Solomon says "...but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." proverbs 11:14 1000 BC Westcott and Hort say "In the abundance of witnesses there is falsehood" theory of recension of the NT 1881 AD
I just now watched this and it’s wonderful how Pastor Welch held Sun. night sessions for his church and was so good with communicating with them. It’s also great he used your book, “Authorized”. I always wished my church would have had both the KJV & NKJV projected onscreen during church services.
My goodness. This is what a shepherd looks like. The grace and gentleness, the abundant love he has for his people. So refreshing. Gold. Thank you for posting this, I've been so blessed by your content.
Well if you like a work based salvation and removal of the blood. And also passivness. I use all translations to help with kjv but not for doctrine. Use a dictionary also helps. But back to kjv. not all off it is hard to understand. Watch Real Bible Believers on nkjv errors. From saved to being saved. From fierce countenance when needed to passivity nkjv. List goes on. The further down the worse it gets
Thanks for this interview. And for the others in this series. I was touched throughout by Pastor Welch's honesty, humility, integrity, pastoral care, and his love and commitment to God's Word. 46:54: "I'm not wanting to bring heresy into anything. I want to bring clarity into my miniistry." Amen. And thanks for your work on "Authorized."
I am the pastor of Calvary Baptist Church in Sunnyridge, Germiston, South Africa. I have been here for 15 years and this church has been a KJV stronghold since the 50's. During my tenure here I have also transitioned to the NKJV
Hi Mark. Unlike your dear guest I did not transition during this time from KJV to NKJV. I came into this environment already transitioned to NKJV. I too grew up on the KJV but my dad later preferred a Scofield Reference Bible. This was during my teenage years. When I got married I preferred the NKJV for one reason only and that was because it got rid of all the hithers and thithers and withersoevers. That was my sole reason at the time. My wife also grew up in a KJV environment so it was also hard for her but she is fully trans now. I was never against the KJV until I came into ministry and discovered a host of people who were calling me liberal and all sorts of invectives hurled at me. This made me angry as a young pastor. At that stage I didn't hesitate to give it back to them. Yes...I do regret that now that I am older. When I came to Calvary Baptist Church I was in my late 30's and knowing full well what I was getting into I took it as a mission from the Lord. I determined to begin preaching expository sermons on Philippians because from the first day I saw that this church had much doctrine but no joy. I also included word studies were I could and honestly showed the weaknesses and flaws in both KJV and NKJV. In those days I only compared these two but now I am including the others like NASB, ESV, etc. When the people saw that I was fair with my criticism it changed the way they responded to me. I do not, in any way, think I am a word smith but I try me best. I will never measure up to the likes of you but I do so appreciate scholars like yourself. I have learned that in any difficulty it is best to lead exegetically. @@markwardonwords
I always loved the NKJV because I felt that it still gave me what I enjoyed about the KJV (prose), but updated to more modern English. Thanks for this interview. Very encouraging!
I need to try the NKJV! Of all versions, I think that's the one I have seen the very least. The NASB has always sounded a bit "clunky." The ESV seems less so, but still a bit sometimes. It's just hard to switch versions because it messes with the verses you already have memorized or that are very familiar, in a specific wording.
@@Yesica1993yep, if you want to read a modern translation that will support the memorization work you’ve already done in the KJV, the NKJV is going to usually be the same, but in modern English. Thus, it would be a much easier transition for you.
@@dustinsegers4534 Sorry if there was misunderstanding. I am in the ESV. I've never even read the full KJV. I wish I had started on that one. I started on the NIV and years later moved to ESV since the church was in was using it. I'm just curious about the NKJV for the elegance of the language. Plus it seems a bit rare.Thanks!
Wow, it's hard to change anything after 40 years, much less your Bible translation! He seems like a wise and humble man. What a selfless act, to choose to take on Bible-switch battle in his church. He could have very easily thought, "I'm too old for this", and left it to a younger pastor coming in. I can't imagine anyone would have faulted him. The fact that he did it this way shows his shepherd's heart. More superficial things: Nice to hear he grew up in the Chicago area! And super extra points for his Mr. Rogers sweater, which is adorable.
As a young Christian I read through the KJV New Testament. I struggled with the Elizabethan dialect, and had to re-read many portions over to get what the Anglican Priests were trying to convey in their translation. The Bible does NOT have to be hard to understand. I got a NKJV as soon as it came out, and this truck driver now fully understands his Bible. I have read it through many times since. My only concern is that if everybody uses a different version it leads to confusion. I'd love to see a NKJV only church so that young people can more easily memorize scripture.
That’s a valid concern, though I personally have not witnessed it occurring. I’ve spent the last 20 years in churches where people use different translations with no problem. But I am attempting to do some TH-cam work and maybe a book that will help the confusion abate. I hope to demonstrate how lay Christians can benefit from the use of multiple Bible translations.
I've been in churches that have NO officially sanctioned version for over 30 years. I've never seen the difference in translations ever cause any dispute. The reason is, because there is no one "right" translation, everyone is open to going to various versions or checking the original Greek to understand things better. No "right" version seems to lead people to be more willing to think critically.
Very insightful and spiritually encouraging interview. Many topics are ones I’ll be meditating on, especially around fear, patience, and enduring love. In the discussion on the Bible not saying there’s a perfect translation, I wanted to mention, my KJVO circle uses the following verse to claim the KJV is referenced in the Bible, that it is the perfect translation, and all others are to be done away with. 1 Corinthians 13:10 (KJV) But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
It's easy to be patient with people who are mistaken about complicated issues of translation and history; it's harder to find people guiltless who twist the Words of God this way. =( There simply is no way that 1 Cor 13:10 refers to the KJV. Real debates can be had over whether it refers to the completed canon or the coming of Christ (I favor the latter, because "then shall I know even as also I am known), but to say that the verse refers to the KJV is to set ourselves above Scripture rather than underneath it. =(
I went to kjv churches as a child but in college, I came to an epiphany when I was encouraged to use the Ryrie SB in the NASB. . The NAS was a clear text I could understand. I have since added the NKJV and HCSB/CSB , as a back up plan.
I love the KJV but my pastor and friend of over 30 years recommended the NKJV. I bought copies for my daughters and myself and have enjoyed them. Praise our Lord Jesus Christ!🙏🏼🇺🇸
Both are good! But the NKJV is in our English and the KJV is not, so if I have to choose between the two, I go for the NKJV. But we don't have to choose! We can all use both!
@@markwardonwords and you are too! Listening to the conversation between the two of you is very encouraging. I pray all Christians (and non Christians) can dialogue this way.
A cousin of mine told me that once we stopped reading Shakespeare, we lost our link to the KJV. Probably more truth to that than i realized. As to "dumbed down" versions of the Bible, that could be The Good News for Modern Man where the "death of Jesus" replaced "blood of Jesus," and is dangerous theology. Loved that "Modern Baptist Amish Movement." An uncle of mine said in a deacons' meeting over Bible versions, "If the KJV was good enough for the Apostle Paul then it's good enough for me." Another deacon jumped in with "That's exactly the way that I feel!" Ouch. Great video message, Mark
I like and sometimes "prefer" the KJV, but never understood the KJV Only stance, and i don't think its a stance that's defendable. 1) We don't speak or read Elizabethan English in this culture. A translation should reflect the language spoken and read in the culture. 2) What about Bibles sent all over the World to China, Africa, etc that are not KJV, are they NOT Gods Word? 3) Do we academically (mans brain) understand the Bible, or is its deep truths reveled by the Holy Spirit, can the Holt Spirit be thwarted by a translation from man? 4) We have many more source manuscripts available now than the KJV translators did.
I use a variety of translations because I think it often gives you a much more rounded view of the text. I use the ESV mainly but I also use the HCSB, NLT, and KJV. This mixture really allows me to understand a passage, and I switch between them sometimes daily. On a day when I need to get my Bible reading in amongst my two rambunctious toddler boys, that’s typically an NLT day because I can just absorb the Scripture without having to go through any hurdles of reading and then re-reading to try to understand. But some days I’m feeling the KJV! Just depends. My main Bible is definitely the ESV, though. I think it’s got the literary beauty of the KJV but with a less-wooden NASB-type feel.
Excellent! Do you think you could share an example of an insight you achieved through this method of study? Even if it takes a few weeks before a good candidate arises?
@@markwardonwords sure! A great but nonspecific example off the top of my head is the book of Proverbs. I think it’s much easier to understand in the NLT and I’ve found that applying them to my daily life is easier with the proverbs put into more modern language. I’m confident I can think of other more specific examples as I go about my reading. I’ll also note that I often read from the NLT to my toddlers precisely because it is in a very common vernacular, so i know they will be more familiar with the words! Children have an easier time with less literal translation, I think.
Niice conversation Mark; I admire your approach of gentleness and humility. I pray continuously for God to soften my stance and approach to others. I tend to be a bit harsh at times concerning biblical and societal issues that I believe in very passionately. Unfortunately, my past is full of witnessing and causing death in my prior profession in the military and I have built a wall around myself in an effort to exercise self-preservation of my mind and lessen the torment. That is no excuse but that has been my approach to keep my pain and regret in check. However, this approach has had the opposite result of the desired effect. As a result, I have a hard time getting close to even those who I love most. I can be difficult but I do have a tender heart and don’t mean to come across the way that I do sometimes. I particularly have no tolerance for blatant heresy and it angers me. I’m trying to work on that and continually tell myself to talk to others in a manner fitting and without regret as if this was their (or my) last day on earth. If you will, please pray for me to correct my sinful failings in this area. 😊
What a touching comment! And pray for me that I show grace to the people I love most, and not just to strangers on the internet. I need special grace to show patience to my three children. I love them dearly, but even last night I had to apologize to them for getting too frustrated with them. My mind goes to Matt 18 and the parable of the unforgiving servant. Perhaps that would be worth some of your reflection time.
