"Fancy restaurant" = Five Guys 😂😂 Love the way you set up and delivered that goodie.

"I don't want to score points, I want to score people". This comes out so clearly in your videos Mark! Great video! In reference to copyright, it doesn't just protect wages, it also protects the text... Someone can't just take it change a word here or there and sell it as a new corrupted translation.

It is also worth noting that copyright protects the translation from modifications by various other publishers.

Mark, I just admire you for your patience and grace. I am ashamed to admit that I have grown quite intolerable of the KJV worshippers. It's led me to mock them with quips like, "In the beginning was the KJV, and the KJV was with God...". I see all their special pleading and revisionist history and it just infuriates me. Their hypocrisy in claiming allegiance to the TR and then rejecting the MEV, NKJV, or KJ21 on the basis of slight changes, and without the slightest consideration of what the Greek actually says, really sticks in my craw. And the audacity of some to boldly suggest that the KJV supersedes the original text just outright offends me. These people wouldn't hesitate to break up churches or confuse new converts, all in the name of their cause. It has become a gospel to them. Worst of all, it's caused me to dislike the KJV translation out of spite, even though God has really done awesome things through it. I don't know why I let it get under my skin so much, Mark. But I wish I were more like you. You prove the expression, "The patience of a saint."

Thank you for your gracious spirit when approaching this often heated topic

I've yet to see any example of translations "changing things just to get copyrighted". Likewise, copyrighted translations are all still available online for free so there's no issue here either

Thank you for your gracious input brother I felt the audio was a bit low on volume, maybe it is an issue of my device!

I'm a couple of months late here but I jut wanted to say how much I appreciated this video. I also appreciate you tackling the NIV/HarperCollins issue. I must add I find it frustrating that so many people will knock the NIV because it's publisher, Zondervan, is owned by HarperCollins. And yet very few realize that Thomas Nelson is also owned by HarperCollins. Thomas Nelson is the owner and exclusive publisher of the NKJV and is also the largest printer of the KJV in the world.

This is so interesting! And you are always thoughtful, clear, and careful to be precise in what you are and are not saying - all much appreciated.

I appreciate your videos very much Brother Mark. Thank you for your faithful work. I've expanded my Bible collection in the last 2 years. In doing so, I have included all of the most popular transactions in various study Bible and devotional Bible formats. I'm loving it!! In the back of my mind was always the KJV is the best issue. You have deleted that thought from my brain. I feel so free! Lol ✝️ 🙏🤍

Excellent video, as always! Timothy Frisch has a good video suggesting the CSB could be the perfect “standard” that most camps can compromise and agree on, because it is kind of blend between the ESV and NIV (the two most popular translations read by non-KJV readers). He makes a great argument for it. I don’t think that there can be a new standard Bible in the Christian world today though. We are too segmented and divided, I’m afraid.

This is a helpful explanation of this topic bro. One I’ve wondered about. I’m looking to get a Schuyler ESV. Thanks for your ministry!

Pastor Mark, I appreciate your balance approach in discussing many different topics. Thank you for providing Biblical evidence for your positions.

Thank you Mark for all of your hard work. I look forward to each one of your videos. Would you mind me asking what comment Robert Stein made about baptism that helped you understand your new testament? I'm dying to know, lol. Thanks again Brother!

Just ordered your book but boy I wish you would increase your audio volume!

Good stuff, but can barely hear it. You may want to re-render the video with the audio turned up and then re-upload it. Without subtitles, it's almost impossible to hear.

