I want to share with everyone something that I have discovered a while ago during my journey with Christ. Let me first preface this by saying a few things..... This may sound a bit offensive to some at first. I hope not, but it might. I say that because I too took offense when someone first mentioned this to me. Please reserve judgment for a bit and let me explain. It has to do with Bible translations. When I first began my walk with Christ, I was perplexed with the MANY different translations. I eventually settled on the NASB. It is the translation that a very well known and respected Pastor that I follow uses at his church, and one that is supposed to be among the “most literal translations”. Sounded good enough for me, so thats what I began using as my “go-to”. I also chose to compliment that with a NIV study Bible and a NKJV study Bible...... Now..... Fast forward a bit. One day I came across someone in my travels, and the topic of Bible translations came up. I quickly discovered that he was a member of the “dreaded” “King James Only” group. I had never come across this group before, and it honestly seemed a bit cultish to me at first. He began to tell me how all the “modern translations” had been corrupted and altered, and that the ONLY pure and true English translation was the King James. My response to him was something along the lines of..... “That’s ridiculous! There are a lot of legitimate translations. Many of them just have updated language that make it easier for a modern reader to understand” He went on to explain how even my beloved NASB and NIV (and many others) had been corrupted by unscrupulous translators and so forth. He continued, and said that even the New King James has been altered, and has dangerously changed Gods Truth. Ok..... So now I’m thinking that this guy must be crazy....... But I thought about it for a while. I then purposed in my heart that I wanted, above all else, the TRUTH. If what he was saying to me was actually true, I wanted to know about it, and it was worth the time it took me to find out! I decided to do some research on this topic. The short answer to what I discovered is that he was, in fact, CORRECT! There is a lot of VERY compelling evidence that the modern translations are, in part, corrupt and HAVE BEEN altered in a way that absolutely DOES NOT honor God, specifically attacking the Deity of Jesus Christ, His sinless perfection, The Trinity, and many other critical areas of Christian doctrine. To quote Matthew 13:28 “an enemy hath done this” Now I’m not going to try to convince you of this. But I do want to DESPERATELY URGE you to diligently take the time to look into this. Don’t brush this off as I almost did! Purpose it in your heart to seek Gods truth in this matter, no matter where it takes you! I promise you, it WILL BE worth it! I STRONGLY urge you to get and read the book “51 Reasons Why The King James: A Path From Doubt To Faith” by David W. Daniels. Seriously, everyone needs to read this book!!! It’s only $4.99 for the Kindle version on Amazon! About $17 with shipping if you want the paperback. **Also, MUST READ “New Age Bible Versions: An Exhaustive Documentation of the Message, Men & Manuscripts Moving Mankind to the Antichrist's One World Religion “ by G. A. Riplinger. ** It WILL change your mind!!!!! These books offer TONS of COMPELLING evidence to the King James Only stance! I can now say, without reservation, I am unapologetically a member of the King James Only group. After seeing the evidence in favor of that position, I can’t in good conscience go back. I just can’t. At times, I literally felt sick to my stomach as I saw how some passages of the modern translations have been altered, and the implications that those changes have. In the same way that when I came to know Christ, I felt compelled to tell others about the gospel, I now feel absolutely compelled to share this information with my brothers and sisters in Christ. This is SO IMPORTANT because there is SO MUCH error in people’s theology and it is being perpetuated by CORRUPT translations. On a side note, I used to think the King James was difficult to read. It absolutely is not! It’s beautiful, and I have never felt closer to Jesus during my Bible time, then I do while reading from The King James! Kindly consider my words. I hope this reaches each of you well! It WILL change your mind!!!!!
By far the best explanation for using the NKJV. In 1984, the year the nkjv came to fruition, I sat waiting in my barber shop and asked my pastor, who was getting a haircut, “ Pastor, what bible translation would you use ?” He sat up, paused and said , “go to the Baptist bookstore on 50th street and ask for a copy of the Nkjv bible, the Greek manuscript is very good and excellent for reading and study “ I haven’t used anything since.
@Prentiss Yeates .. actually the NKJV came to Fruition in 1979. before that for a short period the NKJV was only in the N.T. then in 1982... textual footnotes were added such as the ibid.. N.U.. and M.S. notes.. written as footnotes.. or Lit... in the cross-references...then in 1985.. some scriptural texts were updated.. though Not many.. but the 1982.. version is Not Identical to the ones after 1985.......AND.. way.. before the NKJV hit the market....... in around 1971.. newer versions of the KJV were released.. these are the KJV II.... and the KJV III.... I have a copy of the KJV II from about 1971.. where this clearly is between the KJV and the NKJV.. in it's wording.. it is as if... some translators.. were testing the waters.. before they went full bore on the NKJV...I knew a pastor once as well that would use the NKJV.. then years later I caught up with him and he had a KJV in his hands.... I asked him why... and he said "the Lord opened my eyes"... each to their own I guess.. .. but I know I can't trust the NKJV to me any more accurate than other modern translations out there..
@Prentiss Yeates. ,…so that is your reasoning behind using the NKJV. for so many years. ? Because your pastor suggested it. ? When I first got saved. Naturally I did the same thing. As a new believer I believed it was only natural to trust those such as pastors who have some years under their belt and are. “Grounded” in the word. So I understand your logic. Over the years I have had different pastors use various translations. But the day I came to my first pastor with some study books I bought and he promptly grabbed them out from under my arms and threw them in the Trashcan. Then he said to me. “ just read God’s word. Don’t read all that other junk. ‘. I realized that the Christian walk has to be an individual one. No one can do it for me. I decided to find out for myself. Which version of God’s word. Seemed to be the best. I ended up switching to KJV ONLY. Around. 2005. But many pastors and teachers I have had over the years used NKJV. ,….the church I am now reads from the NASB. I have been there 7 months. Had to leave my first church since Covid closed it. But I will probably Not join this church because of the NASB issue. Not that I am being forced to read rhe NASB. BUT I dot wish to stay in a church. Where I cannot feel the Spirit of God at work.
@@jeffcarlson3269 my former pastor taught at a baptist college and seminary and solid teacher. Antidotal stories are important, but I’ve come to believe that when one translation ( NKJV) can bridge the two texts ( majority and critical) then it’s fair and balanced.
I understand what you are saying. And I am happy if you are really loving God s word by reading. The NKJV. I have several. NKJV. myself. My favorites. Are the. MACARTHUR. BELIEVERS. AND. THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. study bibles. But may I suggest. If you get a chance. Pick up a copy of David W. Daniels. THE. BRIDGE BIBLE. ? He explains a lot more about the reservations regarding the. NKJV. much better than I can. If after reading thru that. You still believe. The. NKJV. is the best translation to use. Than I understand. But then again. You may come away with a different Idea regarding the NKJV. THANKS.
Finally, very easy explanation of differences between the older and late Greek texts. My study bible of choice is the full color study bible by Thomas Nelson. Thank you pastor for making this explanation easy to follow.
Absolutely! This is spot on in more than a handful of ways. It is the Bible I read and the Bible I teach from. There is no better translation that deals with the English language well. The literary heritage that it preserves leaves all of the other translations in the dust. Thanks for these great thoughts, Shawn. Right up the middle.
I've watched this three times now. Thanks for this video. I'm starting to develop an interest and hunger for the NKJV and was searching for vids like this one. Thank you.
@Troy Lee Amen and thank you..... I believe that as well... yet I have found myself occasionally reading scripture from the NASB 1995.... the wording is a little different.. yet still Not too liberal...I still consider my self as a KJV onlyist.. because I have seen too many things... to persuade me otherwise..
I have heard that many times from people that completely misunderstood the Bible. That was the same argument Catholics used to prevent the Bible from being translated to English. Silly
I purchased a NKJV Bible not too long ago. After reading the KJV since Grade School. The introduction page on the NKJV says the translations were completed in 1982. I love it. I know one Pastor who uses it for preaching. After using the KJV for decades. That tells you something.
The nkjv removes scripture and drastically changes what God has made written for us. Same with the NIV and ESV. Do as you will, but understand God's words never change, and to change his words is a terrible sin. Be cautious and not deceived. Turn to God and pray for salvation... Truly pray for it and you will receive. May god bless you Amen.
@Curtis Stewart... I had a similar situation with a pastor I knew... he used to use the KJV then one day.. he was using a NKJV.. and I asked Him why..he switched... he said.. when he ran across phrases like "To Wit" in the KJV .. he had to stop and look up what that meant.. he asked me if I knew what it meant and I said no.. so he said,,,"there ya see...?.."....but guess what?... less than a year later he was back preaching from the KJV.. why do you think that was?.. I'll tell you why... because he found out what I found out.. it's better to look up the phrases that you don't know in the KJV and be right... than to read the NKJV and never look something up and BE WRONG...!..
@@kjvnewundergod.6807 Which scriptures does the NKJV remove? I'm a textus receptus guy so I know the niv and nasb are not compliant. I have looked up some word changes of NKJV in the KJV Strongs Concordinance Greek and Hebrew dictionary. So far the NKJV looks closer to the original language. But I haven't seen whole verses deleted from the NKJV such as 1John 5:7 like some. Which ones are missing from NKJV? I'm willing to learn if you have more info than just talking points. I'm washed in the blood of Jesus so don't worry about my salvation.
@@kjvnewundergod.6807 Thou shalt not lie. There are no verses taken out of the NKJV. I know because I read both. If you are talking about the footnotes that INFORM you of the differences between the different Greek texts, I'll let you in on a little secret....The 1611 KJV has a similar footnote in Luke 17:36 which says "This 36 verse is wanting in most Greek copies" and if you have a Trinitarian Bible Society Westminster Reference Bible, that is only offered in the KJV, you will see that same footnote.
The NKJV happens to be my favorite translation, personally (there are so many I like though). It has never crossed my mind as being the “most important” translation. I think you’re right though; you make a very good point. Good job bringing a new idea and fresh insight into such an old debate. We usually just get the same noise over and over, but you brought something new to the conversation (I’m assuming, at least I have not heard this before). Good job.
Thanks for the kind words. I just love the Bible and Bible translations. I'm reading the NASB 2020 right now. And I really like it so far, although it is really early.
Good taste Gary. Just ignore all the places where it says to question whether the text should be there, and change “heart” to “belly” in John 7:38 and you have the second best Bible translation.
I have 3. NKJV is my main one. My KJV sits beside us for clarification and my ESV sits on my bookshelf in case of an emergency, like really archaic language. Thank you for this. I've always been attracted to the NKJV.
I ordered on last week..I find myself straying from him thus week which I hate with passion so I'm going to get back on track and make sure I stay there ! I have the KJV Collectors edition but everytime I try to read / understand the more I keep putting it off and saying "I'll read it later" when infact I know I won't.. I heard about this translation and feel that it's easier for me to understand.
@Random Person..... so let me understand this.. you would rather read from a translation that is weaker and strays from God's intended meaning on many verses..and walk away with a misunderstanding.. rather than try to read a more accurate harder to understand..(in your opinion)...Version like the KJV..?..
@@jeffcarlson3269 With this being your logic, why aren't you reading the NASB? Or the ESV? Since they both [by scholarship approval] Are ABOVE the KJV in translations?
@@calebtheexsatanist6626 I read from the NASB .... sadly that is what the church I am now attending Preaches and teaches from.. I have been going to this church for about 7 months.. but I will Not join or become a member there for that very reason.. I believe that we should not forsake the assembling of ourselves together as the bible teaches,.. but I am Not sure I can be a member of a church that uses a bible such as the NASB.. which does NOT... even use the word HELL.anong its other flaws......I use the NASB ..RSV ..NIV.. ESV and others even the DOUAY RHEIMS.. at times to cross reference.. verses.. as well as many commentaries... and what I have found is that although the KJV.. is not 100%.. perfect.. it is closer to what God had intended for us to know about Him than most translations....... cases in point...... these 2 verses.. are 2 of 1000's I could share with you.. compare REV 4:11... KJV.. with any other version... or 1 COR 1:18 same thing.. oh here's another one I'll suggest...Genesis 22:8.. KJV reads "God will provide Himself a lamb".. most other versions read "God will provide FOR Himself a lamb".. by simply adding the word "FOR".. other versions have taken away the thought that God(Jesus).. will be THE LAMB.. by giving us the impression God is going to find something.. Not necessarily Himself.. in the KJV the Christophony is more apparent.. And that my dear friend.. will draw me closer to God.. as I have said .....as the KJV does this in 1000's of other places.............When I open up God's word I want to feel drawn toward Him.. think like Him.. I can't feel that way or think that way with any other versions even the NKJV.... sorry.... and if you do Not understand my reasoning.. I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree....
@@calebtheexsatanist6626 also I would suggest to you picking up a copy of "Look What's Missing" .. by David W. Daniels.... He explains very thoroughly why other translations other than the KJV.. are weaker translations and Not as good as the KJV... he shows by several examples of scripture......
@@jeffcarlson3269 Buy the pastor a copy of “neither oldest nor best” and he really might change, to nkjv at least. Pearl bought the copyrights just so it can be sold without royalties or profit to get it to the world. Since he has written so many good bible books, I figured such a move is very meaningful. (Or show him this channel’s review of james snapps book about the ending of mark lol). But im serious about that book, just a thought not trying to tell you what to do. God bless Sir.
