I think the NKJV couldve been the best translation ever if it didnt make this many mistakes. I wish it followed the KJV closer, updating it's language without touching the core meaning.
Thank you, Sir. I am scratching my head about why a lot of translations make odd decisions, most that make no sense, and some really bad. Made me think about this. However, the MEV (Modern English Version) is based on the same texts, and I find, so far, that it matches the KJV almost exactly.
Good video I have had this conflict with modern versions myself. Any bible can help to get someone saved but when it comes to studying we need to make sure we are studying the complete word of God. A few months ago I purchased a newer translation and asked God should I be reading this text. And one of the new pages became detached from the binding.
@@truthunchainedministries1564Since when was the KJV the complete word of God? Which of the at least ten different revisions of the KJV is the so called complete word of God? Also why do the KJV only cultists not speak in King James English? The usual double standards and hypocrisy of the KJV only cult.
I accidentally purchased a NKJV Scofield for studying. I plan on just using the reference notes but not reading the scriptures out of it. Thank you so much my brother in Christ for this video.
The NKJV is an excellent and trustworthy translation. I would encourage you to read it alongside your KJV. To truly get the best understanding, one must consult a variety of translations. This is actually what the KJV translators themselves stated in the preface to the reader.
@@Matthew-307 I used to really trust the NKJV... but the more familiar I get with the NKJV... the more I dislike it... too many changes... INCORRECT changes...
@@henrylaurel1188 I never stated that the KJV is "the standard"... AND that us NOT what KJV Onlyism is all about anyway... maybe some KJV users out there are trying to impose the KJV as the standard... but I believe the Manuscripts... or what has been found of them should be used as the standard.. the issue is.. that the modern translations prefer to base their text off of the Alexandrian ..or Sinaiticus Manuscripts.. and these Manuscripts came out of Egypt... and Babylon respectively.. whereas the KJV text is based off of the Byzantine text which came out of Antioch.. where the first followers of Christ were called Christians... which makes more sense..?.. to use text that came from out of a "holy city"... or texts that came out of pagan cities..?.. yet we are told by scholars to believe these pagan sites.. because the manuscripts are either older or newer.. I'm Not buying it.. I trust in the KJV...Not because I think of it as a standard... but because I have seen the mis translation done in the modern translations.. either because of poorer manuscripts... or poorer translating...
@@jeffcarlson3269So you trust a translation based on later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope? With so many added uninspired verses. Also Alexandria where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy started, teaching that the Lord Jesus Christ was a created being. I am not buying the KJV only heresy.
thanks for showing why the kjv is often a better translation than the nkjv. but just an idea, for 2 kings 23:29 and 2 chron 35:20 they dont need to contradict if necho 'went to the aid' of assyrian king, not intentionally, but because he instead fought a war for assyrian king and was distracted from the initial plan of going 'against' him. so both can be right, and adds up because it complements each other rather than being duplicative
Some clarification may be needed as to the underlying text of the NKJV. The OT is based on the Stuttgart text, a corrupted masoretic text. The NT is based on the TR, but it is translated using critical text/ Alexandrian rules. These are just a few reasons why the NKJV is perhaps the most deceiving perversion of God’s word.
Hiya Tony, my 9-year-old daughter goes to a Christian school that mandates the use of the NKJV for their curriculum. Upon watching your video, I had concerns; so, after Sunday service, I conveyed them to an elder, who is also a biblical scholar. He is actually fluent in Greek. I rendered a couple examples that you put forth in this video. The 1st was the instance of being "saved" in the KJV vs. "being saved" in the NKJV. I then gave him the instance of the words "Son" in the KJV being changed to "servant" in the NKJV version. In both instances, based on the actual Greek wording in the Textus Receptus, he said that "being saved" is a more accurate translation, as well as the word "servant" being a more accurate representation than the word, "Son." In short, he claimed that the NKJV was a more accurate translation (at least pertaining to the Textus Receptus Text comprising the NT) is more accurate than the KJV. One possible issue/problem with his explanation is that, according to you, the NT in the NKJV, is not derived from the Masoretic Text- but rather the Vaticanus Text. What are your thoughts on my encounter, specifically the elder's explanation? Thanks!
First, I do apologize for not responding sooner. It is good that you asked the elder - never go off what a person says without studying for yourself! What you encountered is a prime example of scholarship being exalted over the Bible. Did the elder open up the NKJV and disprove the contradictions or did he simply point to the mysterious "original" manuscripts to justify his answers? Always look at who is being exalted. "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." - Col. 1:18 "...for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." - Ps. 138:2 The Bible translations comprise a $6M industry. Have you ever wondered why only the King James Bible can be found in a dollar store? The KJV is the only Bible that is public domain, and as is the case with all public domain works, 25% of the text has to be changed in order to call it an original work that can be sold. If you look at the history of the NKJV, you'll find that it is traced back to the RV which is a product of Wescott and Hort (two scholars that did not believe the Bible - I did a video on it here: th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html). Roughly 300 translations have been produced since 1900 - and none of them have had the impact on this world as the King James Bible. You don't have to be a Greek or Hebrew scholar to see that. All you have to do is look at what Bible gives Jesus Christ the preeminence, which Bible does not have any contradictions, and which Bible has not caused men to become wealthy. I hope this helps :)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, no man can change that that Word will be with us throughout all eternity, Jesus I'd the Living Word, the man lied to you and is an antichrist servant and he knows it ,but willfully rejects the Real Lord Jesus Christ,remember Jesus said My Word they are Spirit and they are Life no man comes to the Father but by Me .I you really Love the God of the Real Bible, them get your daughter and get away from the deceitful liers and promoters of wickedness and evil.
I think this is a well-meaning video. But the analysis has shortcomings. The KJV does on occasion deviate from a more formally equivalent or literal translation of the Hebrew and Greek text compared to the NKJV. And, of course, vice versa. You can see this if you compare both translations with Young’s Literal Translation of the textus receptus. This not a money-grabbing modern translation but a very literal 19th century translation of the same exact underlying text of the KJV. Proverbs 16:1 (YLT): Of man are arrangements of the heart, and from Jehovah an answer of the tongue. Proverbs 19:18 (YLT): Chastise thy son, for there is hope, and to put him to death lift not up thy soul. Proverbs 25:23 (YLT): A north wind bringeth forth rain, and a secret tongue - indignant faces. In each of these instances, the NKJV has a more literal reading than the KJV. But the NKJV is not flawless. The point is that the KJV does not always have the more literal translation in every place. I have personally cross-compared many random passages of both to the original Greek and Hebrew with the help of concordances and interlinears and the NKJV stands up surprisingly well against the KJV in literalness. But there are still instances where the KJV has the more literal reading. For example, look at Proverbs 16:10 (YLT): An oath is on the lips of a king, in judgment his mouth trespasseth not. The KJV is more literal than the NKJV here. But then look at this one… Proverbs 18:8 (YLT): The words of a tale-bearer are as self-inflicted wounds, and they have gone down to the inner parts of the heart. The KJV matches Young’s translation more closely. However, if you look at the Hebrew word translated wounds you find that it means something that is swallowed or gulped down quickly or greedily. The NKJV better captures the literal meaning of the word, that it is something consumed, which is why the next line says that it goes “down into the innermost parts of the belly” (KJV). But the KJV translations aims to express the proverbial meaning more clearly even though it is less literal, which is consistent with the preceding verse: “A fool’s mouth is his destruction and his lips are the snare of his soul.” Ultimately, both are fine translations of the textus receptus. But you should not disparage one translation simply because it disagrees with the other. What matters is there agreement with the meaning of the underlying Hebrew or Greek text. Both get it right far more often than not, especially compared to many other translations out there based on the highly eclectic critical text. God’s peace and blessings be with you.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 you missed the point of the significance of the change in Proverbs 25:23 in the KJV this verse is saying that just like the North wind drives the rain away... so does....an angry countenance and a backbiting tongue... where as in the NKJV.. it seems to be saying that just as the North wind BRINGS rain... so does.. a backbiting tongue... and angry countenance... in the KJV.. we are being told.. that foulness... drives.. people away.. and in the NKJV we are presented with the thought.. that foulness.. attracts like evil... in other words the NKJV is trying to state... "birds of a feather flock together".. where as the KJV.. is more of a warning NOT to be like the north wind.. again the main point should NOT be whether it it correct meteorologically.. but how true is the NKJV to what God wants us to know....