Mark, I agree and knew of the English KJV copyright. Nothing wrong for paying a wage, so payment is not the concern for me. What I do question (and maybe you have addressed this elsewhere), do moderns translation need to make "enough" changes to get a copyright? In other words, in some cases, the "better" translation might be the same word/words as some other copyright version, but the need to get a copyright drives a certain number of difference is needed just for the copyright. Thanks

If I may occupy a third position here, we needn't choose between copyrights or slave labor. But the sheer volume of English translations are not because we actually needed them, but because of copyright restrictions. Even James White stated in a debate with a KJVO that we have numerous English Bible translations simply because one publisher doesn't want to pay the licensing fees for a translation, so they create their own. Removing the copyrights doesn't ensure that the translators will be working for free. Instead it means that the publishing houses need to pay more on the front end for translation work, as the publishers will be the ones reaping the long term rewards. If Crossway produces the ESV and releases it into the wild, that doesn't prevent them from making money on book sales. It doesn't prevent the translators from getting paid. But it does allow smaller organizations to use the text freely, to make their own physical copies, and reduce the number of translations that bloat our bookshelves.

Excellent points. Thank you very much for answering this question. Here’s a mostly-unrelated parallel: Music composers have been saying this for years, and churches have zero-goat-Afghani problems with paying for an annual CCLI license. Many arrangements use public domain hymnody as source material for their work, too. Churches don’t necessarily complain about it either (as long as it’s not “rock music”).They mostly understand not “muzzling the ox” when it comes to music copyrighting, especially since it could result in fairly hefty fines if they break the law. Yet, when it comes to Bible translation work, it’s all about the money.

Great video. You are a very thoughtful and even handed believer and your wisdom is much appreciated. Thank you and God Bless!

I get criticized for using my somewhat newer translation in french which is the Louis Segond 1910. It is based on the critical text. But it was made especially for having no copyright on it. It was made to be widely available and it was a gigantic success. It made it a dirt cheap bible that everyone bought and made a staple of every christian. It's now the reference among french Bible's.

I thank God for your humble spirit. My prayer is that your graciousness will encourage even your most ardent opponents.

This was very helpful! Loved the goat 🐐 comment! 😂😂

Dr. Ward. I love your presentations and find them very helpful in understanding the KJV only positions and objections. Keep up the good work. Bless up!

This is definitely the weakest argument for KJV-onlyism. Afterall, the KJV is still copyrighted in the UK, but also it doesn't even touch anything content wise in the Bible

I have been working on producing a book covering how got the Bible (authorship, canon, transmission, and translation). I benefited greatly from your work in my sections on Bible translation. My intention with this book is to fully release it into the public domain and make it a freely available resource for the church (Lord willing by the end of the year). Where the topic of Bible copyrights comes in, I had originally written my manuscript using the ESV as my primary Bible translation, such that anytime I quoted the Scriptures, I quoted from the ESV. I learned that, relatively recently (I don't have an exact date, but I want to say within the past 5 years), Crossway updated their copyright to explicitly forbid quoting the ESV in any work under a Creative Commons license: "The ESV text may not be quoted in any publication made available to the public by a Creative Commons license." I am hoping to get some clarification from them on whether this applies to public domain as well, but I have revised my manuscript in the meantime to not use the ESV other than for comparison purposes. I know that context is a bit different than the one you have on this video and the KJV-only debate, but I would be interested if you revisited the topic of Bible copyrights from a broader perspective, specifically concerning how the copyrights restrict free sharing (though I know most people ignore them or are ignorant of those restrictions). I have been becoming more convicted regarding the copyright on Bibles as I have read more and more of the copyrights each one has, and I personally would find it beneficial if that is a topic you chose to pursue again in the future.

All these people that you have mentioned authored books.....do they give them away for free? Therefore, if they do not, are they getting income from writing these books? Are they in it for the income????

Another wonderful video, Mark. Thank you.

Copyright is a declaration of intent to sue infringers in state courts. This is not an appropriate solution to the issue that the laborer ought to receive his wages. The only project to resolve this issue with a truly free license is the Open English Bible, which is still ongoing. KJV, ASV, and some others just happen to be in US public domain due to age. As it actually plays out I don't think translation copyright holders are very litigious and I'm not aware of any translation that was produced merely for money. All translations also offer their full text for free to read, the issue is reproduction.

We are all lucky the copyright ran out on the original gospels and Paul's letters long ago.

I the UK, the AV Is copyrighted. It has a crown copyright and that copyright does not expire.