This video actually helped me decide which bible to purchase as I was in the bookstore. I ended up getting the Ignite NJKV ❤ can't wait to dive in ✝️🙏❤️
I'll be honest I don't understand any of this kind of stuff. I used to read the KJV but the text was hard to understand sometimes so I switched to the American Standard. The American Standard that I read for a while I had issues with, for some reason I did not like it, I felt that it left out some critical things which would give clarity in certain versus and stories or leave things out that would give a completely different perspective on stuff. I now read the NKJV which I haven't had any issues with, no understanding issues or feeling like things are left out. Honestly I feel for an English bible, for clarity, the NKJV stands on top. That is my opinion. Every comparison that i've made between the American standard and the NKJV the NKJV says the same text that is in the American Standard, but with more depth and sometimes different words that opens my eyes to the importance of certain versus.
@GlorifyGodInEverything .... if you haven't had any issues with the NKJV yet then you haven't looked very closely.. there are several places where the translators took liberties with the text by changing the intented meaning of the verse... it's not all an update with the language.. compare.. 1 Cor 1:18 and Rev 4:11... for starters... in several places such as in that Corinthians verse I cited.. words are changed that make the intent muddled/.... there was No reason to change the phrase from the KJV "which are saved".. to NKJV "who are being saved".. why was this done?.. which part of "which are saved" was hard to understand or needed to ne reworded to make it more appealing?... this is the type of meddlesome liberty that the NKJV is riddled with and could have been done without the change.... the serpent in the garden tried to confuse the issue with Eve as well..."Yea hath God said"... watch yourself.. you are heading down the same path with the NKJV....
@@jeffcarlson3269 Trust me I understand what you are saying, there are a lot of different translations and i'm no scholar. You have 3 major greek sources for translating such as Critical text, Majority text, Textus receptus and this all goes far above my head haha. I've heard the rumors about different translations of some being good, others being bad, having to own many different translations to grasp the reality of what particular text is meaning to broaden the understanding of it all etc. etc. In one's life time, I really do not think we will unlock every single text and meaning and obtain every bit of knowledge especially for a normal person such as myself with no background in Greek who doesn't understand Greek, or Hebrew etc. I believe God will reveal his truths to you as He see's fit regardless of translation which is why some people feel lead to not read anything else besides KJV and other people are not being lead in the same path. So if you are reading a translation God see's unfit for you to be reading, in my perspective I believe you will be lead in the spirit to read a different translation depending on how strong your relationship is with God, and that goes with everything, being convicted of doing good rather than bad, discernment being revealed to you. It seems to me that having faith in words without Christ doesn't get people anywhere, it's the faith in Christ and relationship with the Father that actually counts in the end, not the knowledge of every single word that was written down. One thing I do see that kind of bothers me though is a lot of people worship the bible rather than God which is a scary thing, instead of putting their faith where it should be placed. The bible is a very useful tool into understanding more about the faith, but you have to understand the reality that even back in the day, when people didn't own what we call "the bible" were still able to be in relationship with the father and learn in spirit, which they did. Faith is to be had in the Father, in Christ and his promise and what He did for us, and who he says we are, that He is who He says He is "the way, the truth and the life" not faith in a book (not saying we shouldn't read the bible at all, but you know what i'm saying). The bible is a faith builder and was written down so people could see the character of our father, to help guide us in our walk. The bible becomes pointless all together without God. So ya, that is kind of my mindset on it. I've also heard people talk down on the KJV with certain aspects contained in it that a different text translation is better for certain passages, where critical text doesn't do justice to certain translations in the KJV.... So you see where i'm going with all of this. This is a major reason why I trust my relationship in Christ with the Father above any worldly knowledge that someone has to give me about how i'm wrong or I should do this or that. But ya, i'm definitely not going to be doomed reading NKJV, i'll be doomed not following Christ. It's not about having the perfect translation of the bible, because without the original texts and knowledge of the languages used originally, we are just not going to have the perfect translations regardless and people lose perspective of the reality that without Christ, your doomed already. Christ comes first, before relationships with family/friends, before the bible, before your work and everything else. The Holy Spirit guides you in this walk and people are in different locations in their walk in Christ, but if we sit here and let man depict what we are doing wrong, and we start swaying like a leaf in the wind, it all becomes non beneficial, because you end up losing your faith in Christ and obtaining faith in man which is a big no no. If man says something and the Holy Spirit convicts your heart that is a different thing, but without the conviction of the Holy Spirit, people need to continue in the walk that God has laid before them. My perspective is to see that even if someone is reading a translation that I wouldn't read, that I should be happy that they are actively trying to have a relationship with God, and that God is in control, and if this person is really trying to seek and stay in relationship with the Father, the Father will guide them to truth. It doesn't say there is truth in the bible, it says there is truth in Christ and that is what is important. People are losing the fact that Christ is truth, truth is to be had in the Holy Spirit and your relationship with the Father and you do not need a bible to understand that.
@@GlorifyGodInEverything well said.. thank you for stating this plainly... I agree... it is our relationship with Jesus that really counts.... percet sense.. and you are right on a person Not being able to understand all of God's word in one lifetime... there is so much there...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I wasn't trying to harp on you either haha it is more generalizing. I just always kind of rant when it comes to God or Jesus because i'm very passionate about my Savior and my Father. Kind of off topic and maybe some food for thought, but it's baffling to even be in existence, it blows my mind that he thought of us and formed us before we were even born. People want evidence of God... Just look at yourself. You are literally a work of art created by God, and our purpose is to love the Father and all He wants to do is love us. It brings a tear to my eye especially coming from a background without love. You are His and when you look into the mirror, understand you are looking at a creation that God made, he made you for Him and he wants you and me so badly. I always think of myself as a nobody, especially compared to God, but yet I am everything to Him, He is the most important in the universe who can do anything and obtain anything but he wants me and you for some reason haha.... It's mind blowing but i'm forever indebt to my Father for coming after me. King of kings, and Lord of lords, the Almighty. It's pretty crazy, but God is awesome, Christ is awesome and thank God for sacrificing his son for us and pouring out his love onto us... Soooo much love. And I love you and am happy to know I will have you sharing the kingdom with me!!! For real though, I love you and am grateful for another brother in Christ. Stay strong and fight the good fight, we are not alone, God will not abandon us. When the whole world comes against you, you are the Fathers remember that.
It is important to understand no English version will be perfect. One must rely on the Holy Spirit to totally understand it. I used to be a KJV only person until I got a KJV dictionary. I compared it with the NKJV and 99% of all the changes were literally updated definitions that were the same in the dictionary and the omission of verses that were not in original manuscripts, rather added. If you really want a word for word greet and Hebrew word for word, the Linear Bible is excellent. You can really see what the text is. I love the NKJV, NASB, Amplified and ESV versions. I stay away from thought for though translations. Thank you for your vlog and unbiased opinion.
@Vicky Burton the problem is Not with the translators using innappropriate words when substituting... the issue is that some of the verses meanings or intented meanings have been changed by the translators substituting phrases that DO NOT.. transfer the same thought.... compare 1 Cor 1:18 ir Rev 4:11 for just 2 examples....
@P Gunsolley. The biggest trick if the devil is to make one think they are getting closer to God but really they are getting further from God. I probably won’t be able to convince you that the NKJV is not as accurate as the KJV so I will just wish you well and pray that you will continue to grow in your walk with God.
@@powerant1914 He didnt seem tk answer. nkjv is based mostly on kjv. After kjv, nkjv is probably best. Ignore where nkjv questions if the text is legit and should be there. It is and it should. This very channel reviewed the longer ending of mark in james snapp’s book. Is legit. And john 7:38 in nkjv should say “belly” not “heart”. If you get ok with kjv it’s better. Thee and thou is singular and ye and you is plural. Throw away your niv is evil. Michael pearl videos are helpful imo. God bless you Sir. Oh, please consider trying one without chapter and verse markings. For me at least was profound. Those can be so artificial. God-breathed publishing has some
@@ibperson7765 In Jhn7:38 why is it wrong if it was translated as heart? It simply means that whoever believes in Christ rivers of living water will flow from deep within the person.... Just like in John1:18 if we use kjv it reads "bosom" but what if i use other versions like GWT where it renders "heart"? I dont see any mistake there as long as it does not contradict the teaching of God which is to compare spiritual things w/ spiritual (1Cor.2:13,nkjv).... Anyways, it doesnt really matter cause i also use not just kjv but all other versions as my secondary but nkjv will always be my main....
Dear Shawn, THANKS (!!) for a sensible video. I've been using NKJV for a number of years as my preferred text for an accurate translation. I very much appreciate the textual notes that they use, indicating Majority or the Critical ( NU: Nestle-Uhland) text origins and differences. And even I find a Critical text here and there that seems to possibly be the "better sounding" translation. ANYWAY....be affirmed in what you have said; there's great wisdom and common sense. And I appreciate the thought-for-thought because they challenge me to see the past with a contemporary vernacular.
@Dan C Yes those NU. and. MSS seems to bring clarity. But in reality. By offering one options by presenting one with different texts the NKJV translators allow people to choose which text may the correct one. What about those who may end up getting led down the wrong thought path ? What will you say to those that will miss rewards they may have gotten by choosing to believe. The footnotes that may or may not be accurate. ?
@@makarov138 try the notes in the Nelson KJV study bible.. I thinks it's better than the Nelson..NKJV study bible.. why?.. because of the difference in editorship... the the editor Head Editor of the KJV.. study bible is Jerry Falwell... very conservative.. in his views.. old fashioned.almost... where the NKJV.. editors take a more modern Liberal approach to their notes.. not overly noticeable..just slightly.. but to the trained reader the more liberalistic approach is noticeable.... of course.. MacArthur.. is pretty good as far as NKJV.. study bibles go.. even though he has professed publicly.... that the NASB.. is his favorite translation.. I won't hold it against him...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. When I say the notes I'm not referring to notes in a study bible. I don't study bibles. I'm referring to the marginal notes about verses referring to the contexts and word variants in the two main Greek texts.
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:” Revelation 22:18 KJV
My favorite is my 1985 NKJV Nelson Publishers with double-column and wide margins and real leather covers. Just recently I was able to find another one online and bought it immediately!! Same year printing!! The notes as to majority text and critical textual variations are the best.
Man what a great find ...I have a large print 1988 Open Bible Heritage edition it too has the same cool style. In my opinion, the 80s Nelson NKJVs were some of the best bibles ever made.....Yes in very bias , I can't help it I just love the old-school Nelson's.
Can you tell me the Nelson number on that wide margin bible? I have a slightly newer one that is worn out. Would love to have a wide margin NKJV. Thanks.
@@ralphbrickey9441 Can't find an ISBN number. However, the outside number below the word NELSON is 476BG. Printed in 1985. Hope this helps. God bless!!
I have KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, NIV, and NRSV. I tend to gravitate to the NJKV. In my experience, with the editions I have, the NKJV, more than any other translations I have, includes detailed notes on the alternative readings. So, it seems to be the best of both worlds.
The NKJV has been my preferred Bible version for the last 10 years but I have a variety of other translations to refer to. Recently I've been drawn to the NLT because it is so easy to understand, and because my pastor uses it in church. Would you do a review of that translation too?
A couple quick notes : (1) technically speaking the nkjv represents a modernized version of the kjv which uses the tr in the nt (wow that's a lot of acronyms). The tr is only part of the maj text. So yes the nkjv is the only commonly available and somewhat popular "representation" of the majority text. (2) IMHO the nkjv does the best job of indicating the difference between the critical, tr and majority texts. For example look at Rev 1 in the nkjv; way more difference between the tr and majority text than the critical and majority. (3) The HCSB was originally conceived as a translation of the majority text in the nt. This changed when the general editor died; Art Farstad, who was as the editor of the nkjv. Great job summarizing. I plan my day around these videos........ok that's an overstatement.
Great video pastor. Although I know it has several issues, I like the NIV84 because if it's readability. (I'm simple) But I keep my smartphone next to me all the time and I'm constantly looking up KJV, NKJV, ESV, the, NASB to compare. What do you think of my method? Do you think it's OK or should I stay away from the NIV as my main read? Or maybe use one of the other translations as my main o e and use NIV somtimes to compare. What do ya think pastor?
Pastor, I have a NASB New Open Bible study edition from Thomas Nelson and It's copyright from 1990 ( That can't be right and 1990 is for the study Bible) but Just below that is the New American Standard Bible lockman foundation with all the dates from 1960 and it goes all the way up to 1977. Does that mean this version is different than the 1995 that everyone talks about? Even my YouVersion phone app only has NASB95 and then NASB 2020.. My NASB last date is 1977 and I'm wondering if it's different then the 95.
@@yobabybubba The 95 is much easier to read than the 77. I think it was a really good update. I'm still a little torn on how to feel about the 2020 update. I'm reading it now.
@@RevReads yeah you really should. It's more poetic sounding than the new King James but it's also more modern than the old King james. And that's actually what it's supposed to be. Just as the new King James was supposed to be the modern edition of the Old King James likewise is the Mev the updated modern edition of the new King James. I really like it. If anything the only flaws to it is that it doesn't have italics and it doesn't have footnotes.
Excellent explanation. Thank you so much Pastor. I have a question. Is the NKJV based upon the broader Byzantine texts you mentioned or only on the 11 or so Byzantine texts Erasmus has available to him? Thank you.
It follows close to the KJV on textual issues. I would guess there are a few places where it expands outside of the TR and Erasmus, but not many places.