@@truthunchainedministries1564 also I did a study of Proverbs 18:8.... and Yes the KJV is more accurate... and here is why... in the ancient days it was believed that the kidneys... were the part of the body that controlled emotions. .and knowledge and feelings... in other words... the kidneys were believed to be the seat of the emotions... hence the heart and mind of an individual...AND it was believed this was in the deepest part of the body... the KJV translates this "kidney".. body part as "belly".. where as most moderns just use a generality and state "innermost part of the body".. not hinting at the real suggested meaning was a specific body part controlling these things.. such as the kidneys...
@@truthunchainedministries1564 I agree with you regarding 1 Corinthians 1:18... I argued about this passage for years.. but someone explained to me.. this verse is NOT referring to one being saved continually or more than once or over and over again... it is speaking in regards to the act of God's word.. continuing to save people.. this "being saved".. is a reference to the ones Yet coming to know Christ..in other words.. to ones who are becoming new believers.. In THIS verse I would be MORE concerned with What is being considered as foolishness?.. "the word of God?.. or the Preaching of the word of God... since God's word cannot be looked upon as being foolish.. the KJV is More accurate.. since it is those who are preaching the word of God... who seem foolish.. to the Non believers... just as people felt about Noah before the flood..
Tried to find a contact page on your website and couldn't find one so I'll ask here. What's your take on the KJV having "cherubims" when cherubim is plural already? The im indicates that it is plural.
Good morning. English plurality terms change over time. You'll find that "cherubims" is found 65 times in the King James Bible. You'll also find that "seraphims" is found twice. Just because we no longer use the "s" doesn't mean there is an error. Another example we can look at is "fishes". Today we say "fish" for both singular and plural, but that wasn't always the case in the English language. "Fishes" is used 27 times throughout the King James Bible. Hope this helps!
You can’t compare and English version with another English version to see if it’s corrupt otherwise the kjv would have been considered corrupt compared to the English bibles before it. You have to compare the English with the Hebrew and Greek. By the way go look at the KJV marginal note in Isaiah 14.
I understand what you are saying, but you are leaving out two very important details. 1) I do not know if you watched the entire video. Discussed are the origins of the King James Bible and the NKJV. Look at the manuscripts that were used for the KJV - Masoretic (Hebrew OT from Israel) and the Textus Receptus (Greek NT from Antioch where believers where first called Christians). The NKJV does not share the same sources and stems from the Alexandrian (Egypt) and Vaticainus (Rome) texts. 2) You can compare English with English because we speak English and English is what the Lord used for the King James Bible that was used to spread the Gospel throughout the world (study the Church Age of Philadelphia).
@@truthunchainedministries1564 The Spanish speaking world already had the gospel in their language before the KJV. The Greek speaking world already had the gospel in their language before the KJV. Same for the Germans and Latins. Where does this idea come from that the world hadn’t had the Gospel yet til the KJV came along?
@@seansimpson1133you're misunderstanding what's being said. There are 2 lines of manuscripts. If you hear someone say "the Greek", that's not the question. It's which Greek is being used. The KJV uses the Byzantine text type which was used for Luther's German, Valeros Spanish, Diodari's Italian, Olivitans French, etc. These languages used the same line that was used for the KJV. All other English Bibles come from a corrupted source in the hotbed of gnosticism in Alexandria Egypt.
I have a question for you :) I searched a ton of kjv bibles and found one that I love The Humble Lamb Bible, very expensive but I want it to last me for years, only thing it has pictures and now the mean devil is telling me it’s bad to use one with illustrations, I need your opinion? Please help? :)
I am sorry for the delayed response. There is nothing wrong with illustrations when teaching, so if they are included, then great! That said, the most important thing is for you to focus on God's words so that you can grow in your knowledge and understanding of Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:17-19). If the illustrations aid you and inspire you to spend more time in the Bible, then that is a good thing.
Sir why bother with a book of someone else's version why not go The Authorised Word of the Living God, all the other versions are just doctrines of demons that other men that do not love the God of the Authorised Bible have published to fit there agendas
The organ for believing is not the brains ,it's the heart for with the heart man believes unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation
Very helpful video. Completely changed my thinking on this. Many KJV words have a different meaning to us, as long as I can reference their 1769 meaning I can follow! Thank you so much!
Which is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations. Where the words have not changed meaning. Unlike many in the KJV making it even more inaccurate.
There are so many ways they could have modernized the verses in the NKJV but they compeletly change it, or adjust it like they weren't accidents but intentional... Being saved seems to be like its a work-based salvation which is not true.... so sad
The events experienced by @jetsetjoey highlight a typical response from scholars who support the NKJV. Their claims usually assert that the KJV got it wrong because they didn't have access to manuscripts that we now have and that these "newly found" ones are actually older and are, somehow, therefore more correct. Well, since none of the manuscripts is in fact an immediate copy of the originials, let alone an actual original, the argument has no merit since they are not in nay way more liekly to be more accurate. This raises the question then, which should we hold to be the more accurate? We can't legalistically prove either case, how could we? So we must decide on the basis of what evidence we do know. What do we know? Firstly, the large and very qualified team who worked on the KJV had access to a large number of manuscripts. The manuscripts upon which they based their translations were amazingly consistent. This is in the sense that any differences were minor, typically punctuation and spelling and such other minor things, and did not typically change the meaning or intent of what was written. In comparison the "newly found" manuscripts not only differ in inportant ways from theirs but also from one another. Also, apparently, they are relatively much fewer in number. Common sense would tend to suggest that the former are more reliable. Secondly, as raised in this video, we must look at the way the two translations approach the divinity of Jesus. When the NKJV seems to cut out Christ it seems clear to me that there is something wrong. Again I have to say the KJV must be more accurate. Keepin mind that such scholars are perhaps relying upon the liklihood that you don't know a lot about the manuscripts. Therefore, their stated case sounds reasonable. Until you know more about the background. Even first year law students could tell you that a half-truth and a silence constitutes a lie in the eyes of the law.
The KJV translators had very few manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. They were well versed in Latin, which is why they also used the Catholic Latin Vulgate. They made an adequate translation for the time. They also knew their work was not perfect. That is why they encouraged us to use many translations. It is only the KJV only cult that makes ridiculous ludicrous claims about what is nothing more than an imperfect uninspired translation.
My sister and I just found out the difference we were taken turns reading out of Bible she had NKJV and I had kjv I kept stopping her when she would read NKJV I said it doesn't match what I reading we were shocked...what a rude awaken.
@marianmears8026 your words: it doesn't match what I reading we were shocked...what a rude awaken. I only wish MORE people could find out the way you and your sister did... sadly not enough people are getting "shocked".. apparently...sadly... many people I know still ONLY trust the NKJV....
