The Third Millennium Bible

Рет қаралды 5,561

Күн бұрын

A review of The Third Millennium Bible (ISBN 9781892833006). This red hardback edition presents the text of the New Authorized Version (NAV), which is the King James Version (KJV) with certain obsolete or archaic words replaced with modern equivalents, and with changes to spelling and punctuation.
No verses have been removed. 1 John 5.7-8 is in place. The story of the woman taken in adultery and the longer ending of Mark are present without brackets or notes questioning their status. Luke 2.22 reads 'her purification,' not 'their purification.' 2 Cor 2.15 reads, 'those who are saved,' not 'those who are being saved.' 2 Samuel 21.19 has 'the brother of Goliath,' not 'Goliath.'
The Third Millennium Bible contains the 66 books of the Protestant canon, plus the KJV Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books/sections in a separate section. Those books/sections are:
1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Tobit
Judith
The Rest of Esther
Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch (with the Epistle)
Song of the Three Holy Children
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
Prayer of Manasseh
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
This Bible is 9 1/4 x 5 5/8 x 1.9 inches in dimensions. It is tall for its width, which allows for the text to be printed in a single column without that column being too wide for comfortable reading or the volume becoming overly thick.
The Biblical text is presented in a 9 to 10 point font. It is generally divided into paragraphs, but poetic sections of Scripture are arranged accordingly. The text is not line-matched. The King James text and translation notes are generally absent. References appear at page bottom in a 7 to 7.5 point font.
The words of Christ are in black ink, but they are printed in a dark, oblique font. Translator-supplied explanatory text, normally printed in the KJV in italic font, is indistinguishable from other text in this edition. The text is not self-pronouncing.
There are no headings in the text, but chapter summaries are presented at the beginning of each chapter.
The paper weight is approximately 36 gsm. The paper surface is almost matte. It is nearly white, and it is reasonably opaque. The text block is sewn.
The volume does not include book introductions, maps, a concordance, or ribbon markers. It lies open in Genesis.
(At a few points in the video I use the expression 'original King James Version.' On one occasion, at the 24:25 point, I mean the first printing of the KJV in 1611. Elsewhere in the video, all I intend by using the word 'original' is to distinguish the KJV from the NAV or other modernized versions, like the NKJV.)
00:00 Introduction
01:50 Page layout
02:54 The font in the text
04:40 More on page layout
06:02 Paper qualities
07:07 The sewn binding and the cover
09:22 The copyright page, etc.
11:11 Explanation of features and format
15:11 Font comparisons
15:55 How the KJV was modified
19:03 A word on italics
20:40 The Apocrypal/Deuterocanonical Books
24:01 [Bracketed] text
24:43 Summary
26:50 Capitalizing pronoouns
27:45 Summary (continued)

Пікірлер: 73

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

The right-hand columns on the Ezekiel 1.16-18 and Job 34.5-6 comparison charts (show starting at about 17:04) are mislabeled. I adapted them from my KJV vs ESV comparison video, and I neglected to replace 'ESV' with 'NAV.'

@mjkay8660 2 жыл бұрын

i rely on my bible from 1700s sooo many different takes on it since then

@johncortright6952 2 жыл бұрын

@timcrouch4801 2 жыл бұрын

Even though I watched this on mute with subtitles I still imagined it being spoken in your dulcet tones!

@eclipsesonic 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this review. I actually ordered a copy from Amazon not long ago because of this video. There's a chance I never would have heard of it, if it wasn't for your review. I really like this Bible a lot. I like that it updates some of the archaic words of the KJV, but still retains it's Elizabethan feel and tone in its language. I also like that it contains the Apocryphal books, which very few KJV Bibles have nowadays.

@ussconductor5433 2 жыл бұрын

Great review! I was always curious about this particular edition. Thank you!

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the encouraging comment, Anthony!

@dino575 2 жыл бұрын

Another excellent review - and as in-depth as always. Love the work you do here ... fascinating to watch and listen to. Thank you ++

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the encouraging comment, Dino!

@paperweight57 2 жыл бұрын

LOVE this Bible! Thanks for reviewing!

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for taking the time to comment, paperweight57!

@phillipstroll7385 2 жыл бұрын

Why? When you know the kjv removed some 8 + books and changed the meaning of the texts they left in?