Such a big topic. Would love to hear your opinions on all bible versions. It’s a minefield for newbies with so many different opinions. I personally read KJV ESV NIV
Thank you! I have found that the NKJV has the word for word traditional text above and in the apparatus below, it has the NA28, USB and the other variants. I’ve also found that the NIV the CSB the NASB and all the other modern English versions have the traditional text variants below in the apparatus. So I have concluded that I have the complete Word of God, either above or below. So, as found in the NKJV, I myself prefer to have the modern textual variant readings below in the apparatus and the traditional majority, TR, Byzantine texts in the top. Others might prefer it the other way around. So yes, we have the word of God. Conclusion, this debate for me has finally ended.
@@markwardonwords I just received my esv treveris and must say that I love it. I’m like you single column uncluttered text is 😍. I have the esv legacy heirloom for that very reason. Anyways I enjoy your videos. You really have a talent speaking.
I have often found it interesting how much time and focus gets placed on bible translation criticism. The one camp you have KJVO and the other camp that believes other translations should be used to better understand God's Word. This camp almost has the same fervor to discredit the KJV as the KJVO has to claim the KJV is the only translation given by God. I have found that neither camp really yields the end result of really helping Christians to grow in the Love of Christ and in most instances does more to divide Christians than to bring them together. I suppose I fall in the camp that thinks more time should be focused on the application of the word than focusing all the time and energy on my preferred translation being more accurate or easier to understand than the other. If you look today the unfortunate fact is that God's word has been exploited by the money changers for making profits instead of the motivation of helping Christians grow. How many translations do you really need?
I have zero desire to discredit the KJV. I guess I'd say, too, that those pushing back against false doctrine can, yes, push back too hard (please pray that I do not do this!), but the ultimate reason the pushback is necessary is those who strayed from orthodox biblical doctrine in the first place.
Mark, good interview. Let me ask you a question then: On your YT channel, you have recommended both the NKJV and the MEV, and now here you are doing this interview. However, in your book, which I just recently purchased and have been reading, on pages 139-140 you provide a list of recommended translations. However, neither the NKJV or MEV are on that list. Is there a reason for that? Is it because you want to push people away from TR-based translations entirely?
Totally fair question. I’ve been asked it before. I intend to change that in the book if I get a chance. That chapter was originally written as a blog post, and when I put it in the book I failed to adjust that list to the new context. I personally would prefer to see TR translations fade away. But I’m also happy to see them remain and be used by those whose consciences won’t permit a critical text translation. And I’m not willing to invest energy at this point in changing people’s opinions on textual criticism.
this is all enlightening ... you have die-hards on both sides of the fence, and without the necessary credentials ... who can argue. In light of this, what was the author of the book the Pastor mentioned near the end -- God's Word Preserved, thnaks
Theres very little options for an audio version of the bible. CSB has a series called "one minute bible" on spotify. I think the bible publishers should switch to audiobook version of their translations, if they want this new generation to know the bible.
Unless you speak fluent Hebrew and Greek, you must rely on the Holy Spirit and a great Concordance with a Greek and Hebrew dictionary to understand scripture. Another important thing is culture . I, personally study from the NKJV and ESV. I totally agree with using the current language that people actually understand and will actually read. I steer away from paraphrased versions.
What a wonderful guy. I never been into conspiracy theories, to me it’s pretentious trying to appear “deep” to other people. Nothing is deeper than following the gospel, I always laughed when I heard that the nkjv is the “marijuana/gateway drug” of bibles lololololol corny.
After 21 years using the KJV God led me to use the superior literal exact precise accurate correct Concordant Version. Now I'm happy and free and illuminated.
Keith, your comments suggest to me that you are an intelligent guy who can get real benefit out of the Concordant version. May the Lord help you, and enjoy!
@@markwardonwordsOh, my bad. I thought you would be open to an alternative viewpoint like any sports contest. I didn't realize you wanted to present a one-sided viewpoint.
@@johnfanortney7535 My friend, if you're right, the way you're going to persuade me is not by mere assertion of the opposite viewpoint. It's by interacting with the many arguments I've made. That's what I've tried to do for my KJV-Only brothers. I have listened very hard.
@@markwardonwords Jim Welch mentioned the Word of God without defining it. The Word of God is recorded seven times by the Apostle John. In John 1:14 John reveals the Word of God is the flesh and blood Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Jesus Christ is holy and perfect today! Right? The Lord Jesus Christ is counterfeited by many Christs (Matthew 24:24). An effective counterfeit is 90-99.9% of the true. Since the Word of God refers to the Lord Jesus Christ and He is holy and perfect today, there must be an holy and perfect written word of God today. With this conclusion there must also be many counterfeits word of God today. Who is the Standard of Salvation? The Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ! What is the Standard of Scripture? The word of God, the Authorized King James Bible. What are the counterfeits? That's easy. There are many "Christs" in print that counterfeit the Lord's Christ!
@@johnfanortney7535 The KJV is an excellent translation-but if you're going to read it exclusively, you need to understand that it was translated into a form of English no one quite speaks or writes anymore. So there are going to be some places where you think you understand but, because of language change, you're going to miss the intent of the KJV translators. For help discerning when this is the case, I encourage you to check out my "Fifty False Friends in the KJV" series on TH-cam for help reading the KJV! th-cam.com/play/PLq1Aq0ucgkPCtHJ5pwhrU1pjMsUr9F2rc.html
The NKJ gets credit for keeping the 16 New Testament passages that the the other modern translations dropped. However, the NKJ does not solely rely on the traditional text. It too uses the critical text. Gen 1:1 KJV says Heaven and the Earth, NKJ says Heavens, Acts 3:26 KJV says Jesus his Son, NKJ says Jesus his servant. That is a significant difference. In 1st Corinthians 1 : 18 and 2nd Corinthians 2:15 the reading of are saved was changed to are being saved Matthew 7 :14 the KJB reads narrow while the NKJV reads difficult, that's significant as to what the path is. 2 Corinthians 2:17 the KJV says we are not as many which corrupt the word of God but the NKJ says peddling the word of God. Titus 3: 10 KJV says A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject, the NKJ says Reject a divisive man. 1 Thessalonians 5:22 KJV says Abstain from all appearance of evil, NKJ says Abstain from every form of evil. Isaiah 66:5 KJV ... But he shall appear to your joy, but the NKJ says ...That we may see your joy. All of these examples change the meaning and are the words used in other modern translations that rely on the Critical text. Now what in any of those examples does it appear that the NKJ is using words that are easier to understand? There are many other examples like these as well. Yes, there are a lot of archaic words that the NKJ did update where the meaning wasn't changed. However, often it also changes words and phrases that didn't need updated at all and ultimately changed the meaning of the passage.
My friend, the NKJV does not use critical text readings. All the passages you mention are translation decisions, not textual ones. And unless the KJV translators were inspired, some of their translation decisions can be questioned. They would be the very first to say this-and, in fact, they were. Every marginal note saying, "Or, XYZ," is an indication that other translations were possible at that point. And the KJV translators did not view their work as perfect. They specifically denied this: "No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the sun, where Apostles or apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s Spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?" David Norton, ed., The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha: King James Version, Revised edition., vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011), xxviii.
@@markwardonwords Those changes are the same as the modern translations that rely on the critical text. So either the NKJ used the critical text or they used the modern English translations as a reference. Either way it changes the meaning. I didn't bring up KJV onlyism as you appear to be alluding to. However, the KJV translators were trying to make the best possible translation in English and the verses I listed and others that were watered down in the NKJ didn't need to be altered. Its bad enough they're less powerful in the other modern versions, but why call a bible New King James and claim your goal is to update archaic words when you also go as far as changing words who's meanings haven't changed. That makes them untruthful. Do you really think peddling is more current than corrupt? Servant is anymore modern than Son or applies more to who Jesus is? That divisive man is more clear than Heretic in Christian doctrine? That form is more modern than appearance? That difficult is any more modern than narrow to readers? That being saved is needed over just Saved? Especially when no Greek manuscript has a word present for the word being. And him appearing to your joy changed to we may see your joy? Those words change the meaning. You can't say the NKJ with those decisions doesn't change doctrine and therefore is doing more than updating old words and should have the title King James in it at all
My friend, can you read Hebrew or Greek? Can you represent with clarity and understanding the reasons the NKJV translators made any of the revisions you mention?
@@markwardonwords According to Arthur Farstad, the editor the New King James version (NKJV), the critical text is on every page. “On every page of the NKJV New Testament the studious reader will find three different textual views represented…2 “NU” in the NKJV notes, stands for the critical text, based on Westcott and Hort,…” “The New King James Version in the Great Tradition” - Arthur L. Farstad (executive editor of the NKJV) page 111 The NKJV changes somewhere between 54K -100K words. When it diverges from the KJV it follows either the NIV, NASB or the RSV.