Well, I'm screwed, As a recently saved christian, I simply can't understand the archaic language in the KJV so I guess I'm not as smart as a 9 year old..Thought I was doing ok with the NKJV as I just bought a Cambbrige Clarion, But after watching this ,I littorally threw it in the trash, Now I'm lost without a bible to read because now I don't trust any translations other than KJV which I struggle with to the point of giving up.. ugh, now I feel truly lost.. 😞
You're hardly screwed :) The language of the KJV is not as archaic as you think. The most common issue people have are the thou/thee and ye's, but once you understand them, you'll find that the language is far superior to our modern English. Thou/thee is singular and ye is plural. I'll give you an example of how and why this is important: "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." - John 3:7 KJV "Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’" - John 3:7 NKJV In the KJV, Christ said "marvel not that I said unto thee (you - singular, Nicodemus), ye (everybody) must be born again." In the NKJV and modern translations, Christ said "marvel not that I said unto you (singular, Nicodemus), you (singular, Nicodemus) must be born again." Also, the language isn't as difficult to understand as people make it out to be. Look at Job 6:6 in the Revised Standard Version: "Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt, or is there any taste in the slime of the purslane?". Apparently, "Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?" in the KJV was too difficult to understand lol Please do not give up. I was saved for roughly 20 years before I discovered the truth of the KJV and then it took me another few months to part with the other versions I had in my library. Eventually, I threw in the trash a few hundred dollars (at least) worth of "bibles". I'm happy to help in any way that I can and please do not hesitate to reach out!
If you can find an "EVIDENCE BIBLE" from Ray Comfort in KJV they have all or most of the Archaic words translated. Also "THE DIFINED" KJB has all the Archaic words in bold and the translated words at the end of each page. Hope this helps brother.
The KJV is archaic, that is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations like the NKJV. The false teachers of the KJV only cult, would call Jesus corrupt.
Is there a KJV Bible out there that when referring to God or Jesus puts the he and him in capital letters? Like the nkjv does? This is why I use nkjv, I can’t stand when they are referring to the Lord and don’t capitalize it
I haven't come across any. It took me awhile to get used to He/Him not being capitalized, and as you can see in the way that I write, I still capitalize the "H". If I am not mistaken, the capitalization of "H" didn't begin until the early 1980s/late 1970s. It is a relatively new concept. I get that it is a matter of reverence for God and a simple way to distinguish the pronouns. Keep in mind that Hebrew does not have uppercase or lowercase letters (the OT) and the Greek Textus Receptus (NT) was written in all capital letters.
This is the very reason I use NKJV! I do have a few KJV Bibles too and I love them both...this vid is enlightening! As I grow in the Lord, I see myself leaning more toward KJV, it just feels like I'm actually reading the Bible...lol...if that makes sense! ❤
I do enjoy the Amplified Classic translation (AMPC) for study and it does capitalize He/Him when referencing the Lord and/or Jesus. This translation is hard to find and when I do find it, it's a bit costly...I am a Bible Hoarder, so I don't mind :)
By stating that isn't the case at all. 1) The King James Bible was spread throughout the world from the 1700s to the modern day - which means it has a wider audience. 2) You can only buy a King James Bible in a Dollar Store - making it more accessible to all social classes. 3) The King James Bible remains the best selling book of all time - making it the most available. 4) From 1901 to 2023 (122 years) there have been a little over 300 versions of the Bible put out to replace the King James Bible under the argument that the KJV is too hard to understand. That means that a new "bible" has been produced every 2.45 months on average - meaning somebody wants your money and not because our English language changes too frequently.
Language changes the KJV is archaic many words changed meaning making it even more inaccurate. Which is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations in English we can understand. The gospel is about Christ and him crucified not some translation of scripture called the KJV. KJV onlyism is a false teaching a man made tradition.
John MacArthur and David Jeremiah come to mind. Typically, those that support the use of the NKJV hold the notion that people should find the version that best suits them.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 let me tell you about John MacArthur... years ago I bought a MacArthur... NKJV... study bible.. which I no longer use.... since I switched to only KJV back in 2006... then I found out he preaches from the NASB... but his large volume commentary is from the NKJV text..... NEXT he is promoting the LSB bible as being better than the NASB... but it is gender neutral... and the whole time he is touting the LSB.. trying to sell it... he is STILL preaching his sermons from the NASB
Another omission in modern bibles including in Rom4:25 NKJV is the removal of the word “again” which is a reference to Christ’s virgin birth. He was raised from the deadness of the virgin’s womb, raised again on the 3rd day. The removal of “again” is the spirit of antichrist.
My concern isn't so much that the nkjv differs from the kjv. I just want to know how accurate it is to the original manuscripts. People thought the Geneva Bible was the true translation in the 1600's and thought the kjv was a perversion.
There is no such thing as original manuscripts. Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy, etc. This goes back to the founding of Israel. When you read Leviticus, you'll find that the Levites were: Priests, detectives, real estate agents, judges, doctors, auditors, health inspectors, and more. There was not one manuscript that was passed along to millions of people - they were all copies. Over time, manuscripts deteriorate and more copies are made. Fast forward to Luke 4:14-21 where Jesus read from Isaiah and Acts 8:27-35 where the Ethiopian eunuch was carrying Isaiah with him. These were clearly not the same scripts nor were they the same scripts from 760 B.C. to 690 B.C. (the 70 period where Isaiah wrote his book see Is. 1:1). You also have to look at the "original manuscripts" you are citing. Are you speaking of the Masoretic Text (from Israel) and the Textus Receptus (from Antioch) or are you referring to the Septuagint/LXX (from Egypt) and the Vaticanus (from Rome). What you'll find is that the KJV is the ONLY Bible to come from the Masoretic and Textus Receptus and has ZERO contradictions. All other "Bibles" come from the Egyptian and Roman sources and are filled with a plethora of contradictions. "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 for ever." - Psalm 12:6-7 1) Masoretic Text (Hebrew) - 99% of the OT 2) Original Aramaic - 1% of the OT (parts of the book of Daniel) 3) Textus Receptus (Greek) - New Testament 4) Old Syriac 5) Old Latin 6) German 7) English The seven languages used to purify the words of the Lord. That list was obviously an extremely simplified history. The test to see which Bible is true is very simple. Look at Colossians 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." Which Bible gives Christ the preeminence? Is it the NIV that claims Satan and Jesus are the same person? Is it the 250 other versions that take away His title of Lord and remove His words? You must study these things. "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." - 2 Timothy 2:15 I hope this helps :)
@alexclark626 compare how both the KJV and the NKJV both translate Haggai 1:10... Numbers 21:14 Song of Solomon 3:9 Acts 17:22 from the Greek and Hebrew text... that should tell you what you need to know...
Yes. I use Websters 1828 Dictionary; it was the final version that cited the Bible. You can download the app for free or go here: webstersdictionary1828.com/ Hope this helps!
A lot of words are understandable like whosoever, its just words added together and when you read it outloud or in your head, it makes sense and all the Bibles has vocab you don't know, so you need to look it up! Just like how we still sing songs with old English and that we learn new jargon in work/school/sports, if we arne't rewritting shakespeare and can be willing to learn new words in work/school/play, we should also be okay with learning new words for the Bible!!
The Bible states in Revelation 13:16-17 that people will have to take his mark in their right hand or in their forehead in order to purchase the basic necessities of life. This is more than just a simple mark done for economic purposes. Those that take the mark of the beast are worshipping him and sealing their eternal fate (Rev. 14:9-11). There are many speculations involving emerging technology that explain why repentance is not possible for those that take the mark of the beast. Currently, medical doctors and scientists are developing microchips that emit pulses in order to change a person's mood and can alter a person's brain chemistry in a process called "deep brain stimulation". Researchers at DARPA, University of California, and Massachusetts General Hospital are looking for permanent ways to remove the need for medications which can have harmful side effects. On the surface this sounds amazing as it can essentially cure PTSD, various mood disorders, and even Parkinson's Disease as research suggests. Could it be that when a person takes the mark of the beast (which the Bible shows to be voluntary even if it is under duress), the reason that they cannot accept Christ is because their brain is permanently altered? That would explain why the Bible says "in".
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Yeah... its more likely its "in" as microchips or something that will be a barcode to checkout.. Amazon is rolling out Amazon One and there is a lot of other things going on.. well, don't take the mark and share the gospel! time is ticking.