The NKJV also gets it done for me. I also use the KJV from time to time but since I don't speak Elizabethan english I mostly use more modern english translations. I also hold a Byzantine text priority position for the New Testament and for this I use the NKJV. And although it's based on the T.R. the T.R. is about 99% similar to the Byzantine Text. However, for the Old Testament I use both the NKJV and ESV. I believe the Masoretic text has some errors that the Masoretes made intentionally, mostly trying to deny that Jesus was the Messiah which we know they denied. The geneaologies are different among other things. For this I like to contrast the Masoretic Hebrew with the Greek from the LXX and taking into account the discoverings at Qumran in the Dead Sea. Alsl compare Deuteronomy 32:8 between NKJV and the ESV. I prefer the ESV reading. If you wonder why i prefer it consult the work of the late Dr. Heiser and his thesis on the Divine Council. Being spanish I mostly read the Bible in Spanish and occasionally in Italia and there too I prefer Byzantine oriented texts. Reina-Valera SBT and other various Reina-Valera's in Spanish and thr Giovanni Diodati translation in Italian. P.S. I'm still studying biblical greek.
Good video but one correction: The NKJV is not the only modern Bible to use the Textus Receptus for the NT. The Modern English Version (MEV) does as well and it's a widely-available translation. I'm not sure what its future is, or how long it will hang around, but at least for now it's available.
There's also the World English Bible, which is based on the majority text. But after checking out the WEB and the MEV online, I think the NKJV is just better.
The NKJV footnotes are extremely valuable simply because it identifies the texts that the CT eclectic versions either take out or have used differently. It gives you a “ heads-up” and that is helpful! Biggest point to show in the CR eclectic versions is the “ some manuscripts have ( fill in the blank)” error. Why? It’s generally “ most manuscripts have “ not some but they hold to the older/oldest manuscripts are the best. CT is based on weight. Not literal weight but the weight of evidence as to the closeness in date to the original autographs. Blessings
I'm currently reading the ESV along with the KJV to compare & although it's easier to understand, I've noticed that certain words are taken out of the ESV, which could be misleading.
It's a little more complicated than that. The older manuscripts definitely have some issues with them that are overlooked simply because they are older. That's not to say the majority is always preferable, but I think scholars have accepted some readings only because of their dating. Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@RevReads I now, I was simplifying it tremendously, even amongst the Byzantine MSS There's a number of distinct families, Wilbur pickering has done lots of work on Kr for example, (he calls it family 35), but for the most part, All Byz families together are much more consistent than the Alexandrian tradition. Geographical distribution should also be taken into account, Byzantine texttypes were spread all over the Byzantine empire and then some, whereas our alexandrian manuscripts, are, well... Local to Alexandria! I would lean more Byzantine and supplement it with the Alexandrian where necessary, but it's difficult, because "Older = Better" isn't always accurate!
I like that. And I’ve thought about this myself. The only reason I don’t rush out and buy a NKJV is that I’m one of those people who pays attention to variants and footnotes in my bibles so I’m already aware of many of the alternate readings, especially in the NT. But for someone who isn’t as privy, this is good advice.
My first study Bible was a NKJV (New Geneva Study Bible). I have multiple Bibles and multiple translations. The ones I use the most are the NKJV and NASB (1977 and 1995; no interest in the 2020 version). I'd like to find a full-size note-taking Bible in the NKJV I could use when teaching my Sunday school class.
Your comment goes deeper than many believers will ever realize. Part of the reason that, though I own many translations, they are always compared to a KJV for clarity.
I read the nasb for the literal translation but I see people say word for word translation doesn’t care about meaning of metaphors and idioms. I am on the fence about trusting the nkjv and anything with majority text because I really want it to be accurate.
The oldest manuscripts of the Textus Receptus have been ground into dirt over time. They were the most used becaused they were the most accurate. But like any "go to" bible they became worn out. The oldest Alexandrian texts weren't used as much because they weren't as accurate. That's why the oldest Alexandrian manuscripts still exist. We know the TR was around first because the early church fathers quoted verses from the TR that aren't in the Alexandrian in there writings.
One simple question from the following verse..... knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. Gal.2.16 NKJV Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Gal.2.16 KJV Are you justified by your own personal faith in Christ which can ebb and flow with worldly events as taught in the first verse, or are you justified by the faith of Christ which is solid and gifted to us as taught in the second reading? (Eph 2:8)
It was a humble and respectful ...not for profit...like most these days, modern rendition of the KJV. Erasmus believed he was under divine inspiration...I think he was too. If you start comparing closely with other versions on key doctrinal verses, you will come to appreciate the NKJV more and more. NKJV is the modern day king!!! all others bow down.
What is your personal thoughts on the World English Bible? As far as I can tell, it is a modern translation of the Bible with a majority text New Testament. How do you think it compares to the NKJV, which is a Textus Receptus translation?
Just saw this video and channel on 10.04.2024 for first time. Most interesting subject, and informative too. I checked my Bible shelf and the NASB 77, 95, 2020, ESV, RSV, CJB, NIV, LSB, TofLV, and NLT all are like you say here. I do want to say this though; being a fan of the HCSB as a daily reader, it's easy to follow and understand, both of my HCSB's have the word 'FASTING' in Mark 9:29, though my earliest copy from 2003 has that word bracketed. The CSB which replaced the HCSB does not have the word fasting present. I knew where this was going before the reveal as I grew up with the KJV, been reading it since the mid 1970's when salvation occured. So in this one case, my Geneva, HCSB, DRB, old Amplified, KJV's and NKJV's all have fasting where it belongs. Well said my friend, keep up the great work.
If anything, this is a pretty decent argument to keep at least one Alexandrian Bible around. Eh, I still have the old, tattered NIV I used in high school, if I really want those readings. After comparing many versions, I believe that the KJV is still the best English translation in existence, though I often use the NKJV, since it's easier to read. I'm thinking of getting a copy of Brenton's Septuagint translation for alternate readings. What do you think of that one?
I have not read Brenton's work so I can't really comment. I only refer to the LXX when I am studying and I am looking at the Greek in comparison to the Hebrew. I prefer the Masoretic Text.
I agree. I was saved using the NASB95 and trusted it and still trust it because of its scholarship. But Majority Text seems to make the most sense to me since....... It's the majority 🤷
I'm glad you have an open mind about Bible translations, only rejecting those which are obviously bad. But since the Byzantine text and the Alexandrian text are different from each other... ah, you address that. But textual variants aren't random and independent. The question of which one is better, and which one is right in any given passage, seems to me to be the most important question, but if you say we don't know enough to really answer that question with confidence, I can't argue against that position.
Have you tried the ( MEV ) Modern English Version? Or The KJ3 Literal Translation by Jay R Green? Or Young's Literal Translation of the Bible by Robert Young?
I've never heard of the KJ3. What is it? I haven't read through the MEV, so I can't really comment from experience and I only like to comment on the Bibles I have read from beginning to end. I have used Young's often in study and I think it is helpful took. I don't think I'd ever want to read through it, but its a good reference.
@@RevReads KJ3 is an English translation from the Textus Receptus. It leans toward the Young's Literal. another interesting version I reference is, Holy Bible: From the Ancient Eastern Text: George M. Lamsa's Translation From the Aramaic of the Peshitta
I love the ESV, NASB95, NKJV and the KJV (although it is sometimes hard to understand) and if I want something easier to understand in general I go for the NIV or the NLT edit: I'm also looking forward to purchasing the LSB when it's available
I like the majority text which is why I read the World English Bible (WEB), which is different from the TR text which does not always agree with the Majority text.
The NKJV is the best counterfeit of the true. You stated the NWT, but NIV, ESV, NASV, etc. are in agreement with the NWT in many, many ways. You are correct about the NWT. All three of these translations agree with the biased NWT remove or cast doubt upon Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; and Romans 16:24. All four state a boldface lie in Mark 1:2. All four remove some or most of Matthew 6:13; Luke 4:4, 8; Romans 8:1; and 1 John 5:7. All four remove "study" from 2 Timothy 2:15. All four have two separate people killing Goliath in 1 Samuel 17 and 2 Samuel 21:19. All four cast doubt upon Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11, yet include it by separation from the text or place in a footnote. Birds of a feather flock together. I could add the NKJV with the other four that corrupted or changed Romans 1:18, 25, 2 Corinthians 2:17, 1 Timothy 6:10, 20, and 2 Timothy 2:15 because these passages are aimed at the dishonest ones on the committees.
Thanks for this. I've read the KJV all my life as a Southern Baptist but I know it like the back of my hand and wanted to read something a little more modern and fresh so I recently got a CSB that I'm really enjoying. But I've also been wanting to get s study Bible and for that was going to use the KJV or NKJV. I think I'll go with the NKJV because it's so similar to the KJV with very few changes that I can see. Besides, I was weaned off gospel milk long ago and now eat meat, so I'm able to read any Bible translation and get the full Gospel, with my mind automatically filling in the "correct" theology or reading. Chew the meat and spit out the bones, know what I mean?
I completely agree with your conclusions. I also feel that the NKJV is a very pleasant read as well as being accurate to the text it is translated from. I do read other translation like the ESV and the NASB as well as the Legacy Standard Bible which uses God's name through out the entire Old Testament.
“I am dark, but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, Like the tents of Kedar, Like the curtains of Solomon. Do not look upon me, because I am dark, Because the sun has tanned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; They made me the keeper of the vineyards, But my own vineyard I have not kept.” Song of Solomon 1:5-6 NKJV
I always find the NKJV a wonderful help when studying the Bible. I think my personal favorite for reading right now is the CSB, but the EHV is great as well but I am never disappointed with the NKJV.
NKJV strategically removes the word repent 46 times. 36 of which God repents...which is every time God repents. These modern versions bolster the false doctrine of works based salvation. Teaching you have to repent of your sins to be saved. My Jonah 3:10 episode covers this. And I have a video that has the actual Gospel message called the Bible way to heaven for those who want to become saved or are not sure.
“And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.” Hebrews 11:39-40 KJV
Another important item is that the KJV italicizes supplied words. This is at times theologically important, chiefly 1 Cor. 12:1. A glaring error along these lines in John 19:18 ('one' should have been italicized, and once one realizes what it really says *without* the 'one', collaborates a simple harmony from the synoptic gospels that shows that the two robbers and two malefactors couldn't possibly have been the same 2 people. They were crucified at different times, and more importantly, give different responses to Jesus' being mocked). But - - - you get the idea.
Very nice video, the NKJV is my main translation of the Bible in English and I totally agree that we need to read several translations. However, we also have the MEV, that follows the TR, and translations like the WEB that follow the MT. They are not as known and used as the NKJV but I personally believe they deserve a bit more exposure. Blessings!
Someone else just recommended the WEB to me yesterday and it was the first time I heard of it. I think I need to dive into it after I finish my reading in the Literal Standard Version.
@@jeffcarlson3269 I wonder if they mean the Webster Bible and not the World English Bible. Webster's Bible was a lite revision of the KJV. So it is based on the same Greek text as the KJV. I love it!
@@danbratten3103 hmmm I looked up the WEB bible on the internet .. it seems that this was published originally in 2000 and uses the ASV as its base... yet.. well here is what it states... The work is based on the 1901 American Standard Version English translation, the Greek Majority Text, and the Hebrew Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia with some minor adjustments made because of alternate readings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint. These alternate readings are usually ignored or restricted to the footnotes. The translation process included seven phases of editing and proofreading for each book. An initial automated pass updated approximately 1,000 archaic words, phrases and grammatical constructs. The first manual pass added quotation marks (the ASV had none) and other punctuation and compared the translation to the Greek and Hebrew texts in areas where significant textual variants or meanings were unclear. so it is possible they are indeed refering to this WEB bible...I have not checked into this translation as of yet to see how it compares....
@crucified4me... hmm... I just had a chance.. to look at the WEB bible a little online.. and I can tell you in my opinion ....even beginning with the first verse....it seems innacurate to me.... as I have already posted on this site or elsewhere.. I disagree with Gen 1:1 stating "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." as I disagree with the word "heavens" being pluralized here... though I have heard it supported by people who quote Paul from Galatians stating he was caught up in the 3rd heaven implying more than 1 heaven,..... I have doubts regarding its plurality here due to the Apostles Creed.. and the Nicene Creed only using the word "heaven" in it's singular format for their doctrine... I am not sure that the use of "heavens". plural here is substantiall.. denoted as correct...and this could be again due to the translators taking improper liberties regarding God's word...
NKJV, Even their translators say it's to perfect crossover translation to get you to any version other than the KJV. Question is why is that important to them? Why does the nkjv agree with the KJV in some verses but agree with other versions in others? Takes some serious research to find the answer, but its available.
I can read Biblical Greek and painfully slowly the Hebrew Text. I favor the critical text based on thousands of manuscripts. I use the CSB and the 2020 NASB. I also love the 1901 American Standard which is uncommon but very faithful. I am 66 so I grew up with KJV and love its beauty.
You have it backwards. The Byzantine text is based on thousands of MSS, the Critical Text is based on a much smaller number in the hundreds, not thousands.
I would agree with this. I also read numerous translations and I personally feel that the inclusion of the NKJV is a must for the very same reasons you sited. It's an essential read if you are a serious student of the Word.
I look at the NKJV as the "bridge" between both the Byzantine and Critical text bibles. As mine is 36 years old now, the NT is filled with corrections, deletions, word changes, and links to various verses with common context. It has become the MY translation.
I am not KJV only, however, I do affirm that the majority text is the correct text the Church should be using. With that said, I also agree that the CT is also valuable in its own right, the important thing is that you are reading the word of God.
The other reason the NKJV is important... is that the early Bible translators, the Wyclifes, Tyndales, Erasmus, and Martin Luther were NOT using the Vaticanus or Sinticus (since a certain Church made it heretical and illegal to translate or print Bibles in the common language). It was only after the large successes of the English translations of and KJV that the "Church" years later released or "found" their "older" manuscripts- but the million dollar question is why are they older and why were they "discovered" AFTER all of the bible translating/printing revolution? Why are there fewer copies? For the same reason why the Textus Receptus has 80% of the manuscripts available... because they were being used by faithful brethren, not locked away or forbidden from the public.