Mark: Great points all the way through the video. Thanks for your hard work, diligent study and commitment to God's Word. In a free market economy, businesses HAVE to make profits in order to re-invest in their operations, do R&D and survive. I use a CSB Study Bible daily. I very much enjoy it as a translation-though there are some verses where I prefer the KJV or NKJV. I dont know if you said this, but people need a Bivle translation that they can understand and that will cause them to read their Bibles because they UNDERSTAND God's Word. I am glad that we do have the ability to choose from a wide variety of translations. Thanks again for all of your hard work! I laughed at your comment about the restaurant meal paid for by the royalty check.

Thanks for the information ❤️

The KJV was translated in 1611, 1613 - likely corrections from pastors from Coverdale, Matthew, Geneva, Bishops. 1629, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769 and 1850. The KJV used to retranslated every 30-40 years. The funding for the translation committee for the KJV came from King James through the British government. Later the British government continued to finance it till 1850.

Let's just ignore the effect of money. Bob Dylan: Money doesn't talk, it swears.

Using logic and reason are such powerful tools in debate. You win this one! If one thinks that a version of the the Bible is done for spurious reasons... do not buy it. The market does set the value of any product. It is good to witness your measured and well thought out responses. It is not about whether one agrees with you... it is always about civility and maturity in pressing any side of an argument. Soon enough we will stand in front of our Lord and Savior and have all questions answered. Many of us will be surprised! Perhaps worrying about our own Christian walk is more important than fretting about the motivation of others in any endeavor. Christ will not inquire of me and my thoughts about the publishers of any book. He will review how I lived out my days.

The KJV was “copyright”. Copying it wrong or without permission got you a death penalty for over a century after publication.

Mark, I was with you. Believing every word you said until 6:10 when you quoted 1 Timothy 5:18 from the wretched ESV instead of the sacred KJV! It was then that I realized you are inspired of Satan!!! Well.....uhhh....maybe I just made that up because I could not oppose you with truth or facts. Whenever I am in a debate and I have no facts to support my argument I play the trump card and declare my opponent is of the devil. Works every time. I am UNDEFEATED in debates because of this!!! Therefore, I just won my debate against you. lol

I've been told by IFB KJVonly proponent that because of copyright, new translations have to be changed by a certain percentage. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know if there is any truth to this claim, but I would expect there are special cases for translations of ancient texts. If I remember correctly it was "7%" but I apparently didn't write it down.

I agree with you. Many an accusation made... no proof put forward. I've heard this argument time and time again..."they're in it for the money", and "they're profiting off of God's word!" Those that serve should receive wages...I agree. Also, the ministries/publishers need to profit a little at least to stay afloat or they would be losing money and the ministry could not continue. Any profits I imagine go to growing the ministry. What, should they be in debt? Would that make those critical happy? Churches and ministries that print the KJV have to get money from somewhere. Often they sell the bibles and often people give to those ministries or else they, too, could not continue. Paper, ink, etc cost. Often KJV only printing churches/ministries just have a different "business" model to fund the endeavor.

I enjoy and intellectually profit from you teaching. Thank you.

Excellent!!! Mark- When did the KJV/Translation issue become the "line in the sand"? Not in my college/seminary days...and we had both Prof. Zane Hodges and Drs. Harold Hoehner!

Hope this video doesn't get demonetized ... #sandwhiches for Mark. Great vid!

Really laying it on thick here, Mark. But it worked. I just ordered your book. You should be able to buy a burger at McDonald's with the royalties (10 years ago).

Took his family out for a “fancy” meal.. at Five guys 😂

Very good video!!!

When these folks write books criticizing bible translations being copyrighted are their books copyrighted?

Since when is public domain a validation of a Bible translation? Anyone can modify public domain content... 🤷

Do you mean, the King's/Queen's Patent feeds the "beeves" of Christian ministry?

I took my family to a fancy restaurant...5 Guys 🤣🤣🤣

Very sensible talk. Thanks.