I completely understand your frustration. Before I really started studying the history of the Bible, the KJV's history, and the changes made to the 250+ modern "versions", I had spent over $600 on various translations and commentaries. Even after knowing that the other "versions" were subtracting and changing God's words it took me a few months before I got rid of them. I struggled with throwing away $600+ dollars worth of materials. If I may, what I would recommend is to take this to the Lord in prayer and be honest with Him. Tell him about this struggle and help Him guide you on what to do.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 I have a question for you :) I searched a ton of kjv bibles and found one that I love The Humble Lamb Bible, very expensive but I want it to last me for years, only thing it has pictures and now the mean devil is telling me it’s bad to use one with illustrations, I need your opinion? Please help? :)
Everyone should check out “truth is christ”’s channel. He has a video called “words of God” that is terrific for exposing these new age bible versions. Further, his research into bible code (probably not what you think) is absolutely brilliant.
In kjv Psalm 16v2 it says my goodness extendeth not to thee What does it mean But all translation says I have nothing good beside you or My goodness is nothing apart from YOU and the the translation in my native language also says I have nothing good beside you
Notice that v2 ends with a semicolon meaning we cannot take it out of context from verse 3. 2 O my soul, thou hast said unto the Lord, Thou art my Lord: my goodness extendeth not to thee; 3 But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight. King David is saying his goodness doesn't add anything to God's goodness. God's goodness is perfect, so much that only God can be said to be truly "good" (Matt. 19:16-17). This would mean that what goodness David had, profited the saints here on Earth. He (David) delights in excellent saints (real saints that love God - not fakers).
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Thank's for the clarification Can you explain why Lucifer used. in kjv many say Lucifer is a Latin word and in strongs it says morning star and thanks again
Sure. The word "Lucifer" is a Latin word meaning "a bearer of light" and is a translation of the Hebrew word הֵילֵל which means "the shining one". 2 Cor. 11:14 tells us that he transforms (keyword) into "an angel of light". You have to be careful when using modern lexicons as they heavily rely upon the Septuagint. The Septuagint was a perverted Greek "translation" of the Hebrew texts and originated in Alexandria, Egypt. Remember that Satan's goal is to imitate and take God's place. Hence why he had modern "translators" give him Christ's name as "the morning star".
@@truthunchainedministries1564Lucifer a Latin word for the planet Venus meaning morning star. No Latin word should be in an English translation. The KJV translators used the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. Isaiah 14 v 12 is a prophecy about the king of Babylon. Nothing to do with Satan. You forgot to mention that the KJV translators put Daystar in the margin. Also Christ's name is Morning Star not morning star, as in the Isaiah 14 v 12. Also the KJV has "the morning stars that sang together". Were they all names for Christ as well? Are you saying that Jesus is an angel? Agreeing with the Jehovah Witnesses. Why are the KJV only cultists so dishonest. They have to lie to try and justify the KJV only deception. Also Alexandria where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy was taught that Jesus was a created being. What is corrupted are the teachings of the KJV only cult.
@@truthunchainedministries1564Alexandria Egypt where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy arose, teaching that the Lord Jesus Christ was a created being. Yes Satan who is not Lucifer seeks to cast doubt on the word of God. The KJV only heresy is a great example.
What is corrupt about the NKJV? What are you comparing it to? The imperfect uninspired KJV? Since when was the KJV the standard? A translation from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. With mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Which the NKJV translates correctly. Still that is the insanity of the KJV only heresy. Strange how these so called "truth ministries" peddle out the same old lies
So, what are your thoughts on Titus 2:13 kjv vs nkjv? Your premise is that the NKJV demotes the diety of Christ, but in Titus 2:13 the diety of Christ is much clearer in the NKJV rather than the KJV.
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;" - Titus 2:13 KJV "looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," - Titus 2:13 NKJV I'm not sure how the NKJV is "clearer". All they did was changed "that" to "the", removed a comma, removed "the", and removed "our". This is a wonderful example of the NKJV authors meeting the 25% legal textual changes requirement in order to consider their work original and charge money for it. You should research U.S. copyright laws - specifically the requirements for changing an original work in order to make a profit off of that work. There's a reason why you'll only find the KJV in a Dollar Store :)
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Yes I understand the copyright laws and how that affects modern translations. My point was that a modern reader would find the diety of Christ much clearer in the NKJV rendering of Titus 2:13 than in the KJV rendering. The KJV makes it seem like the reference is to two different persons, 1 being the great God and 2 being our Savior Jesus Christ, due to the Granville Sharp rule not being known or understood by the majority of modern readers. The NKJV rendering is much more obvious that the reference is to one person, our savior Jesus Christ who is also our great God. The NKJV is my preferred translation, I was KJV-only for years, but since doing a lot of research on translation history, textual criticism, manuscript tradition, etc, I switched to the NKJV and it has been a huge blessing. Much more understandable than the KJV, and the Bible does say that “in all your getting, get understanding.”(Prov 4:7) The whole point of a translation is to convey the message of God to the reader, and my view is that as long as a translation is a formal equivalence type, then whichever translation belonging to that group that someone can best understand, that is the best translation for them. Many people cannot understand the 17th century form of English, so if they need an NKJV or even an NASB or ESV. Now personally, I’m still a TR guy, I like the concept of the CT, but the influence of Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and Alexandrinus is what makes me choose the TR over the CT. If those three manuscripts did not influence the CT, it would be a different story. So for me, I’ve chosen the NKJV, a modern translation of what I believe to be the most reliable manuscripts. The NKJV improves on the KJV in a couple different ways, one key way being that they translate Hades as Hades, Tartarus as Tartarus, and Gehenna as hell. KJV translates them all as hell. Specifics matter. I love the KJV, but to truly understand the scriptures one must consult a variety of translations, just as the KJV translators themselves stated in the preface to the reader. Anyways, that’s my two cents opinion lol. Have a great day and God bless. 😊✝️
@@Matthew-307you don’t have to acknowledge this video. There’s nothing wrong with the NKJV. The KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NASB are all wonderful translations of God’s Word. All bashing a translation does is separate the body of Christ. The KJV is great but it is NOT perfect. No translation is. If he’s gonna bash a translation, bash the Message Bible or the Jehovah witness “Bible”. Videos like these do nothing for the children of God
@@hoc1992 Yes I agree, the only reason that I occasionally comment on kjvo videos is because I got tricked into kjvo for quite a few years, and now that I’m out of it I want others to be free as well. They’re robbing themselves of understanding.
The Bible isn't a novel it's the Book of Life a d can not be understood with the carnal mind of a man,remember Jesus said My Words they are Spirit and they are Life, He also said until I come give attendance to reading and the Lord give thee understanding. So if we do our part He's will do His,also read it out loud and ita written faith comes by hearing ,and hearing by the Word of God.If you diligently seek The Lord with all of your heart ,you will find Him and also remember the organ for believing is not the brains it's the heart for with the heart man believes unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation
In Israel a North Wind brings rain off the Mediterranean Sea a south wind is dry and comes off the desert. So it is the KJV that is incorrect. Think of the context of the passage. Written by someone in Israel setting forth the situation in Israel. You are correct in some parts of the world it is the south wind that brings rain. Where I live it is mostly the east and west winds. It varies across the Globe the UK for example it is a west wind coming across the Atlantic that brings rain. I will have to check your other comments about other verses. I fully agree with you we need to check our facts like the Bereans. May God bless you in your work David Wilson - Tasmania Australia
The NKJV does use the Masoretic text as well as the Scrivener's Textus Receptus. Sure the OSB bible has a Septuagint OT as its text based, but thats pureply for orthodox christians, as they will always use a majority text type. Also if the Orthodox church can accept the NKJV for their liturgy then that means there is no vaticanus or alexandrian manuscripts.