@johnpeji7736 3 ай бұрын

That Bible Translation can be used by both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodoxes, since in fact, that Bible Translation contains Deuterocanonical Books aside from Old Testament Books and New Testament Books.

@ryrocks9487 2 ай бұрын

I’d buy it in a heartbeat if it had textual notes explaining when it was at divergence from the LXX. That’s the only thing that holds me back.

@fuddlywink1 6 ай бұрын

your work is very good, thanks. i really learn a lot from your work. i appreciate. details details details i want to get one of these. now

@fr.johnwhiteford6194 2 жыл бұрын

I agree that they made unnecessary changes, but they also didn't change many words whose meaning has changed. But what I found most irritating is the embedding of margin notes into the text. My children invariably read them as if they were part of the text. They should have left these notes in the margins.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

I agree. Thanks for commenting, Fr. Whiteford!

@thomasjefferson6 Жыл бұрын

Some words, such as "frowardly" in Isaiah 57 were not changed because to do so would hurt the rhythm of the passage, yet in other places changes were changed which did affect the rhythm of the passage. Some changes were not made because the passages involved are so widely known and quoted that to do so would be greatly harm to the classic reading.

@SolitaireZeta 2 жыл бұрын

I love the formatting and the construction and feel of this Bible. Nevertheless, my criticism of it, is that I don't think it goes far enough in terms of making the KJV more readable and accessible. Even with all the changes made, I still find myself running into some leftover archaic words that the revisers missed, as well as syntax issues. It's to the point, where ironically, I have an easier time reading through a KJV that has good footnotes that explain the archaisms, than I do with reading the NAV.

@bluepacman13 2 жыл бұрын

The Third Millennium Bible (updated), what does it say in Isaiah 11:6? Curious.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

"The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

@donaldmartineau8176 2 жыл бұрын

Another very thorough review! I can't see investing in this bible since we already have the KJV II.I'll keep the kines where they belong. :)

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

LOL! Thanks for the kind comment, Donald.

@hassanmirza2392 2 жыл бұрын

Very nice review of a classic Bible. Another topic: The question which keeps boggling my mind for a few years is, can Christianity remain a force to be reckoned with, at least in Western cultures, without conservative family-based values and mores? I keep advocating for conservative values in front of my European Christian friends and colleagues and get a lot of derision and name-calling in return. All of them are secular humanists who just go to Church sometimes, but practice secular values in their daily lives. Secularism or Secular Humanism is not neutral, it borrows everything from Judeo-Christian religion and then discards the religion in favor of some mythical non-religious universalism. In Europe, it is quite derogatory towards religious people.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

I hope we're at the low point in a cycle, and things will improve in the future (perhaps 100 or 200 years from now). In times of prosperity, it's easier for people to forget Him. Can Christianity remain a force to be reckoned with, at least in Western cultures, without conservative family-based values and mores? I doubt it.

@hassanmirza2392 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Yes, no religion, and tradition can survive without conservative family-based values. That is exactly why the activists of the 60s revolution wanted to get rid of family values and monotheism and wanted to revive Greek decadence in Western cultures. People like Gore Vidal and Ayn Rand and Feminist icons were really vocal about these goals. What is astounding is that most common people followed them. Secularism or Secular Humanism is not neutral at all but portrays itself to be ecumenical. That is a diabolical lie. The decline of Christianity in European cultures has taken Western Muslims by surprise, we do not want Christians to be secular humanists and want them to defend conservative values with rigor. The problem is that many European Christians defend secular values more than Biblical conservative mores, which are also Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, and Confucian values.

@hassanmirza2392 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Another thing, according to Syed Hussain Nasr, the editor of Study Quran, there was never any loss of transcendence in ancient cultures. Conservative and religious values were always there with human beings. Europeans first turned against Catholic Church, then against all of the Christian Church, then there was a rebellion against monarchy (not a bad thing), but then there was a rebellion against the holiness of nature, and it became a source of human exploitation. And now there is rebellion against families since the 1960s. Everything which the ancient world gave us, most Euro-Americans have rebelled against it. This never happened in other major or minor human cultures. This is a very unique experiment going on in human history. Secularism failed in the Islamicate world and now it is gone in India forever. After Marxism is gone in China, there will be no secularism in a big way. Ancient China was never secular, although all ancient empires were definitely multiconfessional. I think a nice alternative to secularism is Multiconfessionalism, with secularism being one of the many faith systems out there.