Great discussion Pastor, and Thank you for sharing this video. From my experience and I must say that my to GO to Bible is the KJV, I have always read an NIV Bible. Until recently for some reason I wanted an KJV. In the past once I attempted reading a KJV 📖 that someone had and found it difficult to read some of the text. Reading my Bible one day I felt in my Heart that I wanted a KJV, never owned one. Well recently (3 months ago) I stopped at a local thrift store and to my surprise I found a 1981 Copyright KJV soft Leather, I must say that I can’t put it down, Love IT 🥰! I thank God for it, to me is a Treasure ❤ I accustom that prior to reading the Word of God to Pray 🙏 and ask the Holy Spirit to Guide me in understanding it. Is a great Bible very clear it’s meaning and I live by it. At first a little difficulty in pronouncing some words, it was a challenge if one can say. Reading it at a daily basis has helped alot in that aspect and it has become a lot easier to read. As far as comprehension I have no problems with it. Can’t compare its authenticity and it’s clear meaning❤ This is my experience with the KJV. God bless all the brothers & sisters here. We are all aiming for the same Goal and that is to Get closer to God and reading His Word Daily is so important. Other than the true Book of Life it will guide and Nourish our Daily Walk with the Lord ❤🕊️🙏
@@Lisa-dd6gm thank you for the sub and for your great perspective on God's Word translated into English. I am so glad the KJV translation continues to help many today.
Since it is a true statement that there are some words, praises, and a few scriptures that are missing in the Critical Text bibles: My question is: are there any words, phrases, or scriptures in the Critical Text bibles that are not in the Textus Receptus bibles? That's what I want to know! Can't find anyone with an answer to it either.
@@johnsivewright1836 That's a great point you've made. I've never noticed that one. It seems the Byzantine-based bibles (TR) use “do his commandments; while the Critical Text bibles use “wash their robes. But the older Latin Vulgate-derived bibles use “wash their robes as well.” This is a quandary to be sure. Well done Sir! Codex Sinaiticus (GR 400AD): Blessed are those who do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and that they may go through the gates into the city. Wycliff (Latin Vulgate 400AD) : Blessed be they, that wash their stoles, that the power of them be in the tree of life, and enter by the gates into the city. Douay-Rheims: Blessed are they that wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb: that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city. Geneva Bible 1560: Blessed are they, that do his Commandments, that their right may be in the tree of Life, and may enter in through the gates into the City.
Before you buy, get online and find the NKJV online and compare Titus 3:10-11 with Luke 12:51 and then decide if you want a "Bible" that says Jesus is a sinner.
I believe you forgot to read Titus 3:9 which describes a divisive person. The division Jesus speaks of in Luke 12:51 is the division between those who follow Christ and those who follow Satan, the division between light and darkness, good and evil. Following Christ has never produced the types of people listed in Titus 3:9. Conclusion: you were being cute.
I agree completely with entire video, as I often do. Only thing I’d add is: 1. We can *ignore* the places in nkjv where it says to doubt if the text should be there (especially the ending of Mark, as op knows based on his review of the James Snapp book). 2. John 7:38 should be “belly” not heart. The NT writers used “heart” a lot, but did not there. It matters based on this being where the Holy Spirit goes down into. A belly laugh is one of the holiest manifestation of spirit. This is the only dark, ignored chakra spot in Hinduism (an inch or two below belly button). And yet the only one that matters for holiness!! Chakras should probably be ignored. But it says belly for a reason. Quickest way to tell if Bible uses majority (as it should) is rom 8:1.
don't forget to mention how the KJV 1 Cor 1:18 reads "which ARE saved"... compared to the NKJV which reads "who are BEING saved"... and Rev 4:11 which in the KJV tells us exactly why God created us.. but Not in any other translation... are we "SAVED".?.. or "BEING saved"..? I don't know about you ...but I was "SAVED".. once for all once I accepted Jesus as my Savior... I am Not "Being" saved... now... but I'll agree I am progressively being "sanctified".. in other words I am "saved".. now I am growing in the Lord...
@@jeffcarlson3269 Not so much about the translation, but I heard a statement I liked: He can save me, did save me, is saving me, and will save me. There are some ways in which that’s true.
@@ibperson7765 the only thing I can say in regards to your statement regarding.."is saving me".... is this... did Jesus die once for all on the cross for you and me?... or does He need to die continually for us?... it is one thing to state "is saving me".. in refering to eternal security... but if we read this "being saved" to mean.. that He is constantly saving us.. then that is something different..... then we are saying that Jesus' death on the cross was Not sufficient.. to save us for all eternity... and THAT I cannot agree with...
If I understand this right from videos I have watched, the modern translations (not counting NKJV) they say they have more older manuscripts which is good but they have less text (I believe it doesn’t include women caught in adultry since it’s omitted out). Is it reasonable to say that God wouldn’t let us use added words for as long as we have used KJV? Because that was a huge translation used for a long time in the past.
I get the idea behind majority wins, but the majority is the majority because it was copied more than manuscripts that were uncovered later. So if there is a manuscript error in the majority then that error has been copied many times over, reinforcing that error. That said, I love the NKJV. I love the ESV and the CSB and the NIV and even the KJV. I agree most all translations are great. Read the TR and the CT NT bibles and look for places that stick out. If you find one, read it in many translations and find out why it’s different. You’ll learn a lot that way.
1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which ARE SAVED it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18 NKJV For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who ARE BEING SAVED it is the power of God. The NKJV turns salvation into a process! We are saveD the moment we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, NOT "being saved"! Matthew 7:14 KJV Because strait is the gate, and NARROW is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matthew 7:14 NKJV Because narrow is the gate and DIFFICULT is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. The way is narrow NOT difficult! Two different words!! Nope, I will stick with the King James Bible, not Satan's counterfeit, thank you!
In I Cor 1:18 saved is in the present tense so being saved isn't wrong. I don't think it is preferable, but it isn't wrong based on the tense used by Paul. In Matthew 7:14, narrow is a bad transition in my opinion. The word means to press upon, to crowd in, to be under pressure, or afflicted. I think narrow is a possible but not likely meaning for that word. To call them wrong is to fail to understand the range of meanings and understanding tenses in Greek.
@@RevReads Matthew 7:14 KJV Because strait is THE GATE, and narrow is THE WAY, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Jesus said: John 10:9 KJV I AM THE DOOR: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. "Door" is another word for "gate," and it's "strait," which is another word for narrow, because there's only ONE WAY to be saved! In our Spanish Reina Valera Bibles, it's clearer because it uses the word "puerta" in both Matthew 7:14 and John 10:9!! Jesus also said: John 14:6 KJV Jesus saith unto him, I AM THE WAY, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. The way is narrow because, again, Jesus is the ONLY WAY to be saved! God Himself commands not to change a single word!! The New King James Bible is very deceptive!! There's so many differences that you simply MUST watch this documentary about this! Put it at a faster speed if you want, but it explains what's wrong with all the new modern Bible versions! God bless you! New World Order Bible Versions ua-cam.com/video/iXK8yJj-S4U/v-deo.html
@@soulh4838 I'll stick with my personal studies in the Greek/Hebrew and by comparing multiple other translations. If it is possible for you to accept it, the NKJV has a fine English translation of the Greek word used by Matthew in 7:14. Remember, Matthew wrote in Greek, not English or Spanish.
@@RevReads God created all languages, and I very much doubt that anyone has better scholarship than the 52 translators that did our King James Bible from the Textus Receptus, Old Testament from the Hebrew and Aramaic, and the New Testament Greek, who were very brilliant and some of them were fluent in a quite a few languages! I myself am bilingual in Spanish and English and have done quite a lot of translating since I was a teenager, when my parents needed my help, since they didn't speak English. If you're not fluent in Greek and Hebrew, I doubt you even know what you're talking about. Just because a word has different meanings depending on how you use them, doesn't mean you can apply every or any meaning you choose on a text. The meaning is determined by the context, plain and simple. Proverbs 18:13 KJV He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
@KJV new under GOD. I FULLY TRUST THE. KJV. my comment was directed to those who think MATT 7:14. Reads difficult is the way. . Which is how the NKJV reads. As opposed to Narrow is the way. How the. KJV READS. I BELIEVE Narrow is a better word for this instance. KJV. I was responding to those who favor the. NKJV. as the better translation. I do not think it is.
I must have missed it: doesn't the KJV also have "fasting" in Mark 9:29? Why do you prefer the NKJV over the KJV? And more importantly, why isn't the KJV the most important translation? - King James Bible: And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. New King James Version: So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.”
I agree with your principle - awareness of manuscript variations - but this does not require reading the NKJV. Important variants are mentioned in many translations' footnotes. Based on the issue of variants, I would argue that the most important English translation is the NET, which provides the best information on variant readings in its detailed footnotes.
From my experience as a pastor, the average Christian is not going to read through all the notes of the NET Bible. You really need a Bible with the main text based on the Majority and a Bible based on the Critical.
Hello, my friend! Just came across your post. My two cents: "difficult" focuses on the labors that WE must struggle through along our Christian journey to reach God, while "narrow" focuses on the one and only Gate onto the path, which is Jesus Christ. So that's a win for the KJV. The win for the NKJV is the textual notes that give the variant readings from the other text types (the more you know...). By the way, the King James translators were most definitely NOT KJVO types; find and read the Preface to the Reader, which should be printed in every KJV edition - that would stop dead the majority of these "arguments about words." The NIV won't damn you. I'm a KJV/NKJV kind of guy, but I have also taught high school English for 38 years, so I'm extremely comfortable with Elizabethan and Jacobean English (Shakespeare and the KJV). In that same vein, for a truly well-done modern translation, I recommend the HCSB/CSB.
In the year 1598, Theodore Beza substituted "the Holy one" with "who is to be" in Rev 16:5 (Beza's Conjectural Emendations) without any textual evidence support ........a very brave act as a Christian scholar in the light of Rev 22:18,19 judgements
@@RevReads Admire Reformed theologian Theodore Beza for the courage in changing God's word......that's where Textus Receptor (TR) differs from Majority text & Westcort-Hort critical text
I want to share with everyone something that I have discovered a while ago during my journey with Christ. Let me first preface this by saying a few things..... This may sound a bit offensive to some at first. I hope not, but it might. I say that because I too took offense when someone first mentioned this to me. Please reserve judgment for a bit and let me explain. It has to do with Bible translations.
When I first began my walk with Christ, I was perplexed with the MANY different translations. I eventually settled on the NASB. It is the translation that a very well known and respected Pastor that I follow uses at his church, and one that is supposed to be among the “most literal translations”. Sounded good enough for me, so thats what I began using as my “go-to”. I also chose to compliment that with a NIV study Bible and a NKJV study Bible......
Now..... Fast forward a bit. One day I came across someone in my travels, and the topic of Bible translations came up. I quickly discovered that he was a member of the “dreaded” “King James Only” group. I had never come across this group before, and it honestly seemed a bit cultish to me at first. He began to tell me how all the “modern translations” had been corrupted and altered, and that the ONLY pure and true English translation was the King James. My response to him was something along the lines of.....
“That’s ridiculous! There are a lot of legitimate translations. Many of them just have updated language that make it easier for a modern reader to understand”
He went on to explain how even my beloved NASB and NIV (and many others) had been corrupted by unscrupulous translators and so forth. He continued, and said that even the New King James has been altered, and has dangerously changed Gods Truth.
Ok..... So now I’m thinking that this guy must be crazy....... But I thought about it for a while. I then purposed in my heart that I wanted, above all else, the TRUTH. If what he was saying to me was actually true, I wanted to know about it, and it was worth the time it took me to find out! I decided to do some research on this topic. The short answer to what I discovered is that he was, in fact, CORRECT!
There is a lot of VERY compelling evidence that the modern translations are, in part, corrupt and HAVE BEEN altered in a way that absolutely DOES NOT honor God, specifically attacking the Deity of Jesus Christ, His sinless perfection, The Trinity, and many other critical areas of Christian doctrine.
To quote Matthew 13:28 “an enemy hath done this”
Now I’m not going to try to convince you of this. But I do want to DESPERATELY URGE you to diligently take the time to look into this. Don’t brush this off as I almost did! Purpose it in your heart to seek Gods truth in this matter, no matter where it takes you! I promise you, it WILL BE worth it!
I STRONGLY urge you to get and read the book “51 Reasons Why The King James: A Path From Doubt To Faith” by David W. Daniels.
Seriously, everyone needs to read this book!!! It’s only $4.99 for the Kindle version on Amazon! About $17 with shipping if you want the paperback.
**Also, MUST READ “New Age Bible Versions: An Exhaustive Documentation of the Message, Men & Manuscripts Moving Mankind to the Antichrist's One World Religion “ by G. A. Riplinger. **
It WILL change your mind!!!!!
These books offer TONS of COMPELLING evidence to the King James Only stance!
I can now say, without reservation, I am unapologetically a member of the King James Only group. After seeing the evidence in favor of that position, I can’t in good conscience go back. I just can’t. At times, I literally felt sick to my stomach as I saw how some passages of the modern translations have been altered, and the implications that those changes have.
In the same way that when I came to know Christ, I felt compelled to tell others about the gospel, I now feel absolutely compelled to share this information with my brothers and sisters in Christ. This is SO IMPORTANT because there is SO MUCH error in people’s theology and it is being perpetuated by CORRUPT translations.