Oh boy, as a new 62 year old lady, I’m so confused as to which Bible i should read now. I did not grow up in a Bible believing family. I bought the NKJV version and a CSB Bible recently. both in Super giant print lol so I can read the Bible. I have watched a few U tube videos about different Bibles and came to conclusion of the above. Now watching this video I’m really, really confused lol I have never read the Bible completely at all. I bought the above ones because they are much more simple to read and understand. I’m completely alone in this journey even though I have a husband who doesn’t believe. Or he says he doesn’t know what to believe. I have tried many, many times to show him but it is not working at all. He kind of gets annoyed with me. So I don’t know what to do. I’m from Western Australia 🇦🇺
Hi! Finding the right Bible is something that definitely takes a lot of studying, but it is well worth it. I was saved for twenty years before I realized the changes made to the 300+ versions and came to the conclusion that only the KJV is perfect. Regarding your husband (and lost people in general), take a look at Jude 22 and 23: "And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh." Essentially, a person will either get saved because they are drawn to Christ because of what He did on the cross or they will accept Christ because they do not want to go to Hell. The latter is the reason I got saved. The most successful tactic I've used when witnessing is to ask a person if they would let complete strangers move into their house - that is what people are expecting of God because they want to go to Heaven while rejecting His Son (John 3:16-18). Questions like that really get a person to think. I hope this helps and I'm always available :)
Why KJV use LORD in place Jehovah or YEHOVA it uses only in seven times but the word is used many times from genesis to Malachi but ASV and young literal translation used Jehovah and legacy standard bible used Yahweh
What did kjv has heaven in genesis 1v1 where as NKJV and others have heavens in verse 1 it has shamayim which is a plural word then why did they keep heaven
Because in Genesis 1:1 there was only one heaven that was created. If you'll go through Genesis 1, you'll find the other heavens created which is why 2:1 states "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." There are three heavens in the Bible: the sky, outer space, and where the Lord's throne is located. Please see the verses below as evidence. The first heaven is the sky and the Bible shows us this in multiple verses: "If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;" - 2 Chronicles 7:13 "By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation, which sing among the branches." - Psalm 104:12 "Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness." - Acts 14:17 "And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit." - James 5:18 The second heaven is what we call outer space. We can find this heaven defined in the following verses: "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good." - Genesis 1:14-18 "For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine." - Isaiah 13:10 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:" - Matthew 24:29 "And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind." - Revelation 6:13 The third heaven, what most people simply refer to as "Heaven", is where God dwells: "And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left." - 1 Kings 22:19 "But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:" - Matthew 5:34 "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." - John 3:13 I hope this helps!
I like the NKJV, and have liked it since 1984. I believe it is largely, or completely based on the same manuscript family as the KJV. I have noticed differences from THE KJV, but it is still an excellent version, and I believe completely trustworthy. I use the KJV, but I am no longer KJVO. I see that idea as erroneous. No, I'm not a scholar, but a person who has done her own minor research. I can also be opinionated.
The Nas’95 is the closet translation to the original Greek. Thats why it’s an excellent translation. Its so sad videos like these are being made to cause division in the body of Christ
23:38 shouldn’t get our swords from the world. Should get them from the church. They’re great Bible publishers that are churches out there and the Bible’s are so much better than any you can get for the price.
But kjv use the same word at different situations like suffer little children to come onto me and 2 Timothy 1:12 KJVS For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. Here suffer is used in context of pain but at other place it is to allow And it use prevent with different meanings like the sanres of death prevent me and in other place thou preventest me with goodness New readers to the bible or non English speaking people or who came to faith recently may misunderstand these words it may lead to Misunderstood the context it says By recently i heard a debate they say that textus receptus contradicts with itself there are many edition some editions differ from eachother
I understand what you are saying, however, the other "versions" create contradictions and blasphemies. Wouldn't it make more sense to suggest a person look up an unknown word in the dictionary? That is what we tell people to do in every other instance.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 then what about that textus receptus contradicts with itself and not every edition is same that they differ each other If textus receptus is accurate then what about the bible translation in other languages that are not based on tr but translated using Alexandria manuscript from what I understand is that in India the translation from bible society of India didn't mention which manuscript they used but it has some incomplete verse like 1john 5v7 it has half verse like modern translation if they don't have bible translated form tr but many are being saved and what about other English speaking person that use modern version like NKJV, ESV or nasb they are yielding in spirit I am not debating with you but I have expressing my doubts Don't you think that kjvonly is going towards idolatry and kjv worship, which distract us from becoming close and having fellow ship with Jesus I am. Saying this because the bible says the heart is deceitful above all
@@truthunchainedministries1564 but what about those who say TEXTUS RECEPTUS contradicts with itself and not all editions are same And what about the Bible in other languages which were translated using Alexandria manuscript And many English speaking people using modern translation like NKJV ESV or nasb they edifying in spirit by reading those versions I am not debating with you but I am expressing my doubts previous I read NKJV and i used kjv for strongs Don't you think that kjvonlyism going towards idolatry worship kjv rather than GOD and distracting from fellow ship with god because many people hear form people arguing kjv is only we should read and some says no we use any version to read which leads many people in dilemma and becoming a hindrance that many people don't read Bible due to this argument and the bible says the heart is deceitful above all And if really those new version contradicts and Satan involved in those versions don't you think god is capable of using them for his glory to make Satan ashamed like what happened with Esther
It isn't idolatry at all. If you lived in the ancient world and you wanted to know what God said, you had to read Hebrew and that text came from Israel. Moving forward to Roman times when Greek was the primary language throughout the known world (thanks to Alexander the Great spreading Greek and then the Romans connecting the countries via roads), if you wanted to read the New Testament writings you had to know Greek. The Alexandrian manuscripts and LXX both came from Egypt (which is never a good place in the Bible) and were produced over 100 years AFTER the complete of the NT (which was finished around 90 AD). The Textus Receptus came from Antioch, which if you know your Bible, was where believers were first called Christians. The Masoratic Text and the Textus Receptus were both written in Jewish and Christian environments - all others came from pagan countries like Egypt (Alexandrian and LXX) and Rome (Codex Vaticanus). I highly recommend you study the entire history of the King James Bible. How it came about and the history of the English language, then study the perversions that came out due to the Wescott and Hort cult. If you are curious about the latter, I did make a video on that here: th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html
If I were Satan I would raise up the KJV only cult. Wait a minute he already has. The false teachers of the KJV only cult, would probably call Jesus a heretic
This NKJV is fraught with errors. Look at Gen 22:8 which denied Jesus as God's for our sins by putting in an extra "For!" Contrast Jon 5:22,24&Rom.8:1, where it says shall not come into judgement but it conflicts Jon.5:27.
Changing from original languages to English, , , is a big change, much is lost and added when changing languages. Language changes over time, nobody speaks the kings English, that's why even KJV itself has been updated
Jesus said until i come give attendance to reading and the Lord give the understanding, you can not understand the Word of God with your brains,the organ for believing is not the brains its the heart that man believes unto righteousness,Jesus said My Words they are Spirit and they are Life ,if we do our part in reading He will do His part in giving us the understanding ,we need to seek Him diligently with our whole heart,we need the wisdom from above that is pure peaceable and easy to be intreated,not some ungodly mans opinions
It's a satanic masterpiece antichrist book of doctrines of demons, the Authorised Scriptures can not be changed by the pen of ungodly men, nkjv is a perversion correct me where im wrong
I have. All of the modern Bibles stem from the Revised Version. I did a history of the RV and those behind it in this video: th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html
@@truthunchainedministries1564 yes I watched the playlist in order last night! Just came across your channel yesterday and I've found it very helpful and informative. Thanks for your research and teachings. God bless!
One thing about the NKJ as well as most all modern versions is they all completely eliminate one of the most important doctrines of salvation found in the KJB.
@@henrylaurel1188 we are justified by the Faith of Christ not our own personal faith in Christ. (Gal 2:16) Hummm, perhaps yet another doctrinal omission from a scholarship idolater.