I understand what this pastor is saying... and he totally has the Prerogative... to begin reading from a different translation than he has been using for years... his reasoning seems valid..... by changing translations...before the new pastor comes to step in...yes.. he is removing that b;ock that may be in the incoming pastors way... but.. here is the way I look at this.....what if the pastor coming in reads from the KJV..?.. then the congregation will have the KJV read to them.. then a short time the NKJV,.. then back to the KJV.... I don't know how many think like I do,... but I get more out of a sermon.. when I can follow along word for word with what is being read from and taught from the pulpit.. when I have attended a church. and . I find the pastor is reading from a different translation than the one I am reading from. this confuses me.. and especially if they expound on the passage and go over words that are in a different translation that I do not find in mine..here is what ends up happening... I bring a bible to church that I can follow along with.. and learn from in church.. usually the same version that is being read from the pulpit...others may not feel this way.. some may even bring the NIV or NASB this does NOT work for me...so then we end up with everyone trusting in what they feel is the translation to use... that may be all fine and dandy... until individual bible groups form within the church.. so we have 4 or 5 study groups... and each group contains different translations being used within each group... I have been to hundreds of these such study groups over the years.. and more time is spent by each of us explaining what Our translation states and going over that instead of truly delving into the meaning of the text studied...this pastor may feel he is doing the proper thing... BUT.... the best way he can help this chirch is in UNITY of the text... he should stick with the KJV and advise.. any incoming pastor to do likewise...
Well, his Church now uses the ESV, so the NKJV did not last very long. Doctrinal statement on scripture lacks any mention of preservation, so standard for a church using a modern translation. I seriously doubt this pastor would have switched from the KJV to the RSV (basis for the ESV) 20 years ago, nor would he have ever accepted the pulpit Bible might change in 2024 when the 29th edition of Nestle-Aland comes out. Well, one more ex-KJV pastor that could never tell me which Bible translation is correct in Exodus 25.
each edition of the Nestle Aland greek new testament changes maybe a dozen words, and it is always the same words, because the manuscripts are equally representative of two possible readings, which either choice doesnt change the meaning of the passage, the rest of the changes fall under 3 categories.. spelling, word order, and alterations to the critical apparatus in the foot notes. Whenever new manuscripts are processed, a new edition comes out so they can change the footnotes to mention the new manuscripts.
@Casey P because the level of variation in future manuscripts that would be required to make an actual alteration to the NA would require that the new manuscripts be so distinct that they wouldnt be considered NT manuscripts at all and therefore wouldnt affect the NA textual decisions. The NT manuscripts textual variance has been well determined and there is a boundary of variation. Anything that falls within that boundary wouldnt change anything at this point, except the cases mentioned, and anything outside that textual boundary point would be recognized by everyone as something akin to the gnostic gospels
@Casey P pretty much what it sounds like, translators often opt to follow what the NA says is a secondary less likely reading because they disagree with the NA explanation of prioritizing a different reading. The NA though is effectively stable from edition to edition, even if translators prefer some of the secondary readings.
The earlier nkjv read closer to the KJV, the later revision of the nkjv reads closer to the nasb. Zechariah 13:6 (King James Version) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. (New King James Version 1982) “And someone will say to him. ‘What are these wounds in your hands?" Then he will answer. ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. (New King James Version 1994) And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds between your arms?' Then he will answer, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. John 20:25 (King James Version) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. (New King James Version 1982) The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” (New King James Version 1994) The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." By the way of the 20 plus modern bibles I have all of them get John 20:25 right where Thomas says see the print of the nails in His HANDS So how is it the the nkjv got it right in 1982 but by 1994 had changed this reading to read more like the nsab? This same 1994 nkjv gets John 20:25 right, so why the departure from 1982 where it was right to the 1994 change and thus causing a contradiction with John 20:25. We are on the road to a one world religion and the revisers of the modern bibles are making running changes inching us closer and closer back to momy dearest Rome.
@@markwardonwords I showed with evidence that a running change was made that caused a contradiction, when an earlier version of the nkjv had it right reading as the KJV did but then it was revised to read closer to the nasb, which caused an obvious contradiction, and you dismissed it, focusing on my coment about the coming one world religion, whichvis not a conspiracy theory, many are the churches that have gone groveling to Rome, youtube Pope meets with religous leaders/ there was a video Pope Benedict xvi meets with christian leaders at St Josheph, youtube had but it is gone, well not totally, I have it. Your holiness may I present and a nice list of leaders of protestant denominations line up to shake hands and kiss his ring, Rome wants to eccunemicaly gather all the religions under her auspices.
@@dennishagans6339 That's because Zechariah 13:6 isn't actually a prophecy about Christ. The KJV mistranslated the verse (I actually suspect they were influenced by the Latin Vulgate here). "Between your arms" is correct.
@@curtthegamer934 Sorry for the length, if I could condense it I would. Zechariah 13:6 1: (The American Standard Version 1901) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds between thine arms? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. 2: (The Amplified Bible) And one shall say to him, What are these wounds on your breast or between your hands? Then he will answer, Those with which I was wounded [when disciplined] in the house of my [loving] friends. 3: (The Bible in Basic English) And if anyone says to him, What are these wounds between your hands? then he will say, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. 4: (The Contemporary English Version) And if any of them are asked why they are wounded, they will answer, "It happened at the house of some friends." 5: (The English Standard Version) And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’ he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’ 6: (The Good News Bible) Then if someone asks him, 'What are those wounds on your chest?' he will answer, 'I got them at a friend's house.' " 7: (The Holman Christian Standard Bible) If someone asks him: What are these wounds on your chest? -then he will answer: The wounds I received in the house of my friends. 8: (The International Standard Version) "Someone will say to him, 'What are these injuries to your hands?' "He will reply, 'They're what I received at my friend's house.' 9: (The King James Version 1) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. 10: (The King James Version 2) And one shall sayH559 untoH413 him, WhatH4100 are theseH428 woundsH4347 inH996 thine hands?H3027 Then he shall answer,H559 Those with whichH834 I was woundedH5221 in the houseH1004 of my friends.H157 11: (The Living Bible) “And if someone asks, ‘Then what are these scars on your chest and your back?’ he will say, ‘I got into a brawl at the home of a friend!’ 12: (The Message) And if someone says, 'And so where did you get that black eye?' they'll say, 'I ran into a door at a friend's house.' 13: (The New American Standard Bible) "And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds (14) between your arms?' Then he will say, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.' 14: (The New Century Version) But someone will ask, 'What are the deep cuts on your body?' And each will answer, 'I was hurt at my friend's house.' 15: (The New English Translation) Then someone will ask him, ‘What are these wounds on your chest?’ and he will answer, ‘Some that I received in the house of my friends.’ 16: (The New International Readers Version) Suppose someone asks him, 'What are those wounds on your body?' Then he will answer, 'I was given these wounds at the house of my friends.' The Good Shepherd Is Killed and the Sheep Are Scattered 17: (The New International Version) If someone asks him, 'What are these wounds on your body [2] ?' he will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.' The Shepherd Struck, the Sheep Scattered 18: (The New King James Version 1994) And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds between your arms?' Then he will answer, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.' 19: (The New Living Translation Second Edition) And if someone asks, 'Then what about those wounds on your chest?' he will say, 'I was wounded at my friends' house!' 20: (The New Revised Standard Version) And if anyone asks them, "What are these wounds on your chest?" [44] the answer will be "The wounds I received in the house of my friends." 21: (The New World Translation) And one must say to him, 'What are these wounds [on your person] between your hands?' And he will have to say, 'Those with which I was struck in the house of my intense lovers.'" We have 1: What are these wounds between thine arms? 2: What are these wounds on your breast or between your hands? 3: What are these wounds between your hands? 4: why they are wounded 5: ‘What are these wounds on your back?’ 6: 'What are those wounds on your chest?' 7: What are these wounds on your chest? 8: 'What are these injuries to your hands? 9: What are these wounds in thine hands? 10: WhatH4100 are theseH428 woundsH4347 inH996 thine hands? 11: ‘Then what are these scars on your chest and your back?’ 12: 'And so where did you get that black eye?' 13: 'What are these wounds between your arms?' 14: 'What are the deep cuts on your body?' 15: ‘What are these wounds on your chest?’ 16: 'What are those wounds on your body?' 17: 'What are these wounds on your body? 18: 'What are these wounds between your arms?' 19:'Then what about those wounds on your chest?' 20: "What are these wounds on your chest?" 21: 'What are these wounds [on your person] between your hands? The modern translations are all over the ballpark in their wording of these verses. 6 out of the 21 have hands, 6 of them say chest, 4 of them says arms, 3 of them say body, 2 of them say back, 1 of them says wounded, 1 of them says black eye. So much for the modern translations being the most accurate when they do not even agree with each other, but that should come as no surprise because the very Codex's used for these translations do not even agree with each other. So who decides what word is the right word to use? The scholars do of course, ask this scholar over here which word should have been used in thus and such place and he will say x word, while if you ask another scholar over there the same question about the same word he will reply y word should be used. Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, "much of archaeology is more 07:49 of an art than a science, the scientific 07:52 part of archaeology ends once you've 07:53 uncovered what's there, you don't have a 07:56 description that tells you what it is 07:57 so you've got to guess what it is and if you 08:01 have two archaeologists looking the same 08:02 thing no two come up the same 08:04 conclusion" Bingo, when you have two Greek/Hebrew scholars translating from these disagreeing Codex's it is unlikely that they will unanimously come up with the same word. Dr. Gene Kim. they can find out what are the 04:49 right words for the Bible in their mind 04:53 but the problem is this when they find 04:56 the Greek and Hebrew words the lexicon 04:59 does not give one definition in fact it 05:03 can give as many as five to thirteen different 05:08 definitions 05:16 that's the problem see that? so they're 05:19 picking and choosing which definition 05:21 they want to use to fit their translated 05:25 words not only that if you look at the 05:27 lexicons they're all different - they're 05:31 all different they don't agree in every 05:34 definition, so who is the final authority 05:40 "they are" and that's where you catch 05:43 them, the final authority is not God, but them. It is no different than what is was in Jesus day, the educated Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus day were the "Jewish leaders" appointed by Rome. Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Joh 11:47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. Joh 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. There were divisionns amongst the educated Jewish leaders of Jesus day, Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Scribes, Doctors, and Lawyers. It is no different today, the edumacated religous folks also are divided along theological lines, Assemblies of God vs Baptists, mainstream vs the cults, and many of them have their own bible colleges. So what do you get when two scholars of the same edumaction and the same degrees are squabbling over some point of doctrine that one holds to be true and the other holds to be false? which of the two scholars is right and which one is wrong. Act 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. Act 23:7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. Act 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both. Act 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God. Act 23:10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle. So which expert am I to believe? as there are "experts" many. Ask an x flavor baptist and he will say you need to listen to his scholars/pastors/teachers, ask someone else from a different denomination and they will say to trust theirs. Modern denominational scholars will make choices using their scolarship along their own denominatioal beliefs, this is unavoidable as they have been trained in their own denominational colleges!!!
