KJV vs ESV, Part II -- the New Testament

Рет қаралды 10,867

Күн бұрын

This is Part 2 of a two-part video that compares the King James Version (KJV) with the English Standard Version (ESV).
Part 1, which concentrated on the Old Testament, can be viewed here: • KJV vs ESV, Part I -- ... .
This part focuses on the New Testament.
Detailed contents:
00:00 Table of Contents
01:46 The KJV is more literal in 2 Peter 2.5 (the eighth)
02:13 The KJV is more literal in Matthew 5.32 (Raca)
02:35 The KJV is more literal in Matthew 10.27 (what ye hear in the ear)
02:55 The KJV is more literal in Galatians 3.22 (by faith of Jesus Christ)
03:38 The translation continuum chart
04:09 Some New Testament differences due to differing textual bases
04:20 Mark 16.9, John 7.53-8.11 (the Pericope Adulterae), Matthew 6.13 (the Lord’s Prayer), 1 John 5.7-8 (the Comma Johanneum)
05:15 Why the textual differences? Different Greek source texts
06:00 A few examples of where the Textus Receptus differs from the majority of Greek manuscripts
06:15 My opinion on New Testament textual criticism (disclaimer: I am not an expert!)
06:38 The Textus Receptus advocates seem to have the weakest argument
06:59 Acts 9.5-6, Jesus’s response to Paul on the road to Damascus
07:50 Acts 24.6-8, Lysias and great violence
09:32 Colossians 1.14, through his blood
10:32 John 1.18, only begotten Son or only God?
12:13 Revelation 8.13, angel or eagle?
13:00 Revelation 16.5, “and shalt be” or “O Holy one”?
14:55 The KJV is hard to understand in 2 Corinthians 6.11-13
15:13 The KJV is hard to understand in Galatians 4.17-18
15:30 The KJV is hard to understand in Job 34.5-6
15:49 Incorrect or misleading translations in the KJV
16:12 2 John 3, “be” or “will be”?
16:35 Genesis 18.1, plains of Mamre or oaks of Mamre?
17:23 Matthew 13.42, gnashing of teeth
18:04 Luke 18.12, “all that I possess” or “all that I get”?
18:27 Mark 11.17, house of prayer -- “of all nations” or “for all nations”?
19:44 Luke 23.42, “in” or “into” thy kingdom? Burgon’s view
20:53 Hebrews 2.1, drifting away
21:22 Romans 1.5, “obedience to the faith” or “the obedience of faith”?
22:24 Matthew 2.16, did Herod kill all the children, or only all the boys?
23:07 1 Timothy 5.4, nephews or grandchildren? Or are nephews grandchildren?
24:20 Titus 2.13, 2 Peter 1.1, Granville Sharp’s rule, and the deity of Christ
24:52 Thee, thou, thine - ye, you, your
25:03 Isaiah 40.1, Comfort ye my people
25:44 Luke 22.31-32, sifting you but praying for thee
26:37 John 3.11-12, I say to thee, but I have told you
27:04 Hebrews 1.13-14, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool
28:21 Did Jesuits produce the KJV as part of a plot to restore England to papal obedience? Sometimes the KJV sides with the Douay-Rheims against the ESV
29:02 Mark 6.20, “he did many things” or “he was greatly perplexed”?
29:15 Mark 15.39, did the centurion see Jesus cry out?
29:31 Luke 9.55-56, the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives
29:46 Luke 23.38, was the inscription in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew?
30:00 John 5.4, did an angel trouble the waters?
30:11 Acts 8.37, did Philip require the eunuch to believe with all his heart before being baptized?
31:03 Other considerations
33:52 The ESV needs italics in Revelation 14.12. “Here is a call for the endurance of the saints …”
34:28 The ESV needs italics in Revelation 13.18. “This calls for wisdom …”
35:20 The ESV needs italics in Galatians 5.6, “but only faith working through love.”
35:37 The ESV needs italics in Romans 6.5, “united with him in a resurrection like his.”
36:30 Back to other considerations
37:49 Summary
38:00 The ESV may be just a bit too informal for use in a worship service

Пікірлер: 108

@nojustno1216 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the time that you put into these. I thoroughly enjoyed both parts, 1 and 2.