Just curious. Can you walk into a Bible bookstore and just take a KJV without paying for it? If not, then someone is making a profit from it.

There is a modern NT translation of the critical text that is under Creative Commons called the Open Bible project.

The BSB is not copyrighted

The approach in that book about the legacy of the KJV is that of ecumenism, a call for an end to biblical tribalism while appreciating what is good in the KJV as the cornerstone of vernacular Bible translations.

Paul's letter to the Romans is one of the longest ancient letters ever written. Paul's paying for the scribe from rough draft to finish product would have costed between $2000-$5000 dollars.

THANK YOU FOR THE WORK YOU DO BROTHER MARK...KEEP ON FIGHTING THE GOOD FIGHT ON BEHALF OF GRACE AND TRUTH. IN A WORLD FULL OF BOTH RELIGIONISM AND SECULARISM SO MANY PEOPLE ARE BOTH CONFUSED AND FIGHTING BACK-AND-FORTH WITH EACH OTHER BUT PEOPLE NEED TO SEE THE GOODNESS OF THE MIDDLE GROUND OF HUMILITY AND UNDERSTANDING. KEEP SOWING THOSE SEEDS OF TRUTH---1 DAY YOU WILL SEE THE MASSIVE HARVEST...THROW YOUR BREAD ON THE WATER AND IN MANY DAYS, IT WILL RETURN TO YOU AS ECCLESIASTES SAYS.

One question… Are the books that you mentioned, not written under copy write and sold for profit?

I'm so grateful to everyone involved with bible translation, publishing, and distribution! Of all industries I could support this seems like the most edifying to all of humanity!

But isn't it true to copyright the bible there must be a percentage of difference to any other copy in text?

I wished I known of your ministry 15-20 years ago at the height of my KJV onlyism.

Mark, who makes money whenever a KJV bible is sold? Amazon or Christian book store or anywhere else?

I've made a very interesting observation: I have *TWO* editions of the KJV Bible. One of them *IS NOT* copyrighted, and the other *IS* copyrighted. The copyrighted version is by "Christian Art Publishers". I haven't scrutinized the text of the passages themselves to determine whether or not there is any difference between them. But what I _have_ noticed, is that at the heading of each chapter [that I have come across thus far], there is a "description" of what each chapter is supposedly making reference to. I'll give two examples (which just so happen to be one chapter, followed by the immediate next chapter. *Romans 12* Non-copyrighted edition: "Christian conduct" Copyrighted edition: "Dedicate your lives to God". Immediately, a comparison could be made whereby one edition of the Bible is inducing a particular model of behaviour to occur, whereas the _other,_ is guiding the reader to assess [what] Christian conduct consists of. The copyrighted edition instructs its readers to do something that could deter those of a cautious disposition, to continue reading and learning of the texts, as they may be potentially disillusioned from previous religious encounters that didn't turn out in the way that they may have been led to believe. *Romans 13* Non-copyrighted edition: {Nothing} Copyrighted edition: "Obey your government" In all of the non-KJV editions of the Bible that I'm aware of, Romans 13:1 instructs Christians to "be subject to the governing authorities". Of course, Romans 13:1 KJV, instructs us to be subject to *the higher powers.* What it looks as though "Christian Art Publishers" have done, is to very cleverly insert how a reader ought to interpret what it is they are about to read. My supposition, as to why I believe that that edition, has been copyrighted (that being one reason at least). Now as for those generating income from the sale of Bibles - whilst I don't have the specific chapter and verses to hand (whether there are, or are not any explicit texts saying this), is that I don't believe that it is in the spirit of Christ, to have the expectation of earthly protection, for copyrighting a different language translation, of the KJV Bible. Somebody can of course choose to translate the word of GOD into a language, a publisher can choose to promote it, and a customer can choose to buy it. I believe that languages may have been used to divide us as a peoples, and that the work that creating different language translations has meant, is that a necessary (and I believe needless) level of work has had to be done, in order for those of us not familiar with the original language texts, to be able to interpret them. It could just be argued that different tongues may have been devised for this very reason. There does certainly exist a degree of risk and reward of course - as in any business venture. But earthly protection against the loss of sales, isn't what (I believe) Christianity is supposed to be about. Similarly, with non-KJV editions of the Bible, those editions themselves, may not be in the spirit of Christ, so that the earthly protection with which the copyrights provide, could potentially induce feelings of envy for example (envy within those, who can't get their editions published, or envy because they can't copy the same edition without some form of penalty - it's still not in the spirit of Christ).