@@curtthegamer934 I have the top 25 (24 not counting the KJV+), most popular bible versions today, most are in E-Sword, the MEB and the CEB are in an Android emulator Also there is John 20:25 John 20:25 1: (The Accurate New Testament+) saidG3004 soG3767 [to] himG846 TheG3588 OtherG243 StudentsG3101 [We] have seenG3708 theG3588 lordG2962 TheG3588 [Man] butG1161 saysG2036 [to] themG846 ifG1437 notG3361 [I] may seeG1492 inG1722 theG3588 handsG5495 [of] himG846 theG3588 markG5179 [of] theG3588 nailsG2247 andG2532 [I] may putG906 theG3588 fingerG1147 [of] meG3450 toG1519 theG3588 markG5179 [of] theG3588 nailsG2247 andG2532 [I] may putG906 [of] meG3450 theG3588 handG5495 toG1519 theG3588 sideG4125 [of] himG846 notG3756 notG3361 [I] will believeG4100 This ANT is based on the Nestles/Aland 27th edtion 2: (The American Standard Version 1901) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe. 3: (The Amplified Bible) So the other disciples kept telling him, We have seen the Lord! But he said to them, Unless I see in His hands the marks made by the nails and put my finger into the nail prints, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe [it]. 4: (The Bible in Basic English) So the other disciples said to him, We have seen the Lord. But he said to them, If I do not see in his hands the print of the nails and put my finger into the print of the nails, and if I do not put my hand into his side, I will never have belief. 5: (The Common English Bible) The other disciples told him, “We’ve seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger in the wounds left by the nails, and put my hand into his side, I won’t believe.” 6: (The Contemporary English Version) So they told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But Thomas said, "First, I must see the nail scars in his hands and touch them with my finger. I must put my hand where the spear went into his side. I won't believe unless I do this!" 7: (The English Standard Version) So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.” 8: (The Good News Bible) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" Thomas said to them, "Unless I see the scars of the nails in his hands and put my finger on those scars and my hand in his side, I will not believe." 9: (The Holman Christian Standard Bible) So the other disciples kept telling him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "If I don't see the mark of the nails in His hands, put my finger into the mark of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe!" 10: (The International Standard Version) So the other disciples kept telling him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he told them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger into them, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe!" 11: (The King James Version 1) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. 12: (The King James Version 2) TheG3588 otherG243 disciplesG3101 thereforeG3767 saidG3004 unto him,G846 We have seenG3708 theG3588 Lord.G2962 ButG1161 heG3588 saidG2036 unto them,G846 ExceptG3362 I shall seeG1492 inG1722 hisG846 handsG5495 theG3588 printG5179 of theG3588 nails,G2247 andG2532 putG906 myG3450 fingerG1147 intoG1519 theG3588 printG5179 of theG3588 nails,G2247 andG2532 thrustG906 myG3450 handG5495 intoG1519 hisG846 side,G4125 I will notG3364 believe.G4100 13: (The Living Bible) When they kept telling him, “We have seen the Lord,” he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands-and put my fingers into them-and place my hand into his side.” 14: (The Message) The other disciples told him, "We saw the Master." But he said, "Unless I see the nail holes in his hands, put my finger in the nail holes, and stick my hand in his side, I won't believe it." 15: (The Modern English Version) The other disciples therefore said to him, We have seen the LORD. But he said to them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. 16: (The New American Standard Bible) So the other disciples were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, (40) I will not believe." 17: (The New Century Version) The other followers kept telling Thomas, "We saw the Lord." But Thomas said, "I will not believe it until I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were and put my hand into his side." 18: (The New English Translation) The other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the wounds from the nails in his hands, and put my finger into the wounds from the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe it!” 19: (The New International Readers Version) So they told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "First I must see the nail marks in his hands. I must put my finger where the nails were. I must put my hand into his side. Only then will I believe what you say." 20: (The New International Version) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it." 21: (The New King James Version 1994) The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." 22: (The New Living Translation Second Edition) They told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he replied, "I won't believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side." 23: (The New Revised Standard Version) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe." 24: (The New World Translation) Consequently the other disciples would say to him: "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them: "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe." 25: (The Passion Translation) So the disciples informed him, “We have seen the Lord with our own eyes!” Still unconvinced, Thomas replied, “There’s no way I’m going to believe this unless I personally see the wounds of the nails in his hands, touch them with my finger, and put my hand into the wound of his side where he was pierced!”
@@barryjtaft That passage simply does not say what you're saying it says. Effectively no one in the history of the church, or of Judaism, interpreted that passage the way KJV-Onlyists do until somewhere around 1980.
@@markwardonwords I guess God was mistaken... ...when He inspired the Prophets, Psalmists and Apostles to write the following, but didn’t see fit to follow through on His promise: Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Isaiah 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. Psalm 33:11 The counsel of the LORD standeth forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations. Psalm 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations. Psalm 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Proverbs 22:20-21 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightiest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee? Proverbs 30:5-6 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 24:34-35 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Luke 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. Revelation 22:18-10 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: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
And my friend, your response is WAY, WAY over the top. If using a different Bible translation leads to apostasy, then you’d better have Bible for that.
"In the multitude of counselors there is safety." In the multitude of translations, there's a pretty good chance you're getting the idea.
Right!
@@markwardonwords Amen bruddah!
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
Solomon says "...but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." proverbs 11:14 1000 BC
Westcott and Hort say "In the abundance of witnesses there is falsehood" theory of recension of the NT 1881 AD
I just now watched this and it’s wonderful how Pastor Welch held Sun. night sessions for his church and was so good with communicating with them. It’s also great he used your book, “Authorized”. I always wished my church would have had both the KJV & NKJV projected onscreen during church services.
My goodness. This is what a shepherd looks like. The grace and gentleness, the abundant love he has for his people. So refreshing. Gold. Thank you for posting this, I've been so blessed by your content.
Wow, thank you!
Remember a pickpocket thief is kind and gentle when he bumps into his victim.
Whenever someone ask me the best translation I usually tell them the one they are actually going to use.
Yes!
Touché
Well if you like a work based salvation and removal of the blood. And also passivness. I use all translations to help with kjv but not for doctrine. Use a dictionary also helps. But back to kjv. not all off it is hard to understand. Watch Real Bible Believers on nkjv errors. From saved to being saved. From fierce countenance when needed to passivity nkjv. List goes on. The further down the worse it gets
@@bretnye6228 Can you read Hebrew or Greek?
@@bretnye6228 did you know that the kjv was not first English translation? Don’t be an kjv only idolater. Kjv have errors too
Thanks for this interview. And for the others in this series. I was touched throughout by Pastor Welch's honesty, humility, integrity, pastoral care, and his love and commitment to God's Word. 46:54: "I'm not wanting to bring heresy into anything. I want to bring clarity into my miniistry." Amen. And thanks for your work on "Authorized."
Many thanks! Yes, I think he did so great!
This was absolute GOLD. It’s so refreshing to hear such wisdom from a shepherd with 40+ years of experience, THANK YOU BOTH! ❤️📖⛪️🙌🏻
I am grateful for the pastoral heart he showed.
Pastor Welch! One of the best! Thanks for interviewing him, Mark!
Yes, I was thrilled with his comments. So pleased.
I am the pastor of Calvary Baptist Church in Sunnyridge, Germiston, South Africa. I have been here for 15 years and this church has been a KJV stronghold since the 50's. During my tenure here I have also transitioned to the NKJV
Praise God! Give us your wisdom-how did you go about it?