On a side note, I used to think the King James was difficult to read. It absolutely is not! It’s beautiful, and I have never felt closer to Jesus during my Bible time, then I do while reading from The King James!
Kindly consider my words. I hope this reaches each of you well!
It WILL change your mind!!!!!
The Truth!
By far the best explanation for using the NKJV. In 1984, the year the nkjv came to fruition, I sat waiting in my barber shop and asked my pastor, who was getting a haircut, “ Pastor, what bible translation would you use ?” He sat up, paused and said , “go to the Baptist bookstore on 50th street and ask for a copy of the Nkjv bible, the Greek manuscript is very good and excellent for reading and study “
I haven’t used anything since.
Great story, thanks for sharing
@Prentiss Yeates .. actually the NKJV came to Fruition in 1979. before that for a short period the NKJV was only in the N.T. then in 1982... textual footnotes were added such as the ibid.. N.U.. and M.S. notes.. written as footnotes.. or Lit... in the cross-references...then in 1985.. some scriptural texts were updated.. though Not many.. but the 1982.. version is Not Identical to the ones after 1985.......AND.. way.. before the NKJV hit the market....... in around 1971.. newer versions of the KJV were released.. these are the KJV II.... and the KJV III.... I have a copy of the KJV II from about 1971.. where this clearly is between the KJV and the NKJV.. in it's wording.. it is as if... some translators.. were testing the waters.. before they went full bore on the NKJV...I knew a pastor once as well that would use the NKJV.. then years later I caught up with him and he had a KJV in his hands.... I asked him why... and he said "the Lord opened my eyes"... each to their own I guess.. .. but I know I can't trust the NKJV to me any more accurate than other modern translations out there..
@Prentiss Yeates. ,…so that is your reasoning behind using the NKJV. for so many years. ? Because your pastor suggested it. ? When I first got saved. Naturally I did the same thing. As a new believer I believed it was only natural to trust those such as pastors who have some years under their belt and are. “Grounded” in the word. So I understand your logic. Over the years I have had different pastors use various translations. But the day I came to my first pastor with some study books I bought and he promptly grabbed them out from under my arms and threw them in the Trashcan. Then he said to me. “ just read God’s word. Don’t read all that other junk. ‘. I realized that the Christian walk has to be an individual one. No one can do it for me. I decided to find out for myself. Which version of God’s word. Seemed to be the best. I ended up switching to KJV ONLY. Around. 2005. But many pastors and teachers I have had over the years used NKJV. ,….the church I am now reads from the NASB. I have been there 7 months. Had to leave my first church since Covid closed it. But I will probably Not join this church because of the NASB issue. Not that I am being forced to read rhe NASB. BUT I dot wish to stay in a church. Where I cannot feel the Spirit of God at work.
@@jeffcarlson3269 my former pastor taught at a baptist college and seminary and solid teacher. Antidotal stories are important, but I’ve come to believe that when one translation ( NKJV) can bridge the two texts ( majority and critical) then it’s fair and balanced.
I understand what you are saying. And I am happy if you are really loving God s word by reading. The NKJV. I have several. NKJV. myself. My favorites. Are the. MACARTHUR. BELIEVERS. AND. THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. study bibles. But may I suggest. If you get a chance. Pick up a copy of David W. Daniels. THE. BRIDGE BIBLE. ? He explains a lot more about the reservations regarding the. NKJV. much better than I can. If after reading thru that. You still believe. The. NKJV. is the best translation to use. Than I understand. But then again. You may come away with a different Idea regarding the NKJV. THANKS.
The Berean Study Bible also includes footnotes indicating readings from the TR, BYZ, majority text, etc..
Finally, very easy explanation of differences between the older and late Greek texts. My study bible of choice is the full color study bible by Thomas Nelson. Thank you pastor for making this explanation easy to follow.
NKJV feels like LORD is talking to you by its preserved poeticness.
❤
666 the worship of Satan is on your new king james version
Absolutely! This is spot on in more than a handful of ways. It is the Bible I read and the Bible I teach from. There is no better translation that deals with the English language well. The literary heritage that it preserves leaves all of the other translations in the dust. Thanks for these great thoughts, Shawn. Right up the middle.
I've watched this three times now. Thanks for this video. I'm starting to develop an interest and hunger for the NKJV and was searching for vids like this one. Thank you.
I love KJV I feel the Holy Spirit helping me to understand as I read.
@Tracy Gregory..... Amen to that.... finally someone.. on this blog.. has their eyes open... thank You..!..
@Troy Lee Amen and thank you..... I believe that as well... yet I have found myself occasionally reading scripture from the NASB 1995.... the wording is a little different.. yet still Not too liberal...I still consider my self as a KJV onlyist.. because I have seen too many things... to persuade me otherwise..
Tracy ~ AMEN!!!!
I have heard that many times from people that completely misunderstood the Bible. That was the same argument Catholics used to prevent the Bible from being translated to English. Silly
@@jeffcarlson3269 So you should be able to read the Greek and Hebrew, then, huh?
I purchased a NKJV Bible not too long ago. After reading the KJV since Grade School. The introduction page on the NKJV says the translations were completed in 1982. I love it. I know one Pastor who uses it for preaching. After using the KJV for decades. That tells you something.
It took me a while to try it for the first time and I'm so glad I've read it.
The nkjv removes scripture and drastically changes what God has made written for us. Same with the NIV and ESV. Do as you will, but understand God's words never change, and to change his words is a terrible sin. Be cautious and not deceived. Turn to God and pray for salvation... Truly pray for it and you will receive. May god bless you Amen.
@Curtis Stewart... I had a similar situation with a pastor I knew... he used to use the KJV then one day.. he was using a NKJV.. and I asked Him why..he switched... he said.. when he ran across phrases like "To Wit" in the KJV .. he had to stop and look up what that meant.. he asked me if I knew what it meant and I said no.. so he said,,,"there ya see...?.."....but guess what?... less than a year later he was back preaching from the KJV.. why do you think that was?.. I'll tell you why... because he found out what I found out.. it's better to look up the phrases that you don't know in the KJV and be right... than to read the NKJV and never look something up and BE WRONG...!..
@@kjvnewundergod.6807 Which scriptures does the NKJV remove? I'm a textus receptus guy so I know the niv and nasb are not compliant. I have looked up some word changes of NKJV in the KJV Strongs Concordinance Greek and Hebrew dictionary. So far the NKJV looks closer to the original language. But I haven't seen whole verses deleted from the NKJV such as 1John 5:7 like some. Which ones are missing from NKJV? I'm willing to learn if you have more info than just talking points. I'm washed in the blood of Jesus so don't worry about my salvation.
@@kjvnewundergod.6807 Thou shalt not lie. There are no verses taken out of the NKJV. I know because I read both. If you are talking about the footnotes that INFORM you of the differences between the different Greek texts, I'll let you in on a little secret....The 1611 KJV has a similar footnote in Luke 17:36 which says "This 36 verse is wanting in most Greek copies" and if you have a Trinitarian Bible Society Westminster Reference Bible, that is only offered in the KJV, you will see that same footnote.
The NKJV happens to be my favorite translation, personally (there are so many I like though). It has never crossed my mind as being the “most important” translation. I think you’re right though; you make a very good point. Good job bringing a new idea and fresh insight into such an old debate. We usually just get the same noise over and over, but you brought something new to the conversation (I’m assuming, at least I have not heard this before). Good job.
Thanks for the kind words. I just love the Bible and Bible translations. I'm reading the NASB 2020 right now. And I really like it so far, although it is really early.
Good taste Gary. Just ignore all the places where it says to question whether the text should be there, and change “heart” to “belly” in John 7:38 and you have the second best Bible translation.
I have 3. NKJV is my main one. My KJV sits beside us for clarification and my ESV sits on my bookshelf in case of an emergency, like really archaic language.
Thank you for this. I've always been attracted to the NKJV.
Wise choices
I ordered on last week..I find myself straying from him thus week which I hate with passion so I'm going to get back on track and make sure I stay there ! I have the KJV Collectors edition but everytime I try to read / understand the more I keep putting it off and saying "I'll read it later" when infact I know I won't.. I heard about this translation and feel that it's easier for me to understand.
@Random Person..... so let me understand this.. you would rather read from a translation that is weaker and strays from God's intended meaning on many verses..and walk away with a misunderstanding.. rather than try to read a more accurate harder to understand..(in your opinion)...Version like the KJV..?..
@@jeffcarlson3269 With this being your logic, why aren't you reading the NASB? Or the ESV? Since they both [by scholarship approval] Are ABOVE the KJV in translations?
@@calebtheexsatanist6626 I read from the NASB .... sadly that is what the church I am now attending Preaches and teaches from.. I have been going to this church for about 7 months.. but I will Not join or become a member there for that very reason.. I believe that we should not forsake the assembling of ourselves together as the bible teaches,.. but I am Not sure I can be a member of a church that uses a bible such as the NASB.. which does NOT... even use the word HELL.anong its other flaws......I use the NASB ..RSV ..NIV.. ESV and others even the DOUAY RHEIMS.. at times to cross reference.. verses.. as well as many commentaries... and what I have found is that although the KJV.. is not 100%.. perfect.. it is closer to what God had intended for us to know about Him than most translations....... cases in point...... these 2 verses.. are 2 of 1000's I could share with you.. compare REV 4:11... KJV.. with any other version... or 1 COR 1:18 same thing.. oh here's another one I'll suggest...Genesis 22:8.. KJV reads "God will provide Himself a lamb".. most other versions read "God will provide FOR Himself a lamb".. by simply adding the word "FOR".. other versions have taken away the thought that God(Jesus).. will be THE LAMB.. by giving us the impression God is going to find something.. Not necessarily Himself.. in the KJV the Christophony is more apparent.. And that my dear friend.. will draw me closer to God.. as I have said .....as the KJV does this in 1000's of other places.............When I open up God's word I want to feel drawn toward Him.. think like Him.. I can't feel that way or think that way with any other versions even the NKJV.... sorry.... and if you do Not understand my reasoning.. I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree....
@@calebtheexsatanist6626 also I would suggest to you picking up a copy of "Look What's Missing" .. by David W. Daniels.... He explains very thoroughly why other translations other than the KJV.. are weaker translations and Not as good as the KJV... he shows by several examples of scripture......
@@jeffcarlson3269 Buy the pastor a copy of “neither oldest nor best” and he really might change, to nkjv at least. Pearl bought the copyrights just so it can be sold without royalties or profit to get it to the world. Since he has written so many good bible books, I figured such a move is very meaningful. (Or show him this channel’s review of james snapps book about the ending of mark lol). But im serious about that book, just a thought not trying to tell you what to do. God bless Sir.
This video actually helped me decide which bible to purchase as I was in the bookstore. I ended up getting the Ignite NJKV ❤ can't wait to dive in ✝️🙏❤️
I'll be honest I don't understand any of this kind of stuff. I used to read the KJV but the text was hard to understand sometimes so I switched to the American Standard. The American Standard that I read for a while I had issues with, for some reason I did not like it, I felt that it left out some critical things which would give clarity in certain versus and stories or leave things out that would give a completely different perspective on stuff. I now read the NKJV which I haven't had any issues with, no understanding issues or feeling like things are left out. Honestly I feel for an English bible, for clarity, the NKJV stands on top. That is my opinion. Every comparison that i've made between the American standard and the NKJV the NKJV says the same text that is in the American Standard, but with more depth and sometimes different words that opens my eyes to the importance of certain versus.
@GlorifyGodInEverything .... if you haven't had any issues with the NKJV yet then you haven't looked very closely.. there are several places where the translators took liberties with the text by changing the intented meaning of the verse... it's not all an update with the language.. compare.. 1 Cor 1:18 and Rev 4:11... for starters... in several places such as in that Corinthians verse I cited.. words are changed that make the intent muddled/.... there was No reason to change the phrase from the KJV "which are saved".. to NKJV "who are being saved".. why was this done?.. which part of "which are saved" was hard to understand or needed to ne reworded to make it more appealing?... this is the type of meddlesome liberty that the NKJV is riddled with and could have been done without the change.... the serpent in the garden tried to confuse the issue with Eve as well..."Yea hath God said"... watch yourself.. you are heading down the same path with the NKJV....