This was excellent. Thanks, mark.

Don't bother any bible unless it can be read online so that it can be subject to judging and evaluation. Any monkey can translate, but it have to be proven by field testing.

I like the World English Bible these days.

I think in this case they kind of have a point. I would extend that point to the KJV itself though; because as you point out the KJV has its own copyright issues in Britian, and I live in Britian. I don't think it's a reason not to *use* a translation, but I do think it is wrong for the publishers to take this stance, because it limits how it can be used. I do like the copyright policy of the NET, because they only have restriction on commerical publications (and that's fair enough, I think). The WEB is good in that it has no copyright at all, and is nice for people who like the KJV as it's pretty literal and follows the majority text. I don't like the copyright policy of most other translations. When it comes to the reviewer's analogy of Luther, it's worth pointin out that Luther hinself made a bible translation. Tyndale published the jntroductions to that bible trnaslation in his own bible. To my knowledge he did not ask Luther's permission and Luther had no problem with it. (The Tyndale bible *was* a commerical publication though, so if he did so I would have less of an issue). Also, most of the Apostles did indeed take a wage, this would have included Peter, but I hope you'll agree Peter did not and would not stop people copying out his Epistles unless they paid him royalties.

whay free resource was it so i can download?

I love how you saved the KJV copyright till the end :) Excellent scripting!

James white also agrees that we have enough modern translations and that it’s about the money.

Please, please, don't use drug companies as an analogy. Their criminality and lack of altruism is Legend.

I think it's perfectly fine for a translation to be copyrighted but I also think that copyright and the profit motive has something to do with why new translations are produced. If a publisher wants to make money by selling Bibles, and they don't want to license someone else's translation, then they know they have to produce their own and then copyright it like everyone else has done. Do we really need a hundred different English translations or is the excessive redundancy we see in this regard due to copyright and the need to produce a new, slightly different translation that it is sufficiently unique to not infringe on another's copyright? Furthermore, how does this requirement to produce a sufficiently unique translation influence the translators' decisions?

Sorry, had to repost my comment. Under "Newest First", please see my comment below. Thank you.

Very helpful.

Honestly this is a nonsensical argument to begin with because the KJV's copyright simply expired. I think people also forget that Christian publishing companies may well be using the money they earn for the causes of Christ. The bible never condemns money. It condemns the LOVE of money.

Mark, I think people who make these statements about the Bible should not be copyrighted are being hypocritical, the KJV is also copyrighted and still is in it's country of origin. It is only out of copyright outside the UK. They don't work for free and they don't pastor for free either and I'm sure whatever twork they do, there are charges for it. That being said, if they so believe then they are themselves buying from these publishers. Zondervan and Thomas Nelson are own by Harper Collins and they publish the KJV. Cambridge and Oxford are secular universities and they publish the KJV, in fact if I'm not mistaken, Cambridge is the Crown copyright holder for the KJV. So what do they have to say about this.

The King James Bible IS copyrighted in English-speaking counties outside the U.S. Did you know that? The copyright holder is the British Crown and it cannot be published without written permission in those countries.