Hi Mark. Unlike your dear guest I did not transition during this time from KJV to NKJV. I came into this environment already transitioned to NKJV. I too grew up on the KJV but my dad later preferred a Scofield Reference Bible. This was during my teenage years. When I got married I preferred the NKJV for one reason only and that was because it got rid of all the hithers and thithers and withersoevers. That was my sole reason at the time. My wife also grew up in a KJV environment so it was also hard for her but she is fully trans now. I was never against the KJV until I came into ministry and discovered a host of people who were calling me liberal and all sorts of invectives hurled at me. This made me angry as a young pastor. At that stage I didn't hesitate to give it back to them. Yes...I do regret that now that I am older. When I came to Calvary Baptist Church I was in my late 30's and knowing full well what I was getting into I took it as a mission from the Lord. I determined to begin preaching expository sermons on Philippians because from the first day I saw that this church had much doctrine but no joy. I also included word studies were I could and honestly showed the weaknesses and flaws in both KJV and NKJV. In those days I only compared these two but now I am including the others like NASB, ESV, etc. When the people saw that I was fair with my criticism it changed the way they responded to me. I do not, in any way, think I am a word smith but I try me best. I will never measure up to the likes of you but I do so appreciate scholars like yourself. I have learned that in any difficulty it is best to lead exegetically. @@markwardonwords
I want to hang out with this guy. His smile is infectious. Great interview, Mark. Thank you.
He is indeed quite the guy! That smile works in real life, too! Met him at a conference somewhere… Where was it? California, I think?
Great interview Mark! It was nice to see this format and it was great to get to meet Bro. Welch. Thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it! I surely did enjoy talking to him. Gracious man.
I always loved the NKJV because I felt that it still gave me what I enjoyed about the KJV (prose), but updated to more modern English. Thanks for this interview. Very encouraging!
Agreed!
I need to try the NKJV! Of all versions, I think that's the one I have seen the very least. The NASB has always sounded a bit "clunky." The ESV seems less so, but still a bit sometimes. It's just hard to switch versions because it messes with the verses you already have memorized or that are very familiar, in a specific wording.
@@Yesica1993yep, if you want to read a modern translation that will support the memorization work you’ve already done in the KJV, the NKJV is going to usually be the same, but in modern English. Thus, it would be a much easier transition for you.
@@dustinsegers4534 Sorry if there was misunderstanding. I am in the ESV. I've never even read the full KJV. I wish I had started on that one. I started on the NIV and years later moved to ESV since the church was in was using it. I'm just curious about the NKJV for the elegance of the language. Plus it seems a bit rare.Thanks!
Wow, it's hard to change anything after 40 years, much less your Bible translation! He seems like a wise and humble man. What a selfless act, to choose to take on Bible-switch battle in his church. He could have very easily thought, "I'm too old for this", and left it to a younger pastor coming in. I can't imagine anyone would have faulted him. The fact that he did it this way shows his shepherd's heart. More superficial things: Nice to hear he grew up in the Chicago area! And super extra points for his Mr. Rogers sweater, which is adorable.
Great interview, Mark. Thank you for this wonderful discussion with Pastor Jim Welch.
I was really pleased with how it went; grateful for his insight.
I grew up on the NKJV so that will always be my go to translation
It's a good one!
As a young Christian I read through the KJV New Testament. I struggled with the Elizabethan dialect, and had to re-read many portions over to get what the Anglican Priests were trying to convey in their translation. The Bible does NOT have to be hard to understand. I got a NKJV as soon as it came out, and this truck driver now fully understands his Bible. I have read it through many times since. My only concern is that if everybody uses a different version it leads to confusion. I'd love to see a NKJV only church so that young people can more easily memorize scripture.
That’s a valid concern, though I personally have not witnessed it occurring. I’ve spent the last 20 years in churches where people use different translations with no problem. But I am attempting to do some TH-cam work and maybe a book that will help the confusion abate. I hope to demonstrate how lay Christians can benefit from the use of multiple Bible translations.
I've been in churches that have NO officially sanctioned version for over 30 years. I've never seen the difference in translations ever cause any dispute.
The reason is, because there is no one "right" translation, everyone is open to going to various versions or checking the original Greek to understand things better. No "right" version seems to lead people to be more willing to think critically.
Agreed.
The KN Bible was written at a 6th grade level.
There is no excuse for using anything else.Why dknt we just slap God in the face and tell Him He didnt do a good job with the bible!!!!!!
What a lovely guy, very wise. How lovely also that your great book was so helpful to him and his church. Keep the videos coming Mark, please.
I had honestly and sincerely forgotten that my book was useful to him!
Mark thank you very much for this episode with Mr. Welch God Bless!!
✔
Thank you, brother Mark!
Let my people understand.
Right!
Great interview, great thoughts by both men.
Thank you!
Very insightful and spiritually encouraging interview. Many topics are ones I’ll be meditating on, especially around fear, patience, and enduring love.
In the discussion on the Bible not saying there’s a perfect translation, I wanted to mention, my KJVO circle uses the following verse to claim the KJV is referenced in the Bible, that it is the perfect translation, and all others are to be done away with.
1 Corinthians 13:10 (KJV)
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
It's easy to be patient with people who are mistaken about complicated issues of translation and history; it's harder to find people guiltless who twist the Words of God this way. =( There simply is no way that 1 Cor 13:10 refers to the KJV. Real debates can be had over whether it refers to the completed canon or the coming of Christ (I favor the latter, because "then shall I know even as also I am known), but to say that the verse refers to the KJV is to set ourselves above Scripture rather than underneath it. =(
I went to kjv churches as a child but in college, I came to an epiphany when I was encouraged to use the Ryrie SB in the NASB. . The NAS was a clear text I could understand. I have since added the NKJV and HCSB/CSB , as a back up plan.
A good plan!
Oh, look, another Mark Ward TH-cam video made me cry (in a good way). 😆
Thank you both. May our Lord continue to bless and keep the two of you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I love the KJV but my pastor and friend of over 30 years recommended the NKJV. I bought copies for my daughters and myself and have enjoyed them. Praise our Lord Jesus Christ!🙏🏼🇺🇸
Both are good! But the NKJV is in our English and the KJV is not, so if I have to choose between the two, I go for the NKJV. But we don't have to choose! We can all use both!
I switched from the KJV to the NKJV about a year ago,
How's it gone?
@@markwardonwords very well, when I read the NKJV I feel I'm getting into a deeper relationship with God.
This is awesome sauce. Thanks for doing it.
When he told me the move he'd made after 40 years preaching from the KJV, I knew I had to interview him.
@@markwardonwords just so you know you are being attacked on youtube by Steven Anderson KJVO. Praying for ya.
Thank you! I’m aware. I won’t engage him.
@@markwardonwords dont blame ya
This has to be the best video ever!! I enjoyed every minute!! 📖⛪️❤️🙏🏻
Excellent! He's a gracious man!
@@markwardonwords and you are too! Listening to the conversation between the two of you is very encouraging. I pray all Christians (and non Christians) can dialogue this way.
This video is 💯 If you want to convince KJV only folks, this is the way.
Pray for them to be convinced!
Excellent interview with a very interesting guest. I wish more pastors were like this one.
It turns out he trained my own longtime pastor in the early 70s to be a "hall monitor" at our alma mater!
Thanx, Gentlemen 🌹🌹🌹
Our pleasure!
A cousin of mine told me that once we stopped reading Shakespeare, we lost our link to the KJV. Probably more truth to that than i realized. As to "dumbed down" versions of the Bible, that could be The Good News for Modern Man where the "death of Jesus" replaced "blood of Jesus," and is dangerous theology. Loved that "Modern Baptist Amish Movement." An uncle of mine said in a deacons' meeting over Bible versions, "If the KJV was good enough for the Apostle Paul then it's good enough for me." Another deacon jumped in with "That's exactly the way that I feel!" Ouch. Great video message, Mark
I like and sometimes "prefer" the KJV, but never understood the KJV Only stance, and i don't think its a stance that's defendable. 1) We don't speak or read Elizabethan English in this culture. A translation should reflect the language spoken and read in the culture. 2) What about Bibles sent all over the World to China, Africa, etc that are not KJV, are they NOT Gods Word? 3) Do we academically (mans brain) understand the Bible, or is its deep truths reveled by the Holy Spirit, can the Holt Spirit be thwarted by a translation from man? 4) We have many more source manuscripts available now than the KJV translators did.
Right. I'm with you on every point.
I use a variety of translations because I think it often gives you a much more rounded view of the text. I use the ESV mainly but I also use the HCSB, NLT, and KJV. This mixture really allows me to understand a passage, and I switch between them sometimes daily. On a day when I need to get my Bible reading in amongst my two rambunctious toddler boys, that’s typically an NLT day because I can just absorb the Scripture without having to go through any hurdles of reading and then re-reading to try to understand. But some days I’m feeling the KJV! Just depends. My main Bible is definitely the ESV, though. I think it’s got the literary beauty of the KJV but with a less-wooden NASB-type feel.
Excellent! Do you think you could share an example of an insight you achieved through this method of study? Even if it takes a few weeks before a good candidate arises?
@@markwardonwords sure! A great but nonspecific example off the top of my head is the book of Proverbs. I think it’s much easier to understand in the NLT and I’ve found that applying them to my daily life is easier with the proverbs put into more modern language. I’m confident I can think of other more specific examples as I go about my reading. I’ll also note that I often read from the NLT to my toddlers precisely because it is in a very common vernacular, so i know they will be more familiar with the words! Children have an easier time with less literal translation, I think.
Psalms sounds better in NKJV; the epistles seems clearer in NASB. KJV send to give greater power to the Deuteronomy.
Niice conversation Mark; I admire your approach of gentleness and humility. I pray continuously for God to soften my stance and approach to others. I tend to be a bit harsh at times concerning biblical and societal issues that I believe in very passionately.
Unfortunately, my past is full of witnessing and causing death in my prior profession in the military and I have built a wall around myself in an effort to exercise self-preservation of my mind and lessen the torment. That is no excuse but that has been my approach to keep my pain and regret in check. However, this approach has had the opposite result of the desired effect. As a result, I have a hard time getting close to even those who I love most.