@@jrge9359Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Calling the Holy Spirit an "it" four times denying his deity. Calling the Son of God an angel in Daniel ch 3. Agreeing with the Jehovah Witnesses. No such creatures as unicorns. Nothing perfect about the KJV. So many words that have changed meaning making it even more inaccurate. Some words no longer in use. Nothing perfect about the KJV. The KJV translators knew that. They never claimed perfection, certainly not inspiration. They never intended their work to become the idol that it is with the KJV only cult.
@henrylaurel1188 wrong, harrod was celebrating easter as he was not a jew, but a pagan. Unicorns were also called rhinoceros as you can look in an 1828 dictionary.
Thank you for shedding light on the importance of understanding the origins of Bible translations
I think the NKJV couldve been the best translation ever if it didnt make this many mistakes. I wish it followed the KJV closer, updating it's language without touching the core meaning.
Try the Simplified KJV (SKJV) :)
@@VitoUno-- Or the Third Millenium Bible.
There are no mistakes in the nkjv it's antichrist doctrines of demons by design
@@nerowolfe929
OR the KJVER by SWORD publishing
@@VitoUno
OR the KJVER by SWORD publishers
Thank you, Sir. I am scratching my head about why a lot of translations make odd decisions, most that make no sense, and some really bad. Made me think about this. However, the MEV (Modern English Version) is based on the same texts, and I find, so far, that it matches the KJV almost exactly.
Good video I have had this conflict with modern versions myself. Any bible can help to get someone saved but when it comes to studying we need to make sure we are studying the complete word of God. A few months ago I purchased a newer translation and asked God should I be reading this text. And one of the new pages became detached from the binding.
"Any bible can help to get someone saved but when it comes to studying we need to make sure we are studying the complete word of God. " I agree 100%!
@@truthunchainedministries1564Since when was the KJV the complete word of God? Which of the at least ten different revisions of the KJV is the so called complete word of God? Also why do the KJV only cultists not speak in King James English? The usual double standards and hypocrisy of the KJV only cult.
I accidentally purchased a NKJV Scofield for studying. I plan on just using the reference notes but not reading the scriptures out of it. Thank you so much my brother in Christ for this video.
The NKJV is an excellent and trustworthy translation. I would encourage you to read it alongside your KJV. To truly get the best understanding, one must consult a variety of translations. This is actually what the KJV translators themselves stated in the preface to the reader.
@@Matthew-307
I used to really trust the NKJV... but the more familiar I get with the NKJV... the more I dislike it... too many changes... INCORRECT changes...
@@jeffcarlson3269Examples please.Since when was the imperfect uninspired KJV the standard?
@@henrylaurel1188 I never stated that the KJV is "the standard"... AND that us NOT what KJV Onlyism is all about anyway...
maybe some KJV users out there are trying to impose the KJV as the standard... but I believe the Manuscripts... or what has been found of them should be used as the standard..
the issue is.. that the modern translations prefer to base their text off of the Alexandrian ..or Sinaiticus Manuscripts.. and these Manuscripts came out of Egypt... and Babylon respectively..
whereas the KJV text is based off of the Byzantine text which came out of Antioch.. where the first followers of Christ were called Christians...
which makes more sense..?.. to use text that came from out of a "holy city"... or texts that came out of pagan cities..?..
yet we are told by scholars to believe these pagan sites.. because the manuscripts are either older or newer..
I'm Not buying it..
I trust in the KJV...Not because I think of it as a standard... but because I have seen the mis translation done in the modern translations.. either because of poorer manuscripts... or poorer translating...
@@jeffcarlson3269So you trust a translation based on later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope? With so many added uninspired verses. Also Alexandria where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy started, teaching that the Lord Jesus Christ was a created being. I am not buying the KJV only heresy.
7:32 seconds in and I’m convinced to stick with my KJV. Thank you!
This has been my experience too with the NKJV/KJV. A balanced analysis of this subject. Thank you!
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for emphasizing the importance of scrutinizing even minor changes in scripture.
Thanks!
I look forward to learning more. New sub.
Thanks!
I appreciate your detailed analysis of the King James Bible and its alternatives.
Thank you so much!
Ours is not to change the Word of God; it is to live God's Word. "It is appointed to man, but once to die then cometh Judgment".
Who is changing the word of God? Only the KJV only cult with the KJV only heresy.
Thank you for such a convicting video. You helped me immensely.
thanks for showing why the kjv is often a better translation than the nkjv.
but just an idea, for 2 kings 23:29 and 2 chron 35:20 they dont need to contradict if necho 'went to the aid' of assyrian king, not intentionally, but because he instead fought a war for assyrian king and was distracted from the initial plan of going 'against' him. so both can be right, and adds up because it complements each other rather than being duplicative
Some clarification may be needed as to the underlying text of the NKJV. The OT is based on the Stuttgart text, a corrupted masoretic text. The NT is based on the TR, but it is translated using critical text/ Alexandrian rules. These are just a few reasons why the NKJV is perhaps the most deceiving perversion of God’s word.
I agree the NKJV is just as wicked as the NIV, ESV, maybe even more so
Hiya Tony,
my 9-year-old daughter goes to a Christian school that mandates the use of the NKJV for their curriculum. Upon watching your video, I had concerns; so, after Sunday service, I conveyed them to an elder, who is also a biblical scholar. He is actually fluent in Greek. I rendered a couple examples that you put forth in this video. The 1st was the instance of being "saved" in the KJV vs. "being saved" in the NKJV. I then gave him the instance of the words "Son" in the KJV being changed to "servant" in the NKJV version. In both instances, based on the actual Greek wording in the Textus Receptus, he said that "being saved" is a more accurate translation, as well as the word "servant" being a more accurate representation than the word, "Son." In short, he claimed that the NKJV was a more accurate translation (at least pertaining to the Textus Receptus Text comprising the NT) is more accurate than the KJV. One possible issue/problem with his explanation is that, according to you, the NT in the NKJV, is not derived from the Masoretic Text- but rather the Vaticanus Text. What are your thoughts on my encounter, specifically the elder's explanation? Thanks!
First, I do apologize for not responding sooner. It is good that you asked the elder - never go off what a person says without studying for yourself! What you encountered is a prime example of scholarship being exalted over the Bible. Did the elder open up the NKJV and disprove the contradictions or did he simply point to the mysterious "original" manuscripts to justify his answers? Always look at who is being exalted.
"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." - Col. 1:18
"...for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." - Ps. 138:2
The Bible translations comprise a $6M industry. Have you ever wondered why only the King James Bible can be found in a dollar store? The KJV is the only Bible that is public domain, and as is the case with all public domain works, 25% of the text has to be changed in order to call it an original work that can be sold. If you look at the history of the NKJV, you'll find that it is traced back to the RV which is a product of Wescott and Hort (two scholars that did not believe the Bible - I did a video on it here: th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html).
Roughly 300 translations have been produced since 1900 - and none of them have had the impact on this world as the King James Bible. You don't have to be a Greek or Hebrew scholar to see that. All you have to do is look at what Bible gives Jesus Christ the preeminence, which Bible does not have any contradictions, and which Bible has not caused men to become wealthy.
I hope this helps :)
I love how useful these discussions are… it’s great to see other seekers seeking 😊
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, no man can change that that Word will be with us throughout all eternity, Jesus I'd the Living Word, the man lied to you and is an antichrist servant and he knows it ,but willfully rejects the Real Lord Jesus Christ,remember Jesus said My Word they are Spirit and they are Life no man comes to the Father but by Me .I you really Love the God of the Real Bible, them get your daughter and get away from the deceitful liers and promoters of wickedness and evil.
I think this is a well-meaning video. But the analysis has shortcomings.
The KJV does on occasion deviate from a more formally equivalent or literal translation of the Hebrew and Greek text compared to the NKJV. And, of course, vice versa.