@@jeffcarlson3269 Trust me I understand what you are saying, there are a lot of different translations and i'm no scholar. You have 3 major greek sources for translating such as Critical text, Majority text, Textus receptus and this all goes far above my head haha. I've heard the rumors about different translations of some being good, others being bad, having to own many different translations to grasp the reality of what particular text is meaning to broaden the understanding of it all etc. etc. In one's life time, I really do not think we will unlock every single text and meaning and obtain every bit of knowledge especially for a normal person such as myself with no background in Greek who doesn't understand Greek, or Hebrew etc. I believe God will reveal his truths to you as He see's fit regardless of translation which is why some people feel lead to not read anything else besides KJV and other people are not being lead in the same path. So if you are reading a translation God see's unfit for you to be reading, in my perspective I believe you will be lead in the spirit to read a different translation depending on how strong your relationship is with God, and that goes with everything, being convicted of doing good rather than bad, discernment being revealed to you. It seems to me that having faith in words without Christ doesn't get people anywhere, it's the faith in Christ and relationship with the Father that actually counts in the end, not the knowledge of every single word that was written down. One thing I do see that kind of bothers me though is a lot of people worship the bible rather than God which is a scary thing, instead of putting their faith where it should be placed. The bible is a very useful tool into understanding more about the faith, but you have to understand the reality that even back in the day, when people didn't own what we call "the bible" were still able to be in relationship with the father and learn in spirit, which they did. Faith is to be had in the Father, in Christ and his promise and what He did for us, and who he says we are, that He is who He says He is "the way, the truth and the life" not faith in a book (not saying we shouldn't read the bible at all, but you know what i'm saying). The bible is a faith builder and was written down so people could see the character of our father, to help guide us in our walk. The bible becomes pointless all together without God. So ya, that is kind of my mindset on it. I've also heard people talk down on the KJV with certain aspects contained in it that a different text translation is better for certain passages, where critical text doesn't do justice to certain translations in the KJV.... So you see where i'm going with all of this. This is a major reason why I trust my relationship in Christ with the Father above any worldly knowledge that someone has to give me about how i'm wrong or I should do this or that. But ya, i'm definitely not going to be doomed reading NKJV, i'll be doomed not following Christ. It's not about having the perfect translation of the bible, because without the original texts and knowledge of the languages used originally, we are just not going to have the perfect translations regardless and people lose perspective of the reality that without Christ, your doomed already. Christ comes first, before relationships with family/friends, before the bible, before your work and everything else. The Holy Spirit guides you in this walk and people are in different locations in their walk in Christ, but if we sit here and let man depict what we are doing wrong, and we start swaying like a leaf in the wind, it all becomes non beneficial, because you end up losing your faith in Christ and obtaining faith in man which is a big no no. If man says something and the Holy Spirit convicts your heart that is a different thing, but without the conviction of the Holy Spirit, people need to continue in the walk that God has laid before them. My perspective is to see that even if someone is reading a translation that I wouldn't read, that I should be happy that they are actively trying to have a relationship with God, and that God is in control, and if this person is really trying to seek and stay in relationship with the Father, the Father will guide them to truth. It doesn't say there is truth in the bible, it says there is truth in Christ and that is what is important. People are losing the fact that Christ is truth, truth is to be had in the Holy Spirit and your relationship with the Father and you do not need a bible to understand that.
@@GlorifyGodInEverything well said.. thank you for stating this plainly... I agree... it is our relationship with Jesus that really counts.... percet sense.. and you are right on a person Not being able to understand all of God's word in one lifetime... there is so much there...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I wasn't trying to harp on you either haha it is more generalizing. I just always kind of rant when it comes to God or Jesus because i'm very passionate about my Savior and my Father. Kind of off topic and maybe some food for thought, but it's baffling to even be in existence, it blows my mind that he thought of us and formed us before we were even born. People want evidence of God... Just look at yourself. You are literally a work of art created by God, and our purpose is to love the Father and all He wants to do is love us. It brings a tear to my eye especially coming from a background without love. You are His and when you look into the mirror, understand you are looking at a creation that God made, he made you for Him and he wants you and me so badly. I always think of myself as a nobody, especially compared to God, but yet I am everything to Him, He is the most important in the universe who can do anything and obtain anything but he wants me and you for some reason haha.... It's mind blowing but i'm forever indebt to my Father for coming after me. King of kings, and Lord of lords, the Almighty. It's pretty crazy, but God is awesome, Christ is awesome and thank God for sacrificing his son for us and pouring out his love onto us... Soooo much love. And I love you and am happy to know I will have you sharing the kingdom with me!!! For real though, I love you and am grateful for another brother in Christ. Stay strong and fight the good fight, we are not alone, God will not abandon us. When the whole world comes against you, you are the Fathers remember that.
@@GlorifyGodInEverything thanks for the kind words and the same to you as well... Love ya in the Lord... .... a new friend.. ...Jeff C..
It is important to understand no English version will be perfect. One must rely on the Holy Spirit to totally understand it. I used to be a KJV only person until I got a KJV dictionary. I compared it with the NKJV and 99% of all the changes were literally updated definitions that were the same in the dictionary and the omission of verses that were not in original manuscripts, rather added. If you really want a word for word greet and Hebrew word for word, the Linear Bible is excellent. You can really see what the text is. I love the NKJV, NASB, Amplified and ESV versions. I stay away from thought for though translations.
Thank you for your vlog and unbiased opinion.
Thank you so much for the lovely comment. I receive so much opposition at times that a comment like this is cool water to a parched soul. Thank you!
Does the NKJV mention unicorns?
@@strangeroamer3219 No. It says "wild ox."
Reading Young's literal modern N. T., I think it uses same material as KJV.
@Vicky Burton the problem is Not with the translators using innappropriate words when substituting... the issue is that some of the verses meanings or intented meanings have been changed by the translators substituting phrases that DO NOT.. transfer the same thought.... compare 1 Cor 1:18 ir Rev 4:11 for just 2 examples....
NKJV for me for life!!
Most of my biggest break throughs, in spirituality, have been made while reading the NKJV. I've read the NIV and NKJV back to back at times too.
@P Gunsolley. The biggest trick if the devil is to make one think they are getting closer to God but really they are getting further from God. I probably won’t be able to convince you that the NKJV is not as accurate as the KJV so I will just wish you well and pray that you will continue to grow in your walk with God.
@@jeffcarlson3269
How accurate is the kjv compare to nkjv which is my main translation?
@@jeffcarlson3269 kjv best by far, nkjv second best, douay rheims is third. Ignore the doubts about text in nkjv. Niv is evil. Esv awful.
@@powerant1914 He didnt seem tk answer. nkjv is based mostly on kjv. After kjv, nkjv is probably best. Ignore where nkjv questions if the text is legit and should be there. It is and it should. This very channel reviewed the longer ending of mark in james snapp’s book. Is legit. And john 7:38 in nkjv should say “belly” not “heart”. If you get ok with kjv it’s better. Thee and thou is singular and ye and you is plural. Throw away your niv is evil. Michael pearl videos are helpful imo. God bless you Sir. Oh, please consider trying one without chapter and verse markings. For me at least was profound. Those can be so artificial. God-breathed publishing has some
@@ibperson7765
In Jhn7:38 why is it wrong if it was translated as heart? It simply means that whoever believes in Christ rivers of living water will flow from deep within the person....
Just like in John1:18 if we use kjv it reads "bosom" but what if i use other versions like GWT where it renders "heart"?
I dont see any mistake there as long as it does not contradict the teaching of God which is to compare spiritual things w/ spiritual (1Cor.2:13,nkjv)....
Anyways, it doesnt really matter cause i also use not just kjv but all other versions as my secondary but nkjv will always be my main....
There is now a Majority Text translation available online. Not yet in print though.
Dear Shawn, THANKS (!!) for a sensible video. I've been using NKJV for a number of years as my preferred text for an accurate translation. I very much appreciate the textual notes that they use, indicating Majority or the Critical ( NU: Nestle-Uhland) text origins and differences. And even I find a Critical text here and there that seems to possibly be the "better sounding" translation. ANYWAY....be affirmed in what you have said; there's great wisdom and common sense. And I appreciate the thought-for-thought because they challenge me to see the past with a contemporary vernacular.
Love the notes in the Nelson NKJVs!
@Dan C Yes those NU. and. MSS seems to bring clarity. But in reality. By offering one options by presenting one with different texts the NKJV translators allow people to choose which text may the correct one. What about those who may end up getting led down the wrong thought path ? What will you say to those that will miss rewards they may have gotten by choosing to believe. The footnotes that may or may not be accurate. ?
@@makarov138 try the notes in the Nelson KJV study bible.. I thinks it's better than the Nelson..NKJV study bible.. why?.. because of the difference in editorship... the the editor Head Editor of the KJV.. study bible is Jerry Falwell... very conservative.. in his views.. old fashioned.almost... where the NKJV.. editors take a more modern Liberal approach to their notes.. not overly noticeable..just slightly.. but to the trained reader the more liberalistic approach is noticeable.... of course.. MacArthur.. is pretty good as far as NKJV.. study bibles go.. even though he has professed publicly.... that the NASB.. is his favorite translation.. I won't hold it against him...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. When I say the notes I'm not referring to notes in a study bible. I don't study bibles. I'm referring to the marginal notes about verses referring to the contexts and word variants in the two main Greek texts.
@@makarov138 oh ok.. thanks for clarifying that....
My 11 year old grandson accepted the Lord recently. He is just starting to be able to use a regular as opposed a children's Bible
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:”
Revelation 22:18 KJV
That is why I am Orthodox and not catholic or protestant
Yep you dont mess with the book of revelation.
My favorite is my 1985 NKJV Nelson Publishers with double-column and wide margins and real leather covers. Just recently I was able to find another one online and bought it immediately!! Same year printing!! The notes as to majority text and critical textual variations are the best.
I also like the Nelson notes. Overall they are very good.
Man what a great find ...I have a large print 1988 Open Bible Heritage edition it too has the same cool style.
In my opinion, the 80s Nelson NKJVs were some of the best bibles ever made.....Yes in very bias , I can't help it I just love the old-school Nelson's.
Can you tell me the Nelson number on that wide margin bible? I have a slightly newer one that is worn out. Would love to have a wide margin NKJV. Thanks.
@@ralphbrickey9441 Can't find an ISBN number. However, the outside number below the word NELSON is 476BG. Printed in 1985. Hope this helps. God bless!!
I have KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, NIV, and NRSV. I tend to gravitate to the NJKV. In my experience, with the editions I have, the NKJV, more than any other translations I have, includes detailed notes on the alternative readings. So, it seems to be the best of both worlds.
Thank you so much for sharing your excellent insights that will prove invaluable in my understanding of the bible !!!
The NKJV has been my preferred Bible version for the last 10 years but I have a variety of other translations to refer to. Recently I've been drawn to the NLT because it is so easy to understand, and because my pastor uses it in church. Would you do a review of that translation too?
A couple quick notes : (1) technically speaking the nkjv represents a modernized version of the kjv which uses the tr in the nt (wow that's a lot of acronyms). The tr is only part of the maj text. So yes the nkjv is the only commonly available and somewhat popular "representation" of the majority text. (2) IMHO the nkjv does the best job of indicating the difference between the critical, tr and majority texts. For example look at Rev 1 in the nkjv; way more difference between the tr and majority text than the critical and majority. (3) The HCSB was originally conceived as a translation of the majority text in the nt. This changed when the general editor died; Art Farstad, who was as the editor of the nkjv. Great job summarizing. I plan my day around these videos........ok that's an overstatement.
What a beautiful name! Art Farstad; I’d like to learn about him.
@@SoRunThatYeMayObtain you can type in his name on wikipedia.. or google and it should come up
Great video pastor. Although I know it has several issues, I like the NIV84 because if it's readability. (I'm simple) But I keep my smartphone next to me all the time and I'm constantly looking up KJV, NKJV, ESV, the, NASB to compare. What do you think of my method? Do you think it's OK or should I stay away from the NIV as my main read? Or maybe use one of the other translations as my main o e and use NIV somtimes to compare. What do ya think pastor?
I think it's a safe strategy. I like the 84 NIV. I wish they never would have updated it.
@@RevReads Thank you pastor
Pastor, I have a NASB New Open Bible study edition from Thomas Nelson and It's copyright from 1990 ( That can't be right and 1990 is for the study Bible) but Just below that is the New American Standard Bible lockman foundation with all the dates from 1960 and it goes all the way up to 1977. Does that mean this version is different than the 1995 that everyone talks about? Even my YouVersion phone app only has NASB95 and then NASB 2020.. My NASB last date is 1977 and I'm wondering if it's different then the 95.
@@yobabybubba The 95 is much easier to read than the 77. I think it was a really good update. I'm still a little torn on how to feel about the 2020 update. I'm reading it now.
@@RevReads thank you once again
What do you think of the MEV/ morden english version ?
I haven't read it. I should.
@@RevReads yeah you really should.
It's more poetic sounding than the new King James but it's also more modern than the old King james.
And that's actually what it's supposed to be.
Just as the new King James was supposed to be the modern edition of the Old King James likewise is the Mev the updated modern edition of the new King James.
I really like it.
If anything the only flaws to it is that it doesn't have italics and it doesn't have footnotes.
@@austintucker394 it has probably been recommended to me more than any other book on this channel. I think I might need to read it.
What ever Bible you get I always recommend to have a kjv study Bible to go with it.
I 100 percent agree with this. Great advice!
Excellent explanation. Thank you so much Pastor. I have a question. Is the NKJV based upon the broader Byzantine texts you mentioned or only on the 11 or so Byzantine texts Erasmus has available to him? Thank you.
It follows close to the KJV on textual issues. I would guess there are a few places where it expands outside of the TR and Erasmus, but not many places.
Thank you Pastor!☺
Good Word,Rev!!! Thank you for your enthusiasm.🌹🌹🌹
The NKJV also gets it done for me.
I also use the KJV from time to time but since I don't speak Elizabethan english I mostly use more modern english translations.
I also hold a Byzantine text priority position for the New Testament and for this I use the NKJV. And although it's based on the T.R. the T.R. is about 99% similar to the Byzantine Text.
However, for the Old Testament I use both the NKJV and ESV. I believe the Masoretic text has some errors that the Masoretes made intentionally, mostly trying to deny that Jesus was the Messiah which we know they denied. The geneaologies are different among other things.
For this I like to contrast the Masoretic Hebrew with the Greek from the LXX and taking into account the discoverings at Qumran in the Dead Sea.
Alsl compare Deuteronomy 32:8 between NKJV and the ESV. I prefer the ESV reading. If you wonder why i prefer it consult the work of the late Dr. Heiser and his thesis on the Divine Council.
Being spanish I mostly read the Bible in Spanish and occasionally in Italia and there too I prefer Byzantine oriented texts.