@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Steve, for letting me know. I'm glad you liked them.

@rab-cnesbit4181 3 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones what do you think of the king James 2016 textus receptus online version

@Kenneth-nVA 4 жыл бұрын

A really nice video brother... I’m new to your KZfaq channel but not to the translations discussion. I just subscribed👍🏻Blessings

@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard, Coram Deo Assembly!

@joshuahoward7567 3 жыл бұрын

That final summary pretty much sums it up in a nut shell I like them both

@sherizaahd Жыл бұрын

31:40, I was trying to find a bible in a non-verse-by-verse format and I chose an ESV that happened to be in verse-by-verse format, almost by accident. Now I was looking for a KJV in paragraph format and can't really find one the way I want with the Psalms and other poetic passages in poetic format.

@themelaman 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for these useful comparisons. I cannot make up my mind between memorizing the King James Version (I just turned 50 and I have memorized several books of the Bible from my youth) and the ESV which is used in my church. I love the poetry of the KJV but I don't want to get confused when it comes to passages and the New testament where the ESV might render the idea of propitiation in Hebrews better. Would this be the case?

@robertscofield7845 Жыл бұрын

Stick with the good old standard… just saying.

@robertscofield7845 Ай бұрын

@@Nick-wn1xwin English I mean, of course, it was the undisputed standard for three hundred years. If you read old books, like Matthew Henry, they never had to explain which version. It never crossed their mind anyone reading would know already it was the Authorised version. But not today! There’s no end to it all… when are they going to get it right? The next one? Never. We already have a good one, or the best one, actually.

@AnHebrewChild 2 жыл бұрын

Hi R Grant Jones - thanks for all the work you do on these videos! Great stuff. Question: when you measure “literalness,” do you take into account the KJV’s (and certain other older translations’) singular vs plural 2nd person pronoun distinction? I’ve always been curious about this and your metric. Thanks

@AnHebrewChild 2 жыл бұрын

(Specifically, I’m referring to the formal scale you regularly update)

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question, danullb! No, that isn't a factor in the scores.

@AnHebrewChild 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones okay. I appreciate the quick response! And thanks again for the care and effort you put into all these videos: the level of objectivity you manage to achieve in your reviews is as refreshing as it is rare (ie, very). Cheers

@danieljackson377 3 жыл бұрын

Could you compare ESV to NKJV, or recommend an article? Thanks!

@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын

Yes, and thanks for the suggestion! Unfortunately, it may be some time before I can build it.

@danieljackson377 3 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Thanks for the work you do.

