see in modern translations.. softer words or even words that do not have the same impact or connotation are used.. and THAT is what i am against.....
My friend, I appreciate your humility in that first line. I understand!
I encourage you to consider that the people who translated all the modern evangelical English versions are themselves opposed to same-sex sexual acts and desire. Charity means looking for ways to interpret their actions without maximum suspicion. Some of the translators of the NIV are egalitarian, and I am not. But some are complementarians like me. If you actually read what Doug Moo of the NIV says about his work, you may find that he's more reasonable than you imagined. Here's a short piece he wrote: drops.forwarddesigner.net/W5Dw5F
At the very least, Christian love-Jesus' Golden Rule-demands that you represent your evangelical brothers in words they would agree with, after having listened to their reasons for their actions.
(1 Peter 1:25) "But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." This verse means that the very words written in that day have by Gods' hand / Holy Spirit been perfectly translated into English and endure to this day. I accept that truth and believe the words. We are commanded to "keep His words". (Proverbs 7:1) "My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee." Satan told Eve to doubt the words of GOD. you do the same.
I decline to answer this comment.
(Romans 3:4) "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged." You diminish and doubt Gods' Words
My friend, I do not. You are fully equating God's words with a translation of his words. You are doing what the KJV translators were careful not to do.
@@markwardonwordstranslation is going from one condition to another. God has taken Hebrew, to Greek, to Latin to English. Its the same seed, same line of life from language to language. Did you know there is a Hebrew word within the English word study?
Not relying on the Greek or Hebrew we can see other liberalities taken by translators.. such as in the case of 1 Corinthians.. 1:18... the KJV .. which are saved...".. other translations .."who are being saved..".. let me ask you something.. if a person has accepted Jesus..or has trusted in Him as their savior are they saved ? or.. being saved?.. is salvation a process.. ?.. if so how do we know we wll be saved at the time we leave this earth?.. I believe sanctification or growing in love and knowledge of Christ is progressive.. but Not our salvation... and while I am preaching a little...WHY ARE WE HERE.. read Rev.. 4:11... the KJV tells me for God's pleasure we are and were created..... that is pretty much the only translation that will tell you that.. most just state by His will we were and are created which is fine I guess... they tell us.. HOW.. but the KJV tells us WHY.. and that is Mankind's eternally question.. ...I feel ...part of our progressive sanctification should be trying to find out the why of things.. the How of things.. I trust in God in....
My friend, again I have to encourage you not to answer a matter before you hear it. Do you know why evangelical Protestant Bible scholars would translate 1 Cor 1:18 this way? Not a single one of them is Roman Catholic; they all reject Roman Catholic theology. So why would they translate the Greek here as "being saved"? Do you know?
Mark, I’m a Canadian, living in Ontario , where most of the population live. I object to your characterization of Canadians. I’ve lived here all my life I never heard Canadians talk that way. I’ve said this in another comment and I’ll make it again your tar brushing of people is false. The Bible says “One side of the story seems right until you hear the other half”. I accepted Chrst at the age of 10, now I am 64 years old. It was John 3:16 KJV that convicted me of my sin and need of a savour , I had no problem understanding it. I was handed the living Bible than later on got the new American standard and then the NIV. Listening to both sides of the story, I am now using the King James Version. It has a power that no other version has, in my experience. I am not saying that the new versions do not contain the word of God. My question is how much dog poo do you accept in your brownie before you will not eat it. I am fully convinced that the newer versions have been corrupted. Would you be willing to go on a live debate on the subject?
I admit that my Canadian accent could use some help… I choose not to engage your other points.
So. ..... What are you advocating for? There are already 100s of translations of the Bible since 1950.
And the KJV had been made comp!etely readable with the NKJV translation. Take a break n rest from the advocacy looking for a subject on you tube
A dumbed down translation for dumbed down people.
You mean the KJV itself? Not sure I follow.
I percieve.. that you must be fairly ignorant to what is actually going on in modern translations.. there is no MINOR.. updating of wording into spoken language of today's age... going on.. it's much worse entire passages are losing their meaning when the translations deviate from the KJV... for instance.. Acts 17:22 words were changed from "too superstitious ".. to "very religious".. I understand in this case it could go either way.. due to the original Greek word.. but if the modern translations would like to update this.. why did they use the wording "too religious".. instead of "very religious"/.. what was the reason for changing the word "too"' to "very".. subtle but wrong I feel on the translator's part.. or what about Job 4:17 compare this verse in any translation to the KJV.. or Revelation 4:11..?... please check the modern translations closely to find exactly what these versions are doing that completely changes the bible verse.. before you try to convince people this is OK... it's NOT OK..!!
My friend, I mean no disrespect: can you read Hebrew or Greek?