@mb9484 2 жыл бұрын

This volume seems to have a lot in common with the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible, with both being single column KJV's having light revision.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

They do sound similar. A comparison video could be interesting. Unhappily, I don't have a copy of the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Thanks for commenting, M B!

@mengbomin 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones One troublesome aspect of the KJV (and Book of Common Prayer) is the inconsistent treatment of a, my, and thy before words starting in an audible h in contemporary English. For instance, one will see roughly equal uses of "my heart" and "mine heart" catered throughout, seemingly randomly (presumably linked to the accent of the translator for the particular verse). When I was first looking through the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible it seemed that he had fixed this by defaulting to the a/my/thy firm before an audible h, but my joy turned to chagrin when I realized that he had done this by removing mines and thines before all initial vowel words, not just those with an h that may have been inaudible at the time of translation.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

@@mengbomin - Thank you for that interesting comment! I checked a few passages, and it appears that the editors of the Third Millennium Bible simply let the KJV translators' choices stand.

@larrym.johnson9219 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you, for your review, God bless.P.S. most people do not have your command of English I do wish that they would elevate education, and not lower it.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your kind words, Larrym.!

@geneparadiso4203 2 жыл бұрын

Since this Bible includes the deuterocanonical books; does it bear the Imprimatur?

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

No, Gene, it doesn't. Thanks for the question!

@danivuk2036 2 жыл бұрын

Excellent review, sir. I do enjoy the KJV. This seems interesting. They got the "" he" right at the 27 minute mark. I am sure you know what St. John Chrysostom said about the one ""that holdeth back". Great job.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind comment, Dani! I had to consult Chrysostom, since my memory isn't so good. The Roman Empire is Tertullian's answer also, I think.

@danivuk2036 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones You are welcome, sir. It is true. You could review a rock and I would watch. Even Calvin`s Institutes. LOL. But yes, he said it was the office of the Emperor. I never thought it was the Holy Spirit. My personal opnion is that the specific "he" was Nicholas II. Please do not laugh at me lol.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

@@danivuk2036 - Things _have_ gotten out of hand since that tsar died. :)

@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175 2 жыл бұрын

millennium bible = kj21 + apocrypha. It has very minor changes. Many archaic words are not changed.

@legacyandlegend 2 жыл бұрын

Never knew this bible existed. An updated and modernized 1611 kjv with the deuterocanonical books. I'll have to pick this up.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, legacyandlegend!

@gtgodbear6320 2 жыл бұрын

Would a Bible company print a custom copy. I want a KJV with capitalized deity like the NKJV. The only thing I don't like about my KJV is I get confused in spots. Where "he told him" should be "He(God) told him(human)" type of lines.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

I don't know of a company that does the kind of work you describe. This edition is very nearly a KJV with capitalized pronouns for deity. Thanks for commenting, GT Godbear!

@donaldmartineau8176 2 жыл бұрын

I decided to replace my old Oxford paperback with this improved edition--kines or o kines! :)

@DeepDelta527 2 жыл бұрын

What kind of mechanical pencil is that?

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

It’s a Pentel GraphGear 500 PG523.

@timcrouch4801 2 жыл бұрын

I think this version is the same as the KJ21 but with Apocrypha added

@thomasjefferson6 Жыл бұрын

Not quite. The TMB restores the worlds "Holy Ghost" in all those places where the words are used in the KJV, while the KJ21 uses the words "Holy Spirit" exclusively. The reasons for this change back the the KJV use have to do with the personality of the word "spirit" in certain contexts, and a recognition that this change was quite unnecessary.

@thomasjefferson6 Жыл бұрын

On the whole, and in spite of some needless changes, the TMB is an excellent updating of the KJV, and a great way to work back to the KJV itself. Actual errors in updating are very few. In II Kings 2:19, the word "naught" is updated to "nothing", and this updating error is repeated in Proverbs 20:14. The word "naught" is used in the KJV in a sense so arcahic that it is not mentioned in Webster's Second Unabridged Dictionary. The word "naught" in the KJV does not mean "nothing" but "bad", or, in context here, "contaminated" (a word too modern to be suitable for a KJV update.) For those who instinctively love the KJV and its language, but cannot be bothered to learn some archaic words and deal with some archaic phraseology, the TMB is an excellent choice.