@iQRUZN 5 жыл бұрын

@ R. Grant Jones - Wonderful video. I was really looking forward to part 2 so thank you for completing this excellent video series. One thing I enjoy doing while watching your video is comparing your highlighted texts to my Jerusalem Bible and my RSV-1CE and RSV-2CE translations. I did discover a few interesting things with two of the highlighted passages. First, regarding Is 40.1. You mentioned the KJV’s use of the archaic second person plural pronoun "ye" which assists the reader in interpreting this passage as God not addressing the prophet Isaiah alone. “Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.” I really like this better. It definitely makes the meaning clearer. The Jerusalem Bible reads: “Console my people, console them says your God.” I really like this translation also. It resolves the archaic use of “ye” nicely while maintaining the correct meaning. Personally, I have no problem with the use of so called archaic pronouns, mainly the singular pronouns “thee, thou, and thy.” For example, thou, the second person singular pronoun. I quote from Michael P. Foley’s excellent editor’s preface to Frank Sheed’s equally excellent translation of Augustine’s Confessions: “Thou remains the only pronominal marker we have in English for expressing intimacy and familiarity. Students are often surprised to learn that thou is the second person singular pronoun that was used to speak to someone of lesser or equal rank while you, the second person plural, was used to address a superior. Thou, not you, is the language of closeness, comfort, and intimacy.” For me, I think this “closeness, comfort, and intimacy” is important in our personal prayer life and also when reading scripture. While reading Is 40.1 in the Jerusalem Bible, I also noticed something by accident. There appears to be two Chapter 40s in a row. I believe this could be a typo. The correct chapter 40 appears on page 1202 of my copy and the incorrect one on page 1205. I believe it’s a typo and should have been chapter 41. Could you please verify this mistake in your copy of the Jerusalem Bible? The second highlighted passage I wanted to discuss is Gal 5.6 in which the ESV inserts the word “only” with regard to faith. You mentioned the KJV rightfully does not include the word “only.” The Jerusalem Bible and both Catholic editions of the RSV also rightfully does not insert the word “only.” I think this probably has something to do with the “faith and works” of the book of James. I do have a question. Does the original RSV insert the word “only” like the later ESV? And did the Catholic edition of the RSV take it back out? I don’t own the original RSV so I am unable to confirm that. Well I’ll end my long comment here. Please don’t take any offense to some of the other comments who say your video is biased. I couldn’t disagree more. Personally, I think your video is very well balanced. So please continue to make these excellent videos.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Preston - thanks for viewing and for this excellent comment. (And for sharing the quote from Frank Sheed.) My copy of the Jerusalem Bible has only one Isaiah 40. On page 1205, just beneath the heading "The calling of Cyrus," chapter 41 begins -- clearly marked as 41. Regarding the RSV and Galatians 5.6, the 1946 RSV New Testament did not include "only" there, nor was it inserted when a new edition of the RSV New Testament was published in 1971. The 1989 NRSV has, "the only thing that counts is faith working through love." So the NRSV could have inspired the ESV. But the root of the insertion is more likely the 1984 NIV, which has "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." I checked my copy of the original (2001) ESV, and it inserts "only". Both RSV Catholic editions are identical to the RSV - no "only". That KJV Onlyist's bitter comment didn't bother me much. I'm actually a bit surprised that I haven't seen more like it. The likes far outweigh the dislikes, and the video view count is healthy. From the comments, it appears that a number of people found the video useful, so I'm not discouraged at all.

@iQRUZN 5 жыл бұрын

R. Grant Jones - Now I’m curious about the differences in our copies of the Jerusalem Bible. My copy does not state any edition or printing number. It just has a copyright date of 1966 by Darton, Longman & Todd, Ltd. and Doubleday & Company, Inc. And it is printed in the United States. I know my Edition does not have the thumb indices. Could you check your copyright date on your copy?

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

@@iQRUZN - mine has the same copyright date and other information as yours. It was also printed in the US. Clearly, our copies come from different print runs. I actually have a second copy -- one that I bought new in 1981. Its copyright date & etc. is just like my thumb-indexed copy. My guess is that your copy was printed early on, before they caught the error.

@american9m 4 жыл бұрын

I’m curious as to how you can say that the KJV is more literal than the ESV/NASB when they come from different texts? I may have missed your explanation on that, if I have, forgive me, please.

@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question, american9m! I scored them against different New Testament texts. For instance, I scored the KJV and the NKJV against the Textus Receptus (TR), taking into account variants within the family of TR editions. For the NAS and ESV, I scored against the Nestle-Aland text, taking into account variant readings in the apparatus. I don't recall what I said in this particular video, but there is a very brief explanation of the procedure I followed on the translation continuum chart itself.

@einarengemoen2486 2 жыл бұрын

Good review as always. Just one question from one of your charts where you say on Luke 17:36 that TR includes this verse, but Stephanus 1550 does not. As far as I have supposed Stephanus 1550 to be the printed version of Erasmus' TR, is what you are saying here that Erasmus include it, but not Stephanus?

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question, Einar. It's been some time since I made this video, so I'm not sure precisely what I said in it. But it is true that the 1550 edition of Stephanus omits Luke 17.36, which is present in the 1624 Elzevir edition and in Scrivener's 1894 edition. I don't have a copy of any of Erasmus's editions handy, so I'm not sure about him; but Tyndale's 1526 English New Testament translation was based on Erasmus's 1516 Greek edition, and Tyndale omits Luke 17.36, which suggests that Erasmus didn't have that verse either.