You can see this if you compare both translations with Young’s Literal Translation of the textus receptus. This not a money-grabbing modern translation but a very literal 19th century translation of the same exact underlying text of the KJV.
Proverbs 16:1 (YLT): Of man are arrangements of the heart, and from Jehovah an answer of the tongue.
Proverbs 19:18 (YLT): Chastise thy son, for there is hope, and to put him to death lift not up thy soul.
Proverbs 25:23 (YLT): A north wind bringeth forth rain, and a secret tongue - indignant faces.
In each of these instances, the NKJV has a more literal reading than the KJV. But the NKJV is not flawless. The point is that the KJV does not always have the more literal translation in every place.
I have personally cross-compared many random passages of both to the original Greek and Hebrew with the help of concordances and interlinears and the NKJV stands up surprisingly well against the KJV in literalness. But there are still instances where the KJV has the more literal reading.
For example, look at Proverbs 16:10 (YLT): An oath is on the lips of a king, in judgment his mouth trespasseth not.
The KJV is more literal than the NKJV here. But then look at this one…
Proverbs 18:8 (YLT): The words of a tale-bearer are as self-inflicted wounds, and they have gone down to the inner parts of the heart.
The KJV matches Young’s translation more closely. However, if you look at the Hebrew word translated wounds you find that it means something that is swallowed or gulped down quickly or greedily. The NKJV better captures the literal meaning of the word, that it is something consumed, which is why the next line says that it goes “down into the innermost parts of the belly” (KJV). But the KJV translations aims to express the proverbial meaning more clearly even though it is less literal, which is consistent with the preceding verse: “A fool’s mouth is his destruction and his lips are the snare of his soul.”
Ultimately, both are fine translations of the textus receptus. But you should not disparage one translation simply because it disagrees with the other. What matters is there agreement with the meaning of the underlying Hebrew or Greek text. Both get it right far more often than not, especially compared to many other translations out there based on the highly eclectic critical text.
God’s peace and blessings be with you.
@anewmaninchrist why read someone's opinion of the Authorised Scriptures, just read the Authorised Bible
Excellent. Out with the New and in with the Old!
Right on!
@@truthunchainedministries1564
you missed the point of the significance of the change in Proverbs 25:23
in the KJV this verse is saying that just like the North wind drives the rain away... so does....an angry countenance and a backbiting tongue... where as in the NKJV.. it seems to be saying that just as the North wind BRINGS rain... so does.. a backbiting tongue... and angry countenance...
in the KJV.. we are being told.. that foulness... drives.. people away.. and in the NKJV we are presented with the thought.. that foulness.. attracts like evil... in other words the NKJV is trying to state...
"birds of a feather flock together".. where as the KJV..
is more of a warning NOT to be like the north wind..
again the main point should NOT be whether it it correct meteorologically.. but how true is the NKJV to what God wants us to know....
@@truthunchainedministries1564
also I did a study of Proverbs 18:8.... and Yes the KJV is more accurate... and here is why... in the ancient days it was believed that the kidneys... were the part of the body that controlled emotions. .and knowledge and feelings... in other words... the kidneys were believed to be the seat of the emotions... hence the heart and mind of an individual...AND it was believed this was in the deepest part of the body...
the KJV translates this "kidney".. body part as "belly".. where as most moderns just use a generality and state "innermost part of the body".. not hinting at the real suggested meaning was a specific body part controlling these things.. such as the kidneys...
@@truthunchainedministries1564
oh also in Genesis 3:1 the devil stated.. "Yea. hath God said ? "..... NOT "has God TRULY said?".. as You stated...
@@truthunchainedministries1564
I agree with you regarding 1 Corinthians 1:18... I argued about this passage for years.. but someone explained to me.. this verse is NOT referring to one being saved continually or more than once or over and over again... it is speaking in regards to the act of God's word.. continuing to save people.. this "being saved".. is a reference to the ones Yet coming to know Christ..in other words.. to ones who are becoming new believers..
In THIS verse I would be MORE concerned with What is being considered as foolishness?.. "the word of God?.. or
the Preaching of the word of God...
since God's word cannot be looked upon as being foolish.. the KJV is More accurate.. since it is those who are preaching the word of God... who seem foolish.. to the Non believers...
just as people felt about Noah before the flood..
Amen brother. Very good video.
Tried to find a contact page on your website and couldn't find one so I'll ask here. What's your take on the KJV having "cherubims" when cherubim is plural already? The im indicates that it is plural.
Good morning. English plurality terms change over time. You'll find that "cherubims" is found 65 times in the King James Bible. You'll also find that "seraphims" is found twice. Just because we no longer use the "s" doesn't mean there is an error. Another example we can look at is "fishes". Today we say "fish" for both singular and plural, but that wasn't always the case in the English language. "Fishes" is used 27 times throughout the King James Bible.
Hope this helps!
@@truthunchainedministries1564"I,m" is ALWAYS the plural translated from Hebrew!
Very interesting and informative presentation.
You can’t compare and English version with another English version to see if it’s corrupt otherwise the kjv would have been considered corrupt compared to the English bibles before it. You have to compare the English with the Hebrew and Greek. By the way go look at the KJV marginal note in Isaiah 14.
I understand what you are saying, but you are leaving out two very important details.
1) I do not know if you watched the entire video. Discussed are the origins of the King James Bible and the NKJV. Look at the manuscripts that were used for the KJV - Masoretic (Hebrew OT from Israel) and the Textus Receptus (Greek NT from Antioch where believers where first called Christians). The NKJV does not share the same sources and stems from the Alexandrian (Egypt) and Vaticainus (Rome) texts.
2) You can compare English with English because we speak English and English is what the Lord used for the King James Bible that was used to spread the Gospel throughout the world (study the Church Age of Philadelphia).
@@truthunchainedministries1564 The Spanish speaking world already had the gospel in their language before the KJV. The Greek speaking world already had the gospel in their language before the KJV. Same for the Germans and Latins. Where does this idea come from that the world hadn’t had the Gospel yet til the KJV came along?
also marginal note on your KJV in Pr 18.19
Wrong!!!
@@seansimpson1133you're misunderstanding what's being said. There are 2 lines of manuscripts. If you hear someone say "the Greek", that's not the question. It's which Greek is being used. The KJV uses the Byzantine text type which was used for Luther's German, Valeros Spanish, Diodari's Italian, Olivitans French, etc. These languages used the same line that was used for the KJV. All other English Bibles come from a corrupted source in the hotbed of gnosticism in Alexandria Egypt.
I have a question for you :)
I searched a ton of kjv bibles and found one that I love The Humble Lamb Bible, very expensive but I want it to last me for years, only thing it has pictures and now the mean devil is telling me it’s bad to use one with illustrations, I need your opinion? Please help? :)
I am sorry for the delayed response. There is nothing wrong with illustrations when teaching, so if they are included, then great! That said, the most important thing is for you to focus on God's words so that you can grow in your knowledge and understanding of Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:17-19). If the illustrations aid you and inspire you to spend more time in the Bible, then that is a good thing.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 , TH-cam is removing my comments to you
Sir why bother with a book of someone else's version why not go The Authorised Word of the Living God, all the other versions are just doctrines of demons that other men that do not love the God of the Authorised Bible have published to fit there agendas
The organ for believing is not the brains ,it's the heart for with the heart man believes unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation
Very helpful video. Completely changed my thinking on this. Many KJV words have a different meaning to us, as long as I can reference their 1769 meaning I can follow! Thank you so much!
Which is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations. Where the words have not changed meaning. Unlike many in the KJV making it even more inaccurate.
There are so many ways they could have modernized the verses in the NKJV but they compeletly change it, or adjust it like they weren't accidents but intentional... Being saved seems to be like its a work-based salvation which is not true.... so sad
The events experienced by @jetsetjoey highlight a typical response from scholars who support the NKJV.