I can be difficult but I do have a tender heart and don’t mean to come across the way that I do sometimes. I particularly have no tolerance for blatant heresy and it angers me. I’m trying to work on that and continually tell myself to talk to others in a manner fitting and without regret as if this was their (or my) last day on earth.
If you will, please pray for me to correct my sinful failings in this area. 😊
What a touching comment! And pray for me that I show grace to the people I love most, and not just to strangers on the internet. I need special grace to show patience to my three children. I love them dearly, but even last night I had to apologize to them for getting too frustrated with them.
My mind goes to Matt 18 and the parable of the unforgiving servant. Perhaps that would be worth some of your reflection time.
I agree this is a great interview 5 stars rate from a Filipino plowboy.
Ha! Thank you Filipino plow boy!
Such a big topic. Would love to hear your opinions on all bible versions. It’s a minefield for newbies with so many different opinions. I personally read KJV ESV NIV
th-cam.com/play/PLq1Aq0ucgkPA18L9HH_HC4IEgUNvMxsku.html
This was phenomenal to listen to.
I got a nice message from the new pastor, the one to whom Pastor Welch passed the torch. Their move has apparently been smooth. Praise God!
Thank you!
I have found that the NKJV has the word for word traditional text above and in the apparatus below, it has the NA28, USB and the other variants.
I’ve also found that the NIV the CSB the NASB and all the other modern English versions have the traditional text variants below in the apparatus.
So I have concluded that I have the complete Word of God, either above or below.
So, as found in the NKJV, I myself prefer to have the modern textual variant readings below in the apparatus and the traditional majority, TR, Byzantine texts in the top. Others might prefer it the other way around. So yes, we have the word of God. Conclusion, this debate for me has finally ended.
I love this! I support you!
Hey! I was born in Montrose, CO! 😅
Great episode, by the way...🙂
Thank you for watching!
Born and raised in Spartanburg. Still live here. Kjv only is everywhere here. Love your video’s. I love the CSB, NASB , ESV, NIV and NLT.
Excellent!
@@markwardonwords I just received my esv treveris and must say that I love it. I’m like you single column uncluttered text is 😍. I have the esv legacy heirloom for that very reason. Anyways I enjoy your videos. You really have a talent speaking.
Awesome! I’ve wanted to get hold of one of those. May do so soon… Thank you for the kind word!
I have often found it interesting how much time and focus gets placed on bible translation criticism. The one camp you have KJVO and the other camp that believes other translations should be used to better understand God's Word. This camp almost has the same fervor to discredit the KJV as the KJVO has to claim the KJV is the only translation given by God. I have found that neither camp really yields the end result of really helping Christians to grow in the Love of Christ and in most instances does more to divide Christians than to bring them together. I suppose I fall in the camp that thinks more time should be focused on the application of the word than focusing all the time and energy on my preferred translation being more accurate or easier to understand than the other. If you look today the unfortunate fact is that God's word has been exploited by the money changers for making profits instead of the motivation of helping Christians grow. How many translations do you really need?
I have zero desire to discredit the KJV.
I guess I'd say, too, that those pushing back against false doctrine can, yes, push back too hard (please pray that I do not do this!), but the ultimate reason the pushback is necessary is those who strayed from orthodox biblical doctrine in the first place.
Mark, good interview. Let me ask you a question then: On your YT channel, you have recommended both the NKJV and the MEV, and now here you are doing this interview. However, in your book, which I just recently purchased and have been reading, on pages 139-140 you provide a list of recommended translations. However, neither the NKJV or MEV are on that list. Is there a reason for that? Is it because you want to push people away from TR-based translations entirely?
Totally fair question. I’ve been asked it before. I intend to change that in the book if I get a chance. That chapter was originally written as a blog post, and when I put it in the book I failed to adjust that list to the new context. I personally would prefer to see TR translations fade away. But I’m also happy to see them remain and be used by those whose consciences won’t permit a critical text translation. And I’m not willing to invest energy at this point in changing people’s opinions on textual criticism.
CSB!
A good option, too!
I might be the only one here, but I cringe at the words "Scofield study bible", and the terrible theology and wars that come with it.
I know Jim Welch
I just met him a few years back at a conference.
kjv onlyism is motivated by concern for faithfulness to God but based on fairy tales.
this is all enlightening ... you have die-hards on both sides of the fence, and without the necessary credentials ... who can argue. In light of this, what was the author of the book the Pastor mentioned near the end -- God's Word Preserved, thnaks
Mike Sproul's "God's Word Preserved":
www.amazon.com/dp/B0045JVBJG?tag=3755-20
Theres very little options for an audio version of the bible. CSB has a series called "one minute bible" on spotify. I think the bible publishers should switch to audiobook version of their translations, if they want this new generation to know the bible.
The Tecarta App sells an electronic edition of the CSB. It includes a very good audio edition. Just hit play in the app and it plays. It’s great!
I just grabbed that app for the CSB audio Bible. Thanks for the tip, Jeremiah!
@@markwardonwords you are very welcome! Take care Brother Mark!
Unless you speak fluent Hebrew and Greek, you must rely on the Holy Spirit and a great Concordance with a Greek and Hebrew dictionary to understand scripture. Another important thing is culture . I, personally study from the NKJV and ESV. I totally agree with using the current language that people actually understand and will actually read. I steer away from paraphrased versions.
Vicky, what are some insights you've gained through the use of a concordance with Greek and Hebrew dictionaries?
What a wonderful guy. I never been into conspiracy theories, to me it’s pretentious trying to appear “deep” to other people. Nothing is deeper than following the gospel, I always laughed when I heard that the nkjv is the “marijuana/gateway drug” of bibles lololololol corny.
After 21 years using the KJV God led me to use the superior literal exact precise accurate correct Concordant Version. Now I'm happy and free and illuminated.
Keith, your comments suggest to me that you are an intelligent guy who can get real benefit out of the Concordant version. May the Lord help you, and enjoy!
Bad grass! 🤣
Only a little!
@@markwardonwords U funny.
Hey, I have a good friend that led a church of a nominal multi-versions to the King James Bible. What a true blessing!!!
Please interact with the arguments made in the video.
@@markwardonwordsOh, my bad. I thought you would be open to an alternative viewpoint like any sports contest. I didn't realize you wanted to present a one-sided viewpoint.
@@johnfanortney7535 My friend, if you're right, the way you're going to persuade me is not by mere assertion of the opposite viewpoint. It's by interacting with the many arguments I've made. That's what I've tried to do for my KJV-Only brothers. I have listened very hard.
@@markwardonwords Jim Welch mentioned the Word of God without defining it. The Word of God is recorded seven times by the Apostle John. In John 1:14 John reveals the Word of God is the flesh and blood Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Jesus Christ is holy and perfect today! Right? The Lord Jesus Christ is counterfeited by many Christs (Matthew 24:24). An effective counterfeit is 90-99.9% of the true.
Since the Word of God refers to the Lord Jesus Christ and He is holy and perfect today, there must be an holy and perfect written word of God today. With this conclusion there must also be many counterfeits word of God today. Who is the Standard of Salvation? The Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ! What is the Standard of Scripture? The word of God, the Authorized King James Bible. What are the counterfeits? That's easy. There are many "Christs" in print that counterfeit the Lord's Christ!
@@johnfanortney7535 The KJV is an excellent translation-but if you're going to read it exclusively, you need to understand that it was translated into a form of English no one quite speaks or writes anymore. So there are going to be some places where you think you understand but, because of language change, you're going to miss the intent of the KJV translators. For help discerning when this is the case, I encourage you to check out my "Fifty False Friends in the KJV" series on TH-cam for help reading the KJV! th-cam.com/play/PLq1Aq0ucgkPCtHJ5pwhrU1pjMsUr9F2rc.html
The NKJ gets credit for keeping the 16 New Testament passages that the the other modern translations dropped. However, the NKJ does not solely rely on the traditional text. It too uses the critical text. Gen 1:1 KJV says Heaven and the Earth, NKJ says Heavens, Acts 3:26 KJV says Jesus his Son, NKJ says Jesus his servant. That is a significant difference. In 1st Corinthians 1 : 18 and 2nd Corinthians 2:15 the reading of are saved was changed to are being saved
Matthew 7 :14 the KJB reads narrow while the NKJV reads difficult, that's significant as to what the path is. 2 Corinthians 2:17 the KJV says we are not as many which corrupt the word of God but the NKJ says peddling the word of God. Titus 3: 10 KJV says A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject, the NKJ says Reject a divisive man. 1 Thessalonians 5:22 KJV says Abstain from all appearance of evil, NKJ says Abstain from every form of evil. Isaiah 66:5 KJV ... But he shall appear to your joy, but the NKJ says ...That we may see your joy. All of these examples change the meaning and are the words used in other modern translations that rely on the Critical text. Now what in any of those examples does it appear that the NKJ is using words that are easier to understand? There are many other examples like these as well. Yes, there are a lot of archaic words that the NKJ did update where the meaning wasn't changed. However, often it also changes words and phrases that didn't need updated at all and ultimately changed the meaning of the passage.
My friend, the NKJV does not use critical text readings. All the passages you mention are translation decisions, not textual ones. And unless the KJV translators were inspired, some of their translation decisions can be questioned. They would be the very first to say this-and, in fact, they were. Every marginal note saying, "Or, XYZ," is an indication that other translations were possible at that point. And the KJV translators did not view their work as perfect. They specifically denied this:
"No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the sun, where Apostles or apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s Spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?"