@einarengemoen2486 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones wow there you go, impressive answer. You really have insight into these things, and what a memory. It’s educational and interesting to listen you on the subject of manuscripts and translations.

@RGrantJones 2 жыл бұрын

@@einarengemoen2486 - thank you for the kind words, Einar. But I'm an amateur, without any doubt, and my memory gets hazier with each passing year. I do have access to some useful references, which help me clear the fog.

@einarengemoen2486 2 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones you know a lot more than many professionals. But as I’m sure you are aware of, the more one knows, the more one knows what are to be known. And one becomes aware of the ones knowing even more. And a lot more some times. But even that takes knowledge 😊

@Snoopy0310 Жыл бұрын

How large is vulgate inserted in KJV (%&x) How large is niv & cjb insertion of DSS & LXX?

@mjc32991 4 жыл бұрын

What translation do you recommend? Thanks!

@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын

I don't have a single favorite translation. I recommend reading Scripture from at least two translations: a literal one, like the KJV, NKJV, ASV, NAS, or ESV; and a relatively loose one, like the CSB, NIV, or NLT. Thanks for the question!

@robcimarolli4510 3 жыл бұрын

I’ve seen so much debate about the age of manuscripts used. That the new translations use manuscripts that actually date further back, closer to the originals. Do you feel the kjv is reliable and trustworthy? If I read it will I be missing something important that is present in new version from discoveries made after the kjv was made?

@sylvaindurand1817 5 жыл бұрын

I was looking forward to part 2 and I'm not disapointed. Very balanced and informative.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Sylvain Durand, for that kind comment!

@OrthodoxJourney359 5 жыл бұрын

Another great learning experience! I really appreciate these videos.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

You're welcome, Pastor Brian! Thanks for the view and the comment.

@InfinitelyManic 4 жыл бұрын

Isa 40:1 -- Good point since it's a noun and a verb. One reason I also read the Bible in Luther's or other German translations is that all nouns are capitalized.

@jameskosch4052 5 жыл бұрын

Wonderful work on both parts. I think your "other considerations" is the most practical and telling of the comparison. Thank you so much for all the work you have put into this.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks much for those kind words!

@Christreality Жыл бұрын

The Bible/God's Word for His own people is wonderful and very needed daily for filling of the soul of man on his journey of faith in Jesus from now to eternity. "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain." Phil 1. -- esv/kjv :)

@markbrooks8623 5 жыл бұрын

A quick point. Only Vaticanus and Siniaticus omit vs. 9-20 of the Gospel of Mark, and I believe Vaticanus has a blank space -- something unusual in hand-written Bibles -- where they should be, a tacit admission that the scribe was aware of them. Burgon wrote an entire book on the subject.

@robertscofield7845 Жыл бұрын

And, it (Burgon’s book, The Last Twelve Verses of Mark) is an excellent three or fourfold argument for the classic translation being correct and, as usual, trustworthy.

@InfinitelyManic 4 жыл бұрын

Luke 17:36 -- Wycliffe and my digital copy of DRC have "They answering, say to him: Where, Lord?" But Luther, Geneva, and Bishops' have the same wording as the KJV. Since the KJV was based on Bishops', this makes sense for the KJV, although the KJV has a marginal note: "this verse is not found in most of the Greek copies". So, what was Luther's source? We know he used Erasmus' second printed Greek text edition; so perhaps someone with a copy of Erasmus' second edition can confirm if it's in there or in its margin.

@Sybok51288 3 жыл бұрын

at 19:00, with "of/for" I think in history these prepositions had a more similar connotation than today especially so in distant past when English had a more complex case system. Maybe in the KJV days they were still considered related? the German cousin to 'of', that is 'ab', takes the dative for example.

@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for that thought-provoking comment!

@markbrooks8623 5 жыл бұрын

One issue with the KJV is the decision to use multiple English words for the same word in the original texts, which was done to make the text read well, but which obscures connections. It is not a perfect translation by any means. However, some of the translations that have followed haven't really improved the situation overall, which makes it understandable why there are many people who see no reason to use a modern Bible. Besides, the fact it is in the public domain (outside of the UK) and its ubiquity as a translation makes the KJV/AV truly common and so very useful for teaching and commentary. Also there are many study aids to help in resolving some of the deficiencies.