@danbratten3103 11 ай бұрын

I know this comment is 11 months old, but since you mentioned a Webster dictionary; I just had to check Noah Webster's 1833 Common Version (today known as the Webster Bible). He caught that and used "bad." Thank you for pointing that out in the TMB.

@bobdylan1677 Жыл бұрын

Re updating the language- why not use the NKJV??

@RGrantJones Жыл бұрын

It may be that they felt that the NKJV was too modern. We'd have to ask the editors of this edition to be sure. Thanks for commenting!

@helgeevensen856 Жыл бұрын

(17:47) KJV vs ESV ? :)

@RGrantJones Жыл бұрын

Typos. See the pinned comment.

@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175 2 жыл бұрын

Fundamentalists seem to use the exclusive use of kjv as an easy way to identify fundamentalists so it is very unlikely for fundamentalists to approve of even slight changes to the kjv. I am not aware of any attempts by fundamentalists to retranslate the textus receptus (except to foreign languages), which is probably not going to happen while there are plenty who believe the kjv translation is a new revelation. Right now, it is easy to identify fundamentalists (kjv), evangelicals (nasb, niv, nlt, esv, csb) and liberals (ceb and nrsvue 2021) by the translations they use. Fundamentalists reject textus receptus translations (nkjv, mev) done by evangelicals. Evangelicals are probably not using ceb and nrsvue 2021.

@gilbertculloden87 2 жыл бұрын

I'm curious, what makes you think the CSB appeals to liberal groups? My understanding is that the Southern Baptist convention had a hand in creating it and most of the congregations currently using the CSB are Southern Baptist. While I disagree with some of the recent developments in that denomination, I certainly wouldn't call it liberal. I also think most evangelicals would favor the ESV these days, but I could be wrong.

@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175 2 жыл бұрын

@@gilbertculloden87 I have fixed the typo, the ceb is the liberal translation. the csb is the evangelical translation. lots of typos once I got old.

@gilbertculloden87 2 жыл бұрын

@@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175 That makes more sense, I was wondering if I'd missed something, haha. I certainly understand about typos. God bless my friend

@markwiygul6356 2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if this is one of the Bibles that follows the language standard that Noah Webster invented in his 1833 Bible: replace "fornication" with "immorality" or "sexual immorality" for example [1 Corinthians 6.9 & 1 Corinthians 6.18]. Fornication has almost been eliminated from the Bible. That took another step forward with the NRSVue Bible released earlier this year with "fornication" replaced with "sexual immorality". NIV, ESV, NLT, CSB and a plethora of others have been copying Noah Webster's translation, totally eliminating the word "fornication" from the Bible. This allows for churches to focus on homosexuals regarding sexual immorality and let others get busy with baby production, even accidental is good for birthrates. Birth rates have been too low according to the human farm husbandry statistics. That's bad for the future economy. Of course, that's what they are worried about I imagine.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

This translation has 'fornicators' in 1 Cor 6.9 and 'fornication' twice in 1 Cor 6.18. Thanks for commenting, Mark!

@markwiygul6356 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Thanks for the information.. Great Video!!

@mihailgae-draghici4864 2 жыл бұрын

According to the biblical calendar we are in the 6th millennium NOT in the 3rd millennium, more precisely in the date of 19 IYAR 5782!!!

@richardmartin2646 2 жыл бұрын

I have a Stone Edition ,translated by Hebrews , Old Testament. hebrew-english linear that is the best translation, The Jews can't even tweak a word in that.

@mihailgae-draghici4864 2 жыл бұрын

Psalm 147 :19 - 20. '' The church weakens everything it touches. '' Johann Wolfgang GOETHE, Maximen und Reflexionen. [ 628 ]

@timcrouch4801 2 жыл бұрын

My wife thinks you sound like the actor Owen Wilson!

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

I had to look him up! She's could be right, but he doesn't whistle his 's' sounds.

@timcrouch4801 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones 😂 you're a good sport

@CAVEDATA 2 жыл бұрын

Can you speak to the absurdity of our faith?

@olelarsen7688 2 жыл бұрын

The Third Millennium Bible?. Earrhhh. That is nothing to be proud of. The idea was that Jesus should come back... I am watching some bibel study by James Tabor on KZfaq, that is why this video came up.

@mihailgae-draghici4864 2 жыл бұрын

yea, B"H!