David Norton, ed., The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha: King James Version, Revised edition., vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011), xxviii.
@@markwardonwords Those changes are the same as the modern translations that rely on the critical text. So either the NKJ used the critical text or they used the modern English translations as a reference. Either way it changes the meaning. I didn't bring up KJV onlyism as you appear to be alluding to. However, the KJV translators were trying to make the best possible translation in English and the verses I listed and others that were watered down in the NKJ didn't need to be altered. Its bad enough they're less powerful in the other modern versions, but why call a bible New King James and claim your goal is to update archaic words when you also go as far as changing words who's meanings haven't changed. That makes them untruthful. Do you really think peddling is more current than corrupt? Servant is anymore modern than Son or applies more to who Jesus is? That divisive man is more clear than Heretic in Christian doctrine? That form is more modern than appearance? That difficult is any more modern than narrow to readers? That being saved is needed over just Saved? Especially when no Greek manuscript has a word present for the word being. And him appearing to your joy changed to we may see your joy? Those words change the meaning. You can't say the NKJ with those decisions doesn't change doctrine and therefore is doing more than updating old words and should have the title King James in it at all
My friend, can you read Hebrew or Greek? Can you represent with clarity and understanding the reasons the NKJV translators made any of the revisions you mention?
@@markwardonwords According to Arthur Farstad, the editor the New King James version (NKJV), the critical text is on every page.
“On every page of the NKJV New Testament the studious reader will find three different textual views represented…2 “NU” in the NKJV notes, stands for the critical text, based on Westcott and Hort,…” “The New King James Version in the Great Tradition” - Arthur L. Farstad (executive editor of the NKJV) page 111
The NKJV changes somewhere between 54K -100K words. When it diverges from the KJV it follows either the NIV, NASB or the RSV.
The KJ is the preserved, inspired worx of God that has been around for over 400 years!!!
Where does the Bible teach this doctrine, brother?
Jesus was not British….lol
I understand what this pastor is saying... and he totally has the Prerogative... to begin reading from a different translation than he has been using for years... his reasoning seems valid..... by changing translations...before the new pastor comes to step in...yes.. he is removing that b;ock that may be in the incoming pastors way... but.. here is the way I look at this.....what if the pastor coming in reads from the KJV..?.. then the congregation will have the KJV read to them.. then a short time the NKJV,.. then back to the KJV.... I don't know how many think like I do,... but I get more out of a sermon.. when I can follow along word for word with what is being read from and taught from the pulpit.. when I have attended a church. and . I find the pastor is reading from a different translation than the one I am reading from. this confuses me.. and especially if they expound on the passage and go over words that are in a different translation that I do not find in mine..here is what ends up happening... I bring a bible to church that I can follow along with.. and learn from in church.. usually the same version that is being read from the pulpit...others may not feel this way.. some may even bring the NIV or NASB this does NOT work for me...so then we end up with everyone trusting in what they feel is the translation to use... that may be all fine and dandy... until individual bible groups form within the church.. so we have 4 or 5 study groups... and each group contains different translations being used within each group... I have been to hundreds of these such study groups over the years.. and more time is spent by each of us explaining what Our translation states and going over that instead of truly delving into the meaning of the text studied...this pastor may feel he is doing the proper thing... BUT.... the best way he can help this chirch is in UNITY of the text... he should stick with the KJV and advise.. any incoming pastor to do likewise...
Well, his Church now uses the ESV, so the NKJV did not last very long. Doctrinal statement on scripture lacks any mention of preservation, so standard for a church using a modern translation.
I seriously doubt this pastor would have switched from the KJV to the RSV (basis for the ESV) 20 years ago, nor would he have ever accepted the pulpit Bible might change in 2024 when the 29th edition of Nestle-Aland comes out.
Well, one more ex-KJV pastor that could never tell me which Bible translation is correct in Exodus 25.
each edition of the Nestle Aland greek new testament changes maybe a dozen words, and it is always the same words, because the manuscripts are equally representative of two possible readings, which either choice doesnt change the meaning of the passage, the rest of the changes fall under 3 categories.. spelling, word order, and alterations to the critical apparatus in the foot notes. Whenever new manuscripts are processed, a new edition comes out so they can change the footnotes to mention the new manuscripts.
@@David-wq3dq What you are saying is what is assumed. But how do you really know this is the case and will be in the future?
@Casey P because the level of variation in future manuscripts that would be required to make an actual alteration to the NA would require that the new manuscripts be so distinct that they wouldnt be considered NT manuscripts at all and therefore wouldnt affect the NA textual decisions. The NT manuscripts textual variance has been well determined and there is a boundary of variation. Anything that falls within that boundary wouldnt change anything at this point, except the cases mentioned, and anything outside that textual boundary point would be recognized by everyone as something akin to the gnostic gospels
@@David-wq3dq Okay, so when James White says there are no modern bibles that follow the critical text 100% of the time, what does that mean?
@Casey P pretty much what it sounds like, translators often opt to follow what the NA says is a secondary less likely reading because they disagree with the NA explanation of prioritizing a different reading. The NA though is effectively stable from edition to edition, even if translators prefer some of the secondary readings.
The earlier nkjv read closer to the KJV, the later revision of the nkjv reads closer to the nasb.
Zechariah 13:6
(King James Version) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
(New King James Version 1982) “And someone will say to him. ‘What are these wounds in your hands?" Then he will answer. ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
(New King James Version 1994) And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds between your arms?' Then he will answer, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
John 20:25
(King James Version) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
(New King James Version 1982) The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.”
(New King James Version 1994) The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."
By the way of the 20 plus modern bibles I have all of them get John 20:25 right where Thomas says see the print of the nails in His HANDS
So how is it the the nkjv got it right in 1982 but by 1994 had changed this reading to read more like the nsab?
This same 1994 nkjv gets John 20:25 right, so why the departure from 1982 where it was right to the 1994 change and thus causing a contradiction with John 20:25.
We are on the road to a one world religion and the revisers of the modern bibles are making running changes inching us closer and closer back to momy dearest Rome.
This is a bizarre conspiracy theory, my friend! I pray you’ll see your way clear of it!
@@markwardonwords
I showed with evidence that a running change was made that caused a contradiction, when an earlier version of the nkjv had it right reading as the KJV did but then it was revised to read closer to the nasb, which caused an obvious contradiction, and you dismissed it, focusing on my coment about the coming one world religion, whichvis not a conspiracy theory, many are the churches that have gone groveling to Rome, youtube Pope meets with religous leaders/ there was a video Pope Benedict xvi meets with christian leaders at St Josheph, youtube had but it is gone, well not totally, I have it. Your holiness may I present and a nice list of leaders of protestant denominations line up to shake hands and kiss his ring, Rome wants to eccunemicaly gather all the religions under her auspices.
@@dennishagans6339 That's because Zechariah 13:6 isn't actually a prophecy about Christ. The KJV mistranslated the verse (I actually suspect they were influenced by the Latin Vulgate here). "Between your arms" is correct.
@@curtthegamer934
Sorry for the length, if I could condense it I would.
Zechariah 13:6
1: (The American Standard Version 1901) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds between thine arms? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
2: (The Amplified Bible) And one shall say to him, What are these wounds on your breast or between your hands? Then he will answer, Those with which I was wounded [when disciplined] in the house of my [loving] friends.
3: (The Bible in Basic English) And if anyone says to him, What are these wounds between your hands? then he will say, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
4: (The Contemporary English Version) And if any of them are asked why they are wounded, they will answer, "It happened at the house of some friends."
5: (The English Standard Version) And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’ he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’
6: (The Good News Bible) Then if someone asks him, 'What are those wounds on your chest?' he will answer, 'I got them at a friend's house.' "
7: (The Holman Christian Standard Bible) If someone asks him: What are these wounds on your chest? -then he will answer: The wounds I received in the house of my friends.
8: (The International Standard Version) "Someone will say to him, 'What are these injuries to your hands?' "He will reply, 'They're what I received at my friend's house.'
9: (The King James Version 1) And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
10: (The King James Version 2) And one shall sayH559 untoH413 him, WhatH4100 are theseH428 woundsH4347 inH996 thine hands?H3027 Then he shall answer,H559 Those with whichH834 I was woundedH5221 in the houseH1004 of my friends.H157
11: (The Living Bible) “And if someone asks, ‘Then what are these scars on your chest and your back?’ he will say, ‘I got into a brawl at the home of a friend!’
12: (The Message) And if someone says, 'And so where did you get that black eye?' they'll say, 'I ran into a door at a friend's house.'
13: (The New American Standard Bible) "And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds (14) between your arms?' Then he will say, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.'
14: (The New Century Version) But someone will ask, 'What are the deep cuts on your body?' And each will answer, 'I was hurt at my friend's house.'
15: (The New English Translation) Then someone will ask him, ‘What are these wounds on your chest?’ and he will answer, ‘Some that I received in the house of my friends.’
16: (The New International Readers Version) Suppose someone asks him, 'What are those wounds on your body?' Then he will answer, 'I was given these wounds at the house of my friends.' The Good Shepherd Is Killed and the Sheep Are Scattered
17: (The New International Version) If someone asks him, 'What are these wounds on your body [2] ?' he will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.' The Shepherd Struck, the Sheep Scattered
18: (The New King James Version 1994) And one will say to him, 'What are these wounds between your arms?' Then he will answer, 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.'
19: (The New Living Translation Second Edition) And if someone asks, 'Then what about those wounds on your chest?' he will say, 'I was wounded at my friends' house!'