@HeartSpeaksToHeart 5 жыл бұрын

Superb analysis as always, thank you. I'm particularly appreciative of your fair and balanced analysis, and how you are able to appeal to translations which are normally forgotten or ignored - like the Douai-Rheims and the Knox - and bring them into your discussion. I'd love to see a review at some point on the Knox Bible, which is a translation I quite frequently use for devotional reading of Scripture, and it would also be wonderful to see a review of the Bentley-Hart translation which you mentioned, and which has caused such a furore in the scholarly world of academia. But thank you again, I always look forward to your videos and profit from them enormously.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for viewing and those kind comments. I intend to review the Knox and Bentley Hart translations at some point. I'm afraid I haven't spent much time with either yet, and I'd like to do them justice. But perhaps within a few months.

@davidamis9056 3 жыл бұрын

You should check out the MEV (Modern English Version). Perhaps compare it with the KJV? It claims to be a modern update of the KJV - Like the NKJV.

@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the suggestion, David! I may examine the MEV at some point, but I've been disappointed with the editions that I've seen marketed to date. They all seem to have glued bindings with the words of Christ in red.

@robertgordon50 3 жыл бұрын

Yesterday Amazon brought me a Readers' Augustine Bible. I have been reading through the OT as a covid project and my RSVCE has very narrow gutters. So, I anyway had decided to get the Augustine based on your deboxing review. I'm not suggesting you recommended it! [Even delivered, $67 seems expensive enough to justify unreasonable expectations. :-)] I am impressed with the scholarly attitude in your posts. Our thinking is similar and I almost always agree with your judgements. Many thanks for your apostolate.

@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Robert, for that very kind comment!

@mikerichards1498 5 жыл бұрын

Grant, I would be absolutely thrilled if you would produce a video comparing the ASV1901 to the ESV (or even the NRSV1989, NIV2011). I believe the results would be fascinating. I have read and used the ASV1901 since 1976. I use the ESV in its various editions now, but my respect for the ASV1901 is unshaken. Thanks for considering making a video featuring the ASV1901.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Mike - I think that's a great idea. The textual differences are more subtle in the New Testament, but just locating them could make for an interesting project. Thanks for the suggestion!

@amyk6403 Жыл бұрын

Huh. I prefer a lighter font because I have an astigmatism, in addition to far-sightedness, which causes blurring. Lighter font, less blur. I appreciate tighter tracking, average spacing and generous leading. I dislike Zondervans Comfort Print - a lot!

@RGrantJones Жыл бұрын

I have an astigmatism too, and I greatly prefer darker, bolder fonts. Thanks for commenting!

@eyeonart6865 4 жыл бұрын

Ge. 18:1 look at Greek it could be either. It does not mean plain as we know it.

@markdelissio6609 5 жыл бұрын

You mentioned that it’s hard to find verse by verse in the ESV. I got one recently that is outstanding. Nice bold print with good spacing. I use it with my TBS Westminster KJV. You can get it on Amazon for $40.00.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Also, a single-column verse-by-verse ESV was in print about a decade ago. That and the one you mention are the only two I can think of. Thanks for viewing and commenting!

@nojustno1216 4 жыл бұрын

TBS Westminster Reference Bible....now you're speaking my language 😉. In my opinion, it is quite possibly the single best layout of any bible of any time period.

@gypsylane8723 5 жыл бұрын

great review, thanks

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for viewing and commenting, Gypsy!

@brucemercerblamelessshamel3104 5 жыл бұрын

until long after the scriptures were written there are no chapters or verses. i enjoyed both videos

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

That's true! I would not have done well with a text that had no spaces between words, almost no punctuation, no chapter divisions, and no verse numbers. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@brucemercerblamelessshamel3104 5 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones blessings

@Nick-wn1xw 4 жыл бұрын

Yep. The Geneva bible was the first to use chapter and verse.