Reina-Valera SBT and other various Reina-Valera's in Spanish and thr Giovanni Diodati translation in Italian.
P.S. I'm still studying biblical greek.
Good video but one correction: The NKJV is not the only modern Bible to use the Textus Receptus for the NT. The Modern English Version (MEV) does as well and it's a widely-available translation. I'm not sure what its future is, or how long it will hang around, but at least for now it's available.
There's also the World English Bible, which is based on the majority text. But after checking out the WEB and the MEV online, I think the NKJV is just better.
Thank you this! A real confirmation
I'm so glad it was a help for you!
The NKJV footnotes are extremely valuable simply because it identifies the texts that the CT eclectic versions either take out or have used differently. It gives you a “ heads-up” and that is helpful! Biggest point to show in the CR eclectic versions is the “ some manuscripts have ( fill in the blank)” error. Why? It’s generally “ most manuscripts have “ not some but they hold to the older/oldest manuscripts are the best. CT is based on weight. Not literal weight but the weight of evidence as to the closeness in date to the original autographs. Blessings
It has different meanings
I love reading ESV and comparing scriptures to KJB but just ordered the NKJV Bible. Very excited to read it. Thanks
Thanks for the response!
I'm currently reading the ESV along with the KJV to compare & although it's easier to understand, I've noticed that certain words are taken out of the ESV, which could be misleading.
The Orthodox Study Bible is so good! It uses the NKJV and a lot of commentary from early church members and fathers!
I have this on my wishlist!
Great Video! Ultimately the argument boils down to 'few manuscripts but older' and 'many manuscripts, but newer'.
It's a little more complicated than that. The older manuscripts definitely have some issues with them that are overlooked simply because they are older. That's not to say the majority is always preferable, but I think scholars have accepted some readings only because of their dating. Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@RevReads I now, I was simplifying it tremendously, even amongst the Byzantine MSS There's a number of distinct families, Wilbur pickering has done lots of work on Kr for example, (he calls it family 35), but for the most part, All Byz families together are much more consistent than the Alexandrian tradition. Geographical distribution should also be taken into account, Byzantine texttypes were spread all over the Byzantine empire and then some, whereas our alexandrian manuscripts, are, well... Local to Alexandria! I would lean more Byzantine and supplement it with the Alexandrian where necessary, but it's difficult, because "Older = Better" isn't always accurate!
@@Dwayne_Green good comment, thanks for looking beyond the surface
I like that. And I’ve thought about this myself. The only reason I don’t rush out and buy a NKJV is that I’m one of those people who pays attention to variants and footnotes in my bibles so I’m already aware of many of the alternate readings, especially in the NT. But for someone who isn’t as privy, this is good advice.
My first study Bible was a NKJV (New Geneva Study Bible). I have multiple Bibles and multiple translations. The ones I use the most are the NKJV and NASB (1977 and 1995; no interest in the 2020 version). I'd like to find a full-size note-taking Bible in the NKJV I could use when teaching my Sunday school class.
The devil dismantles brick by brick so not to be noticed. Perhaps, every step away from the original is a brick removed.
Your comment goes deeper than many believers will ever realize. Part of the reason that, though I own many translations, they are always compared to a KJV for clarity.
I read the nasb for the literal translation but I see people say word for word translation doesn’t care about meaning of metaphors and idioms. I am on the fence about trusting the nkjv and anything with majority text because I really want it to be accurate.
The oldest manuscripts of the Textus Receptus have been ground into dirt over time. They were the most used becaused they were the most accurate. But like any "go to" bible they became worn out. The oldest Alexandrian texts weren't used as much because they weren't as accurate. That's why the oldest Alexandrian manuscripts still exist. We know the TR was around first because the early church fathers quoted verses from the TR that aren't in the Alexandrian in there writings.
I wish there was an updated NKJV that follows the majority text, while still including all the textual notes.
agreed
Originally, it was supposed to follow the Majority Text, but Thomas Nelson received criticism about changing the textual basis from that of the KJV.
Awesome. Thanks rev
Glad you enjoyed it
One simple question from the following verse.....
knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. Gal.2.16 NKJV
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Gal.2.16 KJV
Are you justified by your own personal faith in Christ which can ebb and flow with worldly events as taught in the first verse, or are you justified by the faith of Christ which is solid and gifted to us as taught in the second reading? (Eph 2:8)
For study I use a NKJV full color study bible and for devotional reading it's the New English Translation (NET) or the New Living Translation (NLT).
“My skin grows black and falls from me; My bones burn with fever.”
Job 30:30 NKJV
Israelites weren't black bro they just got sunburned read the whole thing, it's a complaint, not a norm.
It was a humble and respectful ...not for profit...like most these days, modern rendition of the KJV. Erasmus believed he was under divine inspiration...I think he was too. If you start comparing closely with other versions on key doctrinal verses, you will come to appreciate the NKJV more and more. NKJV is the modern day king!!! all others bow down.
What is your personal thoughts on the World English Bible? As far as I can tell, it is a modern translation of the Bible with a majority text New Testament. How do you think it compares to the NKJV, which is a Textus Receptus translation?
I have never heard of that Bible.
@@RevReads it’s public domain if you ever feel the desire to check it out.
Just saw this video and channel on 10.04.2024 for first time. Most interesting subject, and informative too. I checked my Bible shelf and the NASB 77, 95, 2020, ESV, RSV, CJB, NIV, LSB, TofLV, and NLT all are like you say here. I do want to say this though; being a fan of the HCSB as a daily reader, it's easy to follow and understand, both of my HCSB's have the word 'FASTING' in Mark 9:29, though my earliest copy from 2003 has that word bracketed. The CSB which replaced the HCSB does not have the word fasting present. I knew where this was going before the reveal as I grew up with the KJV, been reading it since the mid 1970's when salvation occured. So in this one case, my Geneva, HCSB, DRB, old Amplified, KJV's and NKJV's all have fasting where it belongs. Well said my friend, keep up the great work.
If anything, this is a pretty decent argument to keep at least one Alexandrian Bible around. Eh, I still have the old, tattered NIV I used in high school, if I really want those readings. After comparing many versions, I believe that the KJV is still the best English translation in existence, though I often use the NKJV, since it's easier to read.
I'm thinking of getting a copy of Brenton's Septuagint translation for alternate readings. What do you think of that one?
I have not read Brenton's work so I can't really comment. I only refer to the LXX when I am studying and I am looking at the Greek in comparison to the Hebrew. I prefer the Masoretic Text.
I agree. I was saved using the NASB95 and trusted it and still trust it because of its scholarship. But Majority Text seems to make the most sense to me since....... It's the majority 🤷
I'm glad you have an open mind about Bible translations, only rejecting those which are obviously bad. But since the Byzantine text and the Alexandrian text are different from each other... ah, you address that. But textual variants aren't random and independent. The question of which one is better, and which one is right in any given passage, seems to me to be the most important question, but if you say we don't know enough to really answer that question with confidence, I can't argue against that position.
Have you tried the ( MEV ) Modern English Version?
Or The KJ3 Literal Translation by Jay R Green?
Or Young's Literal Translation of the Bible by Robert Young?
I've never heard of the KJ3. What is it?
I haven't read through the MEV, so I can't really comment from experience and I only like to comment on the Bibles I have read from beginning to end.
I have used Young's often in study and I think it is helpful took. I don't think I'd ever want to read through it, but its a good reference.
@@RevReads KJ3 is an English translation from the Textus Receptus. It leans toward the Young's Literal.
another interesting version I reference is,
Holy Bible: From the Ancient Eastern Text: George M. Lamsa's Translation From the Aramaic of the Peshitta
Thank you so much brother, very helpful video, I’m new in English versions. I learned a lot from. These videos. God bless you.
I love the ESV, NASB95, NKJV and the KJV (although it is sometimes hard to understand) and if I want something easier to understand in general I go for the NIV or the NLT
edit: I'm also looking forward to purchasing the LSB when it's available
Thanks for sharing. You should check out the EHV. I'm also reading the NASB 2020 and I am finding it to be very good so far.
@@RevReads can I find the EHV digitally or a physical copy that's good quality for around $50
Stay away from the Nlt and Niv. They are garbage false translations. Stick with the first 3 you mentioned
@@philarevolutionarywarriorp8295 I'd say just stick with the KJV...
I like the majority text which is why I read the World English Bible (WEB), which is different from the TR text which does not always agree with the Majority text.
I've never even heard of the WEB. Do you know who produced it?
The NKJV is the best counterfeit of the true. You stated the NWT, but NIV, ESV, NASV, etc. are in agreement with the NWT in many, many ways. You are correct about the NWT. All three of these translations agree with the biased NWT remove or cast doubt upon Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; and Romans 16:24. All four state a boldface lie in Mark 1:2. All four remove some or most of Matthew 6:13; Luke 4:4, 8; Romans 8:1; and 1 John 5:7. All four remove "study" from 2 Timothy 2:15. All four have two separate people killing Goliath in 1 Samuel 17 and 2 Samuel 21:19. All four cast doubt upon Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11, yet include it by separation from the text or place in a footnote. Birds of a feather flock together.
I could add the NKJV with the other four that corrupted or changed Romans 1:18, 25, 2 Corinthians 2:17, 1 Timothy 6:10, 20, and 2 Timothy 2:15 because these passages are aimed at the dishonest ones on the committees.
“My skin is black upon me, And my bones are burned with heat.”
Job 30:30 KJV
Thanks for this. I've read the KJV all my life as a Southern Baptist but I know it like the back of my hand and wanted to read something a little more modern and fresh so I recently got a CSB that I'm really enjoying. But I've also been wanting to get s study Bible and for that was going to use the KJV or NKJV. I think I'll go with the NKJV because it's so similar to the KJV with very few changes that I can see. Besides, I was weaned off gospel milk long ago and now eat meat, so I'm able to read any Bible translation and get the full Gospel, with my mind automatically filling in the "correct" theology or reading. Chew the meat and spit out the bones, know what I mean?
I completely agree with your conclusions. I also feel that the NKJV is a very pleasant read as well as being accurate to the text it is translated from. I do read other translation like the ESV and the NASB as well as the Legacy Standard Bible which uses God's name through out the entire Old Testament.
Right 9n, brother. I also like the NKJV because of its text type. It's good to compare and contrast. Thanks for making this video.
Thank you for the encouragement
Thanks for this video brother. You make a lot of sense.
@Pastor4all52... for text type.?... is that really a factor in determining which translation is better?...
“I am dark, but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, Like the tents of Kedar, Like the curtains of Solomon. Do not look upon me, because I am dark, Because the sun has tanned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; They made me the keeper of the vineyards, But my own vineyard I have not kept.”
Song of Solomon 1:5-6 NKJV
Go grab one quick!
I was looking for one for my brother and didn't even find a regular black one in standard print for a decent price.
I don't like calling the Holy Spirit the Holy Ghost. I use both but I will read the Nkjb the most.
I always find the NKJV a wonderful help when studying the Bible. I think my personal favorite for reading right now is the CSB, but the EHV is great as well but I am never disappointed with the NKJV.
NKJV strategically removes the word repent 46 times. 36 of which God repents...which is every time God repents. These modern versions bolster the false doctrine of works based salvation. Teaching you have to repent of your sins to be saved.
My Jonah 3:10 episode covers this.
And I have a video that has the actual Gospel message called the Bible way to heaven for those who want to become saved or are not sure.
“And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.”
Hebrews 11:39-40 KJV
What a valuable question to ask and a,great discussion!
Thanks! I love Bible translations and I wish we discussed the benefits of differing translations more often instead of arguing over the differences.
I been using the nkjv since 2008 I love it
Thank you for the great video
Another important item is that the KJV italicizes supplied words. This is at times theologically important, chiefly 1 Cor. 12:1. A glaring error along these lines in John 19:18 ('one' should have been italicized, and once one realizes what it really says *without* the 'one', collaborates a simple harmony from the synoptic gospels that shows that the two robbers and two malefactors couldn't possibly have been the same 2 people. They were crucified at different times, and more importantly, give different responses to Jesus' being mocked). But - - - you get the idea.
Very nice video, the NKJV is my main translation of the Bible in English and I totally agree that we need to read several translations. However, we also have the MEV, that follows the TR, and translations like the WEB that follow the MT. They are not as known and used as the NKJV but I personally believe they deserve a bit more exposure. Blessings!
Someone else just recommended the WEB to me yesterday and it was the first time I heard of it. I think I need to dive into it after I finish my reading in the Literal Standard Version.
@@RevReads what does WEB stand for?... maybe try the KJVER..?...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I wonder if they mean the Webster Bible and not the World English Bible.
Webster's Bible was a lite revision of the KJV. So it is based on the same Greek text as the KJV. I love it!
@@danbratten3103 hmmm I looked up the WEB bible on the internet .. it seems that this was published originally in 2000 and uses the ASV as its base... yet.. well here is what it states...
The work is based on the 1901 American Standard Version English translation, the Greek Majority Text, and the Hebrew Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia with some minor adjustments made because of alternate readings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint. These alternate readings are usually ignored or restricted to the footnotes. The translation process included seven phases of editing and proofreading for each book. An initial automated pass updated approximately 1,000 archaic words, phrases and grammatical constructs. The first manual pass added quotation marks (the ASV had none) and other punctuation and compared the translation to the Greek and Hebrew texts in areas where significant textual variants or meanings were unclear.
so it is possible they are indeed refering to this WEB bible...I have not checked into this translation as of yet to see how it compares....