20: (The New Revised Standard Version) And if anyone asks them, "What are these wounds on your chest?" [44] the answer will be "The wounds I received in the house of my friends."
21: (The New World Translation) And one must say to him, 'What are these wounds [on your person] between your hands?' And he will have to say, 'Those with which I was struck in the house of my intense lovers.'"
We have
1: What are these wounds between thine arms?
2: What are these wounds on your breast or between your hands?
3: What are these wounds between your hands?
4: why they are wounded
5: ‘What are these wounds on your back?’
6: 'What are those wounds on your chest?'
7: What are these wounds on your chest?
8: 'What are these injuries to your hands?
9: What are these wounds in thine hands?
10: WhatH4100 are theseH428 woundsH4347 inH996 thine hands?
11: ‘Then what are these scars on your chest and your back?’
12: 'And so where did you get that black eye?'
13: 'What are these wounds between your arms?'
14: 'What are the deep cuts on your body?'
15: ‘What are these wounds on your chest?’
16: 'What are those wounds on your body?'
17: 'What are these wounds on your body?
18: 'What are these wounds between your arms?'
19:'Then what about those wounds on your chest?'
20: "What are these wounds on your chest?"
21: 'What are these wounds [on your person] between your hands?
The modern translations are all over the ballpark in their wording of these verses.
6 out of the 21 have hands, 6 of them say chest, 4 of them says arms, 3 of them say body, 2 of them say back, 1 of them says wounded, 1 of them says black eye.
So much for the modern translations being the most accurate when they do not even agree with each other, but that should come as no surprise because the very Codex's used for these translations do not even agree with each other.
So who decides what word is the right word to use? The scholars do of course, ask this scholar over here which word should have been used in thus and such place and he will say x word, while if you ask another scholar over there the same question about the same word he will reply y word should be used.
Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, "much of archaeology is more
07:49
of an art than a science, the scientific
07:52
part of archaeology ends once you've
07:53
uncovered what's there, you don't have a
07:56
description that tells you what it is
07:57
so you've got to guess what it is and if you
08:01
have two archaeologists looking the same
08:02
thing no two come up the same
08:04
conclusion"
Bingo, when you have two Greek/Hebrew scholars translating from these disagreeing Codex's it is unlikely that they will unanimously come up with the same word.
Dr. Gene Kim.
they can find out what are the
04:49
right words for the Bible in their mind
04:53
but the problem is this when they find
04:56
the Greek and Hebrew words the lexicon
04:59
does not give one definition in fact it
05:03
can give as many as five to thirteen different
05:08
definitions
05:16
that's the problem see that? so they're
05:19
picking and choosing which definition
05:21
they want to use to fit their translated
05:25
words not only that if you look at the
05:27
lexicons they're all different - they're
05:31
all different they don't agree in every
05:34
definition, so who is the final authority
05:40
"they are" and that's where you catch
05:43
them, the final authority is not God, but them.
It is no different than what is was in Jesus day, the educated Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus day were the "Jewish leaders" appointed by Rome.
Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
Joh 11:47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.
Joh 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
There were divisionns amongst the educated Jewish leaders of Jesus day, Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Scribes, Doctors, and Lawyers.
It is no different today, the edumacated religous folks also are divided along theological lines, Assemblies of God vs Baptists, mainstream vs the cults, and many of them have their own bible colleges.
So what do you get when two scholars of the same edumaction and the same degrees are squabbling over some point of doctrine that one holds to be true and the other holds to be false? which of the two scholars is right and which one is wrong.
Act 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
Act 23:7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.
Act 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.
Act 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.
Act 23:10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.
So which expert am I to believe? as there are "experts" many.
Ask an x flavor baptist and he will say you need to listen to his scholars/pastors/teachers, ask someone else from a different denomination and they will say to trust theirs.
Modern denominational scholars will make choices using their scolarship along their own denominatioal beliefs, this is unavoidable as they have been trained in their own denominational colleges!!!
@@curtthegamer934
I have the top 25 (24 not counting the KJV+), most popular bible versions today, most are in E-Sword, the MEB and the CEB are in an Android emulator
Also there is John 20:25
John 20:25
1: (The Accurate New Testament+) saidG3004 soG3767 [to] himG846 TheG3588 OtherG243 StudentsG3101 [We] have seenG3708 theG3588 lordG2962 TheG3588 [Man] butG1161 saysG2036 [to] themG846 ifG1437 notG3361 [I] may seeG1492 inG1722 theG3588 handsG5495 [of] himG846 theG3588 markG5179 [of] theG3588 nailsG2247 andG2532 [I] may putG906 theG3588 fingerG1147 [of] meG3450 toG1519 theG3588 markG5179 [of] theG3588 nailsG2247 andG2532 [I] may putG906 [of] meG3450 theG3588 handG5495 toG1519 theG3588 sideG4125 [of] himG846 notG3756 notG3361 [I] will believeG4100
This ANT is based on the Nestles/Aland 27th edtion
2: (The American Standard Version 1901) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.
3: (The Amplified Bible) So the other disciples kept telling him, We have seen the Lord! But he said to them, Unless I see in His hands the marks made by the nails and put my finger into the nail prints, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe [it].
4: (The Bible in Basic English) So the other disciples said to him, We have seen the Lord. But he said to them, If I do not see in his hands the print of the nails and put my finger into the print of the nails, and if I do not put my hand into his side, I will never have belief.
5: (The Common English Bible) The other disciples told him, “We’ve seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger in the wounds left by the nails, and put my hand into his side, I won’t believe.”
6: (The Contemporary English Version) So they told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But Thomas said, "First, I must see the nail scars in his hands and touch them with my finger. I must put my hand where the spear went into his side. I won't believe unless I do this!"
7: (The English Standard Version) So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.”
8: (The Good News Bible) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" Thomas said to them, "Unless I see the scars of the nails in his hands and put my finger on those scars and my hand in his side, I will not believe."
9: (The Holman Christian Standard Bible) So the other disciples kept telling him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "If I don't see the mark of the nails in His hands, put my finger into the mark of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe!"
10: (The International Standard Version) So the other disciples kept telling him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he told them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger into them, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe!"
11: (The King James Version 1) The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
12: (The King James Version 2) TheG3588 otherG243 disciplesG3101 thereforeG3767 saidG3004 unto him,G846 We have seenG3708 theG3588 Lord.G2962 ButG1161 heG3588 saidG2036 unto them,G846 ExceptG3362 I shall seeG1492 inG1722 hisG846 handsG5495 theG3588 printG5179 of theG3588 nails,G2247 andG2532 putG906 myG3450 fingerG1147 intoG1519 theG3588 printG5179 of theG3588 nails,G2247 andG2532 thrustG906 myG3450 handG5495 intoG1519 hisG846 side,G4125 I will notG3364 believe.G4100
13: (The Living Bible) When they kept telling him, “We have seen the Lord,” he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands-and put my fingers into them-and place my hand into his side.”
14: (The Message) The other disciples told him, "We saw the Master." But he said, "Unless I see the nail holes in his hands, put my finger in the nail holes, and stick my hand in his side, I won't believe it."
15: (The Modern English Version) The other disciples therefore said to him, We have seen the LORD. But he said to them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
16: (The New American Standard Bible) So the other disciples were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, (40) I will not believe."
17: (The New Century Version) The other followers kept telling Thomas, "We saw the Lord." But Thomas said, "I will not believe it until I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were and put my hand into his side."
18: (The New English Translation) The other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the wounds from the nails in his hands, and put my finger into the wounds from the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe it!”
19: (The New International Readers Version) So they told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "First I must see the nail marks in his hands. I must put my finger where the nails were. I must put my hand into his side. Only then will I believe what you say."
20: (The New International Version) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
21: (The New King James Version 1994) The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord." So he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."
22: (The New Living Translation Second Edition) They told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he replied, "I won't believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side."
23: (The New Revised Standard Version) So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe."
24: (The New World Translation) Consequently the other disciples would say to him: "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them: "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe."
25: (The Passion Translation) So the disciples informed him, “We have seen the Lord with our own eyes!” Still unconvinced, Thomas replied, “There’s no way I’m going to believe this unless I personally see the wounds of the nails in his hands, touch them with my finger, and put my hand into the wound of his side where he was pierced!”
Why would a pastor do that?
Watch the video and find out the answer to your question!
Did you even watch this?
KJV and the NKJV only one of them can be the word of God because they contradict each other. Different words change doctrine.
This is true only if translations can be perfect, my friend-something the Bible never promises.
@@markwardonwords psalm 12:6-7 and many other like it
@@barryjtaft That passage simply does not say what you're saying it says. Effectively no one in the history of the church, or of Judaism, interpreted that passage the way KJV-Onlyists do until somewhere around 1980.
@@markwardonwords I guess God was mistaken...
...when He inspired the Prophets, Psalmists and Apostles to write the following, but didn’t see fit to follow through on His promise:
Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Isaiah 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.
Psalm 33:11 The counsel of the LORD standeth forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.
Psalm 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.
Psalm 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Proverbs 22:20-21 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightiest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?
Proverbs 30:5-6 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Matthew 24:34-35 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Luke 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.
Revelation 22:18-10 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: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
The great apostacy/falling away has begun
It’s “apostasy.” No “c.”
And my friend, your response is WAY, WAY over the top. If using a different Bible translation leads to apostasy, then you’d better have Bible for that.
It's a shame u left the perfect word of God for a corrupt version .
LOL!