@edwardgraham9443 5 жыл бұрын

Absolutely wonderful video of two very good bible translations. I love the KJV bible and I do see some, not all, of the issues you have pointed out, so for me I read it together with the NKJV and sometimes other translations like NASB and ESV. But I truly appreciate this comparison. I'd love to see a comparison of the NKJV with the ESV. I believe that the NKJV is an under utilized and under appreciated translation and personally believe it's one of the better ones especially when it has all the translators notes with it.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Edward Graham - Someone asked me a week or two ago which translation I'd pick if I could choose only one. I answered: the NKJV, because it's very literal and has many textual and translation notes. But I'd prefer to have more than one! If I could have only two, I'd pick a literal translation and another that's more interpretive, like the KJV or NKJV and the ESV, or the NASB and the ESV. Thanks for that encouraging comment!

@edwardgraham9443 5 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones That my translation of choice, but its difficult to get one here in Jamaica. Generally we have KJV and NIV in our Bible stores, to get NKJV, ESV or NASB, we have have to purchase online and that can prove prohibitive because of the cost, one US $ is 130 JA $. I love the new Thomas Nelson comfort print centre column reference Bibles. I read these transactions online or on my phone. Yes the NKJV is the one I use, I got one some years ago, its worn out but I still use it. The first Bible I ever read was a Gideons NKJV Bible and I have loved it very much since.

@fivestar1836 5 жыл бұрын

KJV vs NASB95 KJV vs NKJV NKJV vs NASB95 Rumors about the new NASB is worrying. They were looking for advice/suggestions, have you contacted them? Would you let your daughter date a KJV Neverist? Or a cocky Calvinist? Loving your video's, need to watch more older one's.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the suggestions, Five Star! Until a few months ago, I examined the snippets of the 2020 NASB as they were posted at Lockman's Facebook page. The ones I saw seemed like a mixed bag, but my overall sense was that Lockman stands a good chance of alienating its customer base. But no, I haven't contacted them. I doubt they'd pay attention to a curmudgeon like me. I suspect their translation philosophy is guided by the results of marketing surveys. On the hypothetical daughter questions -- no, and maybe. Thanks for the amusing post and the kind words!

@markbrooks8623 5 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Sadly, too many publishers are following that path to constant revision to satisfy marketing surveys. The ESV is being continually revised, the HCSB becomes the CSB -- it is all nonsense, really. Thank goodness, Thomas Nelson hasn't changed the NKJV since 1984, but even they won't make a formal commitment to that. How disappointing.

@eyeonart6865 4 жыл бұрын

The faith of or in, of denotes ownership. We are to have the faith of Christ, the same faith Christ had. And that is not our own faith. It is the faith that the Eternal gives us.

@robcimarolli4510 5 жыл бұрын

Check out studylight.org lots of good stuff. Commentaries etc. And I just noticed you can study interlinear bibles there too

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

One hundred and seven commentaries and twenty-seven dictionaries! Not bad. Thanks, Rob!

@Airik1111bibles 5 жыл бұрын

Awesome video and good info for an "armchair hobbyist" 😂.... Wow ....just .....wow... Love ya brother😇 1 blue thumb up.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks, Airik1111! Somehow that reminds me of Monty Python's Bicycle Repairman. "All in a day's work for Armchair Hobbyist." Maybe I should change the name of this channel to "Armchair Hobbyist" or "R. Grant 'Armchair Hobbyist' Jones".

@Airik1111bibles 5 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I was thinking... since I have so many Gail Replinger supporters who follow my channel I might change mine to "Airik1111's New Age Bible Reviews" 😂

@robertscofield7845 Жыл бұрын

@@Airik1111biblesHey! Be nice.

@AKdon68 3 жыл бұрын

I will give one more big mistranslation in KJV - 1 Cor 11:27 "..eat this bread, AND drink this cup of the Lord." KJV "..eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord .." ESV The Greek word is "i" not "kai" so the correct word is "OR" not "AND"

@fredeskridge22 5 жыл бұрын

What some call a mistranslation I would call a dot not yet connected. I believe The Lord has perfectly preserved His Word. Going to the greek is misleading. The original Greek is gone. I know scribes supposedly kept it alive. But that’s just not true. Just like we don’t leave the Holy Bible alone today they did likewise.