@crucified4me... hmm... I just had a chance.. to look at the WEB bible a little online.. and I can tell you in my opinion ....even beginning with the first verse....it seems innacurate to me.... as I have already posted on this site or elsewhere.. I disagree with Gen 1:1 stating "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." as I disagree with the word "heavens" being pluralized here... though I have heard it supported by people who quote Paul from Galatians stating he was caught up in the 3rd heaven implying more than 1 heaven,..... I have doubts regarding its plurality here due to the Apostles Creed.. and the Nicene Creed only using the word "heaven" in it's singular format for their doctrine... I am not sure that the use of "heavens". plural here is substantiall.. denoted as correct...and this could be again due to the translators taking improper liberties regarding God's word...
NKJV, Even their translators say it's to perfect crossover translation to get you to any version other than the KJV. Question is why is that important to them? Why does the nkjv agree with the KJV in some verses but agree with other versions in others? Takes some serious research to find the answer, but its available.
I can read Biblical Greek and painfully slowly the Hebrew Text. I favor the critical text based on thousands of manuscripts. I use the CSB and the 2020 NASB. I also love the 1901 American Standard which is uncommon but very faithful. I am 66 so I grew up with KJV and love its beauty.
You have it backwards. The Byzantine text is based on thousands of MSS, the Critical Text is based on a much smaller number in the hundreds, not thousands.
I would agree with this. I also read numerous translations and I personally feel that the inclusion of the NKJV is a must for the very same reasons you sited. It's an essential read if you are a serious student of the Word.
I look at the NKJV as the "bridge" between both the Byzantine and Critical text bibles. As mine is 36 years old now, the NT is filled with corrections, deletions, word changes, and links to various verses with common context. It has become the MY translation.
I am not KJV only, however, I do affirm that the majority text is the correct text the Church should be using. With that said, I also agree that the CT is also valuable in its own right, the important thing is that you are reading the word of God.
I have a large number of word-for-word translations including the NKJV version and see your point on Mark 9:29.
The other reason the NKJV is important... is that the early Bible translators, the Wyclifes, Tyndales, Erasmus, and Martin Luther were NOT using the Vaticanus or Sinticus (since a certain Church made it heretical and illegal to translate or print Bibles in the common language). It was only after the large successes of the English translations of and KJV that the "Church" years later released or "found" their "older" manuscripts- but the million dollar question is why are they older and why were they "discovered" AFTER all of the bible translating/printing revolution? Why are there fewer copies? For the same reason why the Textus Receptus has 80% of the manuscripts available... because they were being used by faithful brethren, not locked away or forbidden from the public.
Great discussion Pastor, and Thank you for sharing this video. From my experience and I must say that my to GO to Bible is the KJV, I have always read an NIV Bible. Until recently for some reason I wanted an KJV. In the past once I attempted reading a KJV 📖 that someone had and found it difficult to read some of the text. Reading my Bible one day I felt in my Heart that I wanted a KJV, never owned one. Well recently (3 months ago) I stopped at a local thrift store and to my surprise I found a 1981 Copyright KJV soft Leather, I must say that I can’t put it down, Love IT 🥰! I thank God for it, to me is a Treasure ❤ I accustom that prior to reading the Word of God to Pray 🙏 and ask the Holy Spirit to Guide me in understanding it. Is a great Bible very clear it’s meaning and I live by it. At first a little difficulty in pronouncing some words, it was a challenge if one can say. Reading it at a daily basis has helped alot in that aspect and it has become a lot easier to read. As far as comprehension I have no problems with it. Can’t compare its authenticity and it’s clear meaning❤ This is my experience with the KJV. God bless all the brothers & sisters here. We are all aiming for the same Goal and that is to Get closer to God and reading His Word Daily is so important. Other than the true Book of Life it will guide and Nourish our Daily Walk with the Lord ❤🕊️🙏
Subscribed ☝️🙂
@@Lisa-dd6gm thank you for the sub and for your great perspective on God's Word translated into English. I am so glad the KJV translation continues to help many today.
Solid advice I think! I use it some myself for the same reason, knowing that it has many readings different from the other translations I use.
Since it is a true statement that there are some words, praises, and a few scriptures that are missing in the Critical Text bibles: My question is: are there any words, phrases, or scriptures in the Critical Text bibles that are not in the Textus Receptus bibles? That's what I want to know! Can't find anyone with an answer to it either.
@@johnsivewright1836 That's a great point you've made. I've never noticed that one. It seems the Byzantine-based bibles (TR) use “do his commandments; while the Critical Text bibles use “wash their robes. But the older Latin Vulgate-derived bibles use “wash their robes as well.” This is a quandary to be sure. Well done Sir!
Codex Sinaiticus (GR 400AD): Blessed are those who do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and that they may go through the gates into the city.
Wycliff (Latin Vulgate 400AD) : Blessed be they, that wash their stoles, that the power of them be in the tree of life, and enter by the gates into the city.
Douay-Rheims: Blessed are they that wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb: that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city.
Geneva Bible 1560: Blessed are they, that do his Commandments, that their right may be in the tree of Life, and may enter in through the gates into the City.
Before you buy, get online and find the NKJV online and compare Titus 3:10-11 with Luke 12:51 and then decide if you want a "Bible" that says Jesus is a sinner.
I believe you forgot to read Titus 3:9 which describes a divisive person. The division Jesus speaks of in Luke 12:51 is the division between those who follow Christ and those who follow Satan, the division between light and darkness, good and evil. Following Christ has never produced the types of people listed in Titus 3:9. Conclusion: you were being cute.
I agree completely with entire video, as I often do. Only thing I’d add is:
1. We can *ignore* the places in nkjv where it says to doubt if the text should be there (especially the ending of Mark, as op knows based on his review of the James Snapp book).
2. John 7:38 should be “belly” not heart. The NT writers used “heart” a lot, but did not there. It matters based on this being where the Holy Spirit goes down into. A belly laugh is one of the holiest manifestation of spirit. This is the only dark, ignored chakra spot in Hinduism (an inch or two below belly button). And yet the only one that matters for holiness!! Chakras should probably be ignored. But it says belly for a reason.
Quickest way to tell if Bible uses majority (as it should) is rom 8:1.
don't forget to mention how the KJV 1 Cor 1:18 reads "which ARE saved"... compared to the NKJV which reads "who are BEING saved"... and Rev 4:11 which in the KJV tells us exactly why God created us.. but Not in any other translation...
are we "SAVED".?.. or "BEING saved"..?
I don't know about you ...but I was "SAVED".. once for all once I accepted Jesus as my Savior... I am Not "Being" saved... now... but I'll agree I am progressively being "sanctified".. in other words I am "saved".. now I am growing in the Lord...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I looked those both up. Yes indeed and thanks. 🙏🏻✝️
@@jeffcarlson3269 Not so much about the translation, but I heard a statement I liked: He can save me, did save me, is saving me, and will save me. There are some ways in which that’s true.
@@ibperson7765 the only thing I can say in regards to your statement regarding.."is saving me".... is this... did Jesus die once for all on the cross for you and me?... or does He need to die continually for us?... it is one thing to state "is saving me".. in refering to eternal security... but if we read this "being saved" to mean.. that He is constantly saving us.. then that is something different..... then we are saying that Jesus' death on the cross was Not sufficient.. to save us for all eternity... and THAT I cannot agree with...
@@jeffcarlson3269 I agree
Great video 👍 I mainly read NKJV with a mix of KJV, NLT, and YLT thrown in 😁
I thought the KJV was a majority text translation🤯. Okay I made my choice I'm going to buy a big print NKJV when I find one.
The only reason why I use the King James version i s due to the reference aids.
If I understand this right from videos I have watched, the modern translations (not counting NKJV) they say they have more older manuscripts which is good but they have less text (I believe it doesn’t include women caught in adultry since it’s omitted out). Is it reasonable to say that God wouldn’t let us use added words for as long as we have used KJV? Because that was a huge translation used for a long time in the past.
I think that is a great reason to use both. I love Nkjv, flows nice. I also use ESV since my church publisher uses it.
I get the idea behind majority wins, but the majority is the majority because it was copied more than manuscripts that were uncovered later. So if there is a manuscript error in the majority then that error has been copied many times over, reinforcing that error. That said, I love the NKJV. I love the ESV and the CSB and the NIV and even the KJV. I agree most all translations are great. Read the TR and the CT NT bibles and look for places that stick out. If you find one, read it in many translations and find out why it’s different. You’ll learn a lot that way.
1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which ARE SAVED it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:18 NKJV
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who ARE BEING SAVED it is the power of God.
The NKJV turns salvation into a process! We are saveD the moment we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, NOT "being saved"!
Matthew 7:14 KJV
Because strait is the gate, and NARROW is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Matthew 7:14 NKJV
Because narrow is the gate and DIFFICULT is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
The way is narrow NOT difficult! Two different words!!
Nope, I will stick with the King James Bible, not Satan's counterfeit, thank you!
In I Cor 1:18 saved is in the present tense so being saved isn't wrong. I don't think it is preferable, but it isn't wrong based on the tense used by Paul. In Matthew 7:14, narrow is a bad transition in my opinion. The word means to press upon, to crowd in, to be under pressure, or afflicted. I think narrow is a possible but not likely meaning for that word. To call them wrong is to fail to understand the range of meanings and understanding tenses in Greek.
@@RevReads
Matthew 7:14 KJV
Because strait is THE GATE, and narrow is THE WAY, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Jesus said:
John 10:9 KJV
I AM THE DOOR: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
"Door" is another word for "gate," and it's "strait," which is another word for narrow, because there's only ONE WAY to be saved! In our Spanish Reina Valera Bibles, it's clearer because it uses the word "puerta" in both Matthew 7:14 and John 10:9!!
Jesus also said:
John 14:6 KJV
Jesus saith unto him, I AM THE WAY, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
The way is narrow because, again, Jesus is the ONLY WAY to be saved!
God Himself commands not to change a single word!! The New King James Bible is very deceptive!!
There's so many differences that you simply MUST watch this documentary about this! Put it at a faster speed if you want, but it explains what's wrong with all the new modern Bible versions! God bless you!
New World Order Bible Versions
ua-cam.com/video/iXK8yJj-S4U/v-deo.html
@@soulh4838 I'll stick with my personal studies in the Greek/Hebrew and by comparing multiple other translations. If it is possible for you to accept it, the NKJV has a fine English translation of the Greek word used by Matthew in 7:14. Remember, Matthew wrote in Greek, not English or Spanish.
@@RevReads
God created all languages, and I very much doubt that anyone has better scholarship than the 52 translators that did our King James Bible from the Textus Receptus, Old Testament from the Hebrew and Aramaic, and the New Testament Greek, who were very brilliant and some of them were fluent in a quite a few languages! I myself am bilingual in Spanish and English and have done quite a lot of translating since I was a teenager, when my parents needed my help, since they didn't speak English. If you're not fluent in Greek and Hebrew, I doubt you even know what you're talking about.
Just because a word has different meanings depending on how you use them, doesn't mean you can apply every or any meaning you choose on a text. The meaning is determined by the context, plain and simple.
Proverbs 18:13 KJV
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
@KJV new under GOD. I FULLY TRUST THE. KJV. my comment was directed to those who think MATT 7:14. Reads difficult is the way. . Which is how the NKJV reads. As opposed to Narrow is the way. How the. KJV READS. I BELIEVE Narrow is a better word for this instance. KJV. I was responding to those who favor the. NKJV. as the better translation. I do not think it is.
#KJVO & Free Grace go hand in hand. NKJV says "being saved" = WORKS!
I must have missed it: doesn't the KJV also have "fasting" in Mark 9:29? Why do you prefer the NKJV over the KJV? And more importantly, why isn't the KJV the most important translation?
-
King James Bible:
And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.
New King James Version:
So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.”
I agree with your principle - awareness of manuscript variations - but this does not require reading the NKJV. Important variants are mentioned in many translations' footnotes. Based on the issue of variants, I would argue that the most important English translation is the NET, which provides the best information on variant readings in its detailed footnotes.
From my experience as a pastor, the average Christian is not going to read through all the notes of the NET Bible. You really need a Bible with the main text based on the Majority and a Bible based on the Critical.
so is the way that leads to life narrow or is it difficult?
Hello, my friend! Just came across your post. My two cents: "difficult" focuses on the labors that WE must struggle through along our Christian journey to reach God, while "narrow" focuses on the one and only Gate onto the path, which is Jesus Christ. So that's a win for the KJV. The win for the NKJV is the textual notes that give the variant readings from the other text types (the more you know...). By the way, the King James translators were most definitely NOT KJVO types; find and read the Preface to the Reader, which should be printed in every KJV edition - that would stop dead the majority of these "arguments about words." The NIV won't damn you. I'm a KJV/NKJV kind of guy, but I have also taught high school English for 38 years, so I'm extremely comfortable with Elizabethan and Jacobean English (Shakespeare and the KJV). In that same vein, for a truly well-done modern translation, I recommend the HCSB/CSB.
NKJV is above all.
In the year 1598, Theodore Beza substituted "the Holy one" with "who is to be" in Rev 16:5 (Beza's Conjectural Emendations) without any textual evidence support ........a very brave act as a Christian scholar in the light of Rev 22:18,19 judgements
What's your point?
@@RevReads
Admire Reformed theologian Theodore Beza for the courage in changing God's word......that's where Textus Receptor (TR) differs from Majority text & Westcort-Hort critical text
@@derektan2971 Detailed info on this here:
textus-receptus.com/files/Revelation%2016.5%20and%20the%20Triadic%20Declaration.pdf
molek james bible.
what God said about molek in molech james old and new testaments?
molek/molech/moloch translates meaning king.
I just bought this version on Amazon.