I agree the Word of God is not copyrighted but a translation or version is man made and to be protected just like many KJVonly authored books right,? I mean we are living in a computer age and not old testament times or even the pre global flood era.I have a note where I wrote the KJV is copyrighted and the United Kingdom government holds it,unfortunately I forgot the name of the person in the internet who said it.Thank you for this great video

The Revised Version of 1881-5 had a real problem with unofficial editions being proliferated in the United States. The whole reason that the U.S. edition of 1901 was called the "American Standard Version" was to ensure people that this was the official release (hence "standard") and not a bootleg. That idea carried into its official revisions, the Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version. Of course, the water was muddied by the New American Standard Bible, which was created once the ASV fell into the public domain and thus isn't really the "standard" revision of the ASV. At least the English Standard Version is an officially-licensed alternative to the NRSV, so the "standard" moniker has some claim to legitimacy. But even the NASB can appeal to the name of its predecessor (if not the intent of that name) when defending its own title. By contrast, the Holman Christian Standard Bible called itself a "standard" Bible just because it sounded good. So did the more obscure International Standard Version. (I'm all for nixing the words "New," "American," "English," "International," "Revised," and "Standard" from future translations. Come up with some original names!)

While I largely agree with you here, I think this is one of those "grain of truth" arguments--as a number of commenters on this video have mentioned, even if there isn't a motive of "making a profit", there can still be a motive of "saving money in licensing/royalties" (though whether that would really offset the cost of producing one's own translation seems questionable). And that feeds into the orthogonal question of "why do we need *another* modern English translation?" Does the church really need the ESV? Or the HCSB/CSB? It's honestly hard to see why--the NASB is an excellent modern formal translation, while the NIV is quite serviceable (if much maligned) as a dynamic one--and if you want *really* dynamic, there's always the NLT. Sure, you'll always be able to point to places where the ESV is "better" than the NASB (or vice versa), but they're largely equivalent--to oversimplify, the ESV is the NASB without the semicolons. But now that they've made the ESV, Crossway can produce study Bibles without paying royalties to Lockman. And that, I think, may better explain its production than just that they wanted to profit off the new translation. Now that they've produced the CSB, Lifeway has a Bible they can use in all their materials without paying royalties for use of the NIV. Is this bad? Not necessarily--so long as they're faithful translations (which I don't question), the more, the merrier. But it does make me question whether that was the best use of those scholars' time.

Information update for you: the NDV (New Darby Version) states on the copyright page that it is freely available for all usage except publishing of the full text (to protect the textual integrity). This would effectively qualify as a free domain modern bible version.

Good one

So if the kjv is copyrighted in the U.K., I need permission in the U.S. if I want to make an audio on social media?

I don’t understand this attitude! A Catholic non profit. which saved my life twice, isn’t doing good works for free. The truth is every religion on earth needs to pay for its necessary expenses and to provide the community which it serves. Nothing immoral or sacrilegious about it. People deserve to be paid for doing something holy, if not more than they would receive for doing secular work. And what we receive in return is real value and joy in exchange for the money. Abuse of faith always deserves to be condemned but bringing the blessings of God to the world is a treasure. If people earn a fair return for doing that, that’s not something to which a decent person should object and that applies equally to why copyrighted bibles and the Christian publishers who print, them.

bravo bravo bravo the wind bloweth where it listeth what what did you say one more time but this time in american

Copyright is a biblical principle: "Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things." (Gal 6:6, KJV)

One good thing about the King James is that it is good to have a Translation not in control of a single publisher. Nobody can, for instance, decide to make the language gender neutral and then keep the old edition from being printed. I've noticed some pretty poor arguing on both sides of this argument by some. I'm not ready myself to throw out the King James Bible. It's been blessed by God for a pretty long time now I think.

Not all English is the same. That’s what we need to understand. The English in Barbados isn’t the same as Canada and so on. Canadian English and American English can even differ in places. Understanding Caribbean I can understand the KJV

Gotta read a bunch of different translations.

Why so much hate against the niv ?