@moisesg.v.1575 5 жыл бұрын

And the fact that the early manuscripts today cannot prove that even earlier manuscripts that obviously got destroyed, were actually the basis for the MT and the TR. So it is pure speculation and bias. One can say the CT is the oldest and another can say it's the oldest that survived, reason why the MT and TR have more weight since are the majority that also survived. I tend to lean toward the TR and MT but I can see how the CT also can have good points. This is why my favourite version is the NKJV which has all those differences in footnotes for you to read and be aware, unlike the KJV, ESV or NASB. In most of these verses compared here, the NKJV got them right mostly all the time, regardless if it was the KJV or the ESV who was better translated. This only affirms more my conviction that the NKJV is the way to go.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

The NKJV is a very good translation. I like the fact that it usually includes notes that indicate where the TR differs from Nestle-Aland and from Hodges-Farstad. Unfortunately, they missed a few not insignificant variations.

@moisesg.v.1575 5 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Please could you tell me which ones? As far as I know, the NKJV is the best on footnotes so if you can tell me those I can write them by hand. Thanks.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

@@moisesg.v.1575 - Yes. I made a few charts that describe them, as well as places other NKJV notes are now out of date because the Nestle-Aland text changed. You can view them at the end of my Scofield Study Bible III NKJV video from February 2019: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fJ1ip9ZyqKqnoqM.html .

@Nick-wn1xw 4 жыл бұрын

I will tell you what I like about the KJV. I like the plural pronouns as well. Still, my translation of choice is the ESV. I would use the KJV more BUT the KJV onlyists are so embarrassing ignorant that I don't want anyone to associate me with them. Sad they've caused so much division.

@ahammer7000 3 жыл бұрын

The modern Catholic bible copied the KJV, it is nothing like the first English Duoay Reims or the old Latin Vulgate. The KJV was banned by Rome since before it was the KJV, please recall the execution of William Tyndale. Rome has several bible versions and = made some of their bible versions to follow closely the KJV but on the key verses like 1john5:7 and john 1:12, the verses are in brackets or have a foot note that says "these verses are not in the oldest Greek manuscripts". Plus there was a Roman Cardinal Carlo Martini as the only Catholic member of the ecumenical committee that prepared the new Greek edition of the New Testament, the Novum Testamentum Graece, which is the underlying Greek text for all new translations.

@5winder 5 жыл бұрын

Removing Jesus from His creation (in the ESV) is atrocious... Ephesians 3:9. There are no errors in the KJV.

@RGrantJones 5 жыл бұрын

What I don't understand is why that particular translation sponsored by the Church of England is so special. No one claims that the Bishops' Bible, the Great Bible, and the Revised Version -- three other Church of England translations -- are inerrant. We know that the KJV translators were fallible men. I think most KJV Onlyists would disagree with them on several points of theology. (For instance, the KJV translators practiced infant baptism.) So are you saying that just as God inspired the authors of Scripture and prevented them from making any misstatements, God prevented the paedobaptist KJV translators from making translation errors? If so, what evidence do we have that God intervened in history to make the KJV the perfect translation?

@rmsmin 4 жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I am convicted we ought accept the text providentially provided to us in our own language as the authority. This, as you know, was the attitude of the NT writers. That text for us is by any meaningful metric the KJV. A substantive doctrine of preservation precludes the critical text versions from even being considered.

@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын

@@rmsmin - thanks for the comment! I certainly admire the KJV, but I've yet to be convinced that it alone contains God's word in English. Perhaps some day I'll come to that conclusion.

@robertscofield7845 Жыл бұрын

⁠@@RGrantJonesSeveral books I’ve read try to explain why it’s “so special.” One is, In the Beginning, by Alister McGrath. Also, the translators following infant baptism is why they transliterated the Greek word….they knew it meant submerging. But nowhere in the Bible are babies baptized. They couldn’t touch that one for political, or security, reasons, IMHO.