Their claims usually assert that the KJV got it wrong because they didn't have access to manuscripts that we now have and that these "newly found" ones are actually older and are, somehow, therefore more correct.
Well, since none of the manuscripts is in fact an immediate copy of the originials, let alone an actual original, the argument has no merit since they are not in nay way more liekly to be more accurate. This raises the question then, which should we hold to be the more accurate?
We can't legalistically prove either case, how could we? So we must decide on the basis of what evidence we do know. What do we know?
Firstly, the large and very qualified team who worked on the KJV had access to a large number of manuscripts. The manuscripts upon which they based their translations were amazingly consistent. This is in the sense that any differences were minor, typically punctuation and spelling and such other minor things, and did not typically change the meaning or intent of what was written. In comparison the "newly found" manuscripts not only differ in inportant ways from theirs but also from one another. Also, apparently, they are relatively much fewer in number. Common sense would tend to suggest that the former are more reliable.
Secondly, as raised in this video, we must look at the way the two translations approach the divinity of Jesus. When the NKJV seems to cut out Christ it seems clear to me that there is something wrong. Again I have to say the KJV must be more accurate.
Keepin mind that such scholars are perhaps relying upon the liklihood that you don't know a lot about the manuscripts. Therefore, their stated case sounds reasonable. Until you know more about the background. Even first year law students could tell you that a half-truth and a silence constitutes a lie in the eyes of the law.
The KJV translators had very few manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. They were well versed in Latin, which is why they also used the Catholic Latin Vulgate. They made an adequate translation for the time. They also knew their work was not perfect. That is why they encouraged us to use many translations. It is only the KJV only cult that makes ridiculous ludicrous claims about what is nothing more than an imperfect uninspired translation.
My sister and I just found out the difference we were taken turns reading out of Bible she had NKJV and I had kjv I kept stopping her when she would read NKJV I said it doesn't match what I reading we were shocked...what a rude awaken.
@marianmears8026
your words:
it doesn't match what I reading we were shocked...what a rude awaken.
I only wish MORE people could find out the way you and your sister did...
sadly not enough people are getting "shocked".. apparently...sadly... many people I know still ONLY trust the NKJV....
@@jeffcarlson3269Find out what? The double standards and hypocrisy of the KJV only cult?
Well, I'm screwed, As a recently saved christian, I simply can't understand the archaic language in the KJV so I guess I'm not as smart as a 9 year old..Thought I was doing ok with the NKJV as I just bought a Cambbrige Clarion, But after watching this ,I littorally threw it in the trash, Now I'm lost without a bible to read because now I don't trust any translations other than KJV which I struggle with to the point of giving up.. ugh, now I feel truly lost.. 😞
You're hardly screwed :) The language of the KJV is not as archaic as you think. The most common issue people have are the thou/thee and ye's, but once you understand them, you'll find that the language is far superior to our modern English. Thou/thee is singular and ye is plural. I'll give you an example of how and why this is important:
"Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." - John 3:7 KJV
"Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’" - John 3:7 NKJV
In the KJV, Christ said "marvel not that I said unto thee (you - singular, Nicodemus), ye (everybody) must be born again."
In the NKJV and modern translations, Christ said "marvel not that I said unto you (singular, Nicodemus), you (singular, Nicodemus) must be born again."
Also, the language isn't as difficult to understand as people make it out to be. Look at Job 6:6 in the Revised Standard Version: "Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt, or is there any taste in the slime of the purslane?". Apparently, "Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?" in the KJV was too difficult to understand lol
Please do not give up. I was saved for roughly 20 years before I discovered the truth of the KJV and then it took me another few months to part with the other versions I had in my library. Eventually, I threw in the trash a few hundred dollars (at least) worth of "bibles".
I'm happy to help in any way that I can and please do not hesitate to reach out!
If you can find an "EVIDENCE BIBLE" from Ray Comfort in KJV they have all or most of the Archaic words translated. Also "THE DIFINED" KJB has all the Archaic words in bold and the translated words at the end of each page. Hope this helps brother.
@@raston1961it’s NKJV
The KJV is archaic, that is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations like the NKJV. The false teachers of the KJV only cult, would call Jesus corrupt.
Is this the same issues with the ESV??
Yes. I give examples of the ESV removing Christ's words and stripping Him of his Deity in this video: th-cam.com/video/w0Natg_WkK4/w-d-xo.html
Is there a KJV Bible out there that when referring to God or Jesus puts the he and him in capital letters? Like the nkjv does? This is why I use nkjv, I can’t stand when they are referring to the Lord and don’t capitalize it
I haven't come across any.
It took me awhile to get used to He/Him not being capitalized, and as you can see in the way that I write, I still capitalize the "H". If I am not mistaken, the capitalization of "H" didn't begin until the early 1980s/late 1970s. It is a relatively new concept.
I get that it is a matter of reverence for God and a simple way to distinguish the pronouns. Keep in mind that Hebrew does not have uppercase or lowercase letters (the OT) and the Greek Textus Receptus (NT) was written in all capital letters.
This is the very reason I use NKJV! I do have a few KJV Bibles too and I love them both...this vid is enlightening! As I grow in the Lord, I see myself leaning more toward KJV, it just feels like I'm actually reading the Bible...lol...if that makes sense! ❤
I do enjoy the Amplified Classic translation (AMPC) for study and it does capitalize He/Him when referencing the Lord and/or Jesus. This translation is hard to find and when I do find it, it's a bit costly...I am a Bible Hoarder, so I don't mind :)
How do you address the argument that modern language translations make the Bible more accessible to a wider audience?
By stating that isn't the case at all.
1) The King James Bible was spread throughout the world from the 1700s to the modern day - which means it has a wider audience.
2) You can only buy a King James Bible in a Dollar Store - making it more accessible to all social classes.
3) The King James Bible remains the best selling book of all time - making it the most available.
4) From 1901 to 2023 (122 years) there have been a little over 300 versions of the Bible put out to replace the King James Bible under the argument that the KJV is too hard to understand. That means that a new "bible" has been produced every 2.45 months on average - meaning somebody wants your money and not because our English language changes too frequently.
Language changes the KJV is archaic many words changed meaning making it even more inaccurate. Which is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations in English we can understand. The gospel is about Christ and him crucified not some translation of scripture called the KJV. KJV onlyism is a false teaching a man made tradition.
Most of these if you read the footnotes it will tell you what they KJV says compared to the new KJV or at least in my Bible it does
T words are singular and Y words are plural.
Plus the being saved verses removes "preaching" to "message", it doesn't want you to preach....
Are there any scholars or theologians who support the use of the new King James version?
John MacArthur and David Jeremiah come to mind. Typically, those that support the use of the NKJV hold the notion that people should find the version that best suits them.
@@truthunchainedministries1564
let me tell you about John MacArthur...
years ago I bought a MacArthur... NKJV... study bible.. which I no longer use.... since I switched to only KJV back in 2006...
then I found out he preaches from the NASB... but his large volume commentary is from the NKJV text.....
NEXT he is promoting the LSB bible as being better than the NASB... but it is gender neutral... and the whole time he is touting the LSB.. trying to sell it...
he is STILL preaching his sermons from the NASB
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Typical answer from the KJV only cult.
@@truthunchainedministries1564I found the version that suits me. Which is why I stopped using the KJV years ago.
In context, Paul is talking with Corinthians. So maybe they were being saved at that time.
When you think a little harder about prova 18:8 actually the meanings can be interpreted the same.
Another omission in modern bibles including in Rom4:25 NKJV is the removal of the word “again” which is a reference to Christ’s virgin birth. He was raised from the deadness of the virgin’s womb, raised again on the 3rd day. The removal of “again” is the spirit of antichrist.
My concern isn't so much that the nkjv differs from the kjv. I just want to know how accurate it is to the original manuscripts. People thought the Geneva Bible was