Why is it the Bible only holy book religious book to be copyrighted 🤔

I was a 3-star review. 😜

Mark, I thoroughly disagree with your perspective on this issue and many (like myself) who are deeply troubled by the copyrighting of God’s word are not from the KJV-only world. It just happens that in this case the KJV-Only people have a valid point. Your use of 1 Tim. 5:18 to support copyrights is a “straw man” and not a valid use of that Scripture which does not speak to copyright issue at all. Yes, most strongly agree with the premise that 1 Tim. 5:18 demands that the scholars who worked on these translations should be appropriately paid for their work, but obtaining that pay through a copyright is not what 1 Tim. 5:18 is addressing and many do not believe that this is how one who has worked on a bible translation should be paid. A bible translation is not simply the equivalent of another book and the issue is whether a person, committee, or publisher should own the rights to God’s word, or does God’s word belong to the Christian Church. Note, the copyright itself isn’t the problem and does serve a purpose of protecting the version from un-authorized modification, so in that respect I do support it being copyrighted; however, it is the royalty payments, use restrictions, etc… that are an epidemic problem. In you video you praised the work of the NIV translators but the fiasco over the CBT’s (now Biblica’s) abuse of their copyright is one of the best demonstrations of the copyright problem. When the CBT first attempted to introduce inclusive language into the NIV, there was very strong reaction against this by the Evangelical community. After months of public debate, the CBT and Zondervan made a public promise to not introduce inclusive language into the NIV. The CBT later published the TNIV with the inclusive language changes that they had intended for the NIV but were never able to get the public to adopt the TNIV. Then in 2011 Biblica (the renamed CBT) decided to publish a revision of the TNIV under the NIV name in direct violation of the promise they had made. Further, they also revoked all publishing rights to the original NIV in order to force the adoption of their revised TNIV text. Even though it was an ethical violation of the public promise they had made, this was something they could do because they owned the copyright. This was one of the most unethical episodes in Bible publishing history and a large part of the ESV and CSB’s success was a result of people looking for a version to replace the original NIV that was no longer accessible to the Church. Additionally, I personally know someone who memorizes large portions of Scripture to recite publicly from memory. He does not use modern versions because it would cost him too much in royalties to use these versions for public presentation. He has approached many of the publishers of these modern versions but none would allow royalty free public reciting of the text from memory. I know of Bible translation organizations that cannot use modern versions as the basis for derivate works in minority languages because of copyright restrictions. Even writer’s of commentaries on the Bible cannot use modern translations without paying royalties to the publisher of the version they use in the commentary.

you see the bible is actually two death testimonies. they are the Wills to those who will inherit what ever God has promised, thus, yes, it needs to be the best translation possible and it must never be rewritten with errors or deliberate maliciousness. Thus the KJV of the Bible is copyrighted to prevent that from happening. Meanwhile, other translation have undergone re-translation to the point of ridiculous variations... ... the Late Queen Elizabeth protected the KJV Bible the question now, will King Charles protect the KJVB as every monarch from King Jame till Elizabeth. Only time will tell. This Book, The Book, has done more to shape nations and souls than any other book in history. The Eternal copyright of the KJV Bible does indeed exist and belongs to who ever is king or queen of England.

THE MESSAGE!

What all has to be different about all these translations, claiming to be the Bible, for them all to get their own copyright?

I absolutely agree with you on the copyright debate I have on the desk in front of me, my favorite King James Bible. It is the reference edition of the Holy Bible by Thomas Nelson Inc. copyright 1972. It has all the footnotes of the original KJV. It also has an excellent reference system. I imagine the references are why it has a copyright. For me personally, the biggest issue is not the nonsense about copyright, but that most of the modern versions have Jesus telling a lie in John 7:8-10. Jesus lying has a horrible impact on who he was and his ability to be a savior. It is indefensible to say that Jesus lied.

The problem with copyrighting a work like the Bible is that so much of the words have to be different from anything else so that means sooner or later you will not have the same Bible, Because too much has to be changed in order to gain copyrights.

All these aren't valid for MacArthur 😂 He is loaded with money...

Hundreds of translations have come and gone, but at the end of the day, I and millions of others do our devotions from the King James. The fruit is and will always be the reason God’s Word has been with us since 1611. Don’t sing the death knell for the KJV just yet brother. It’s not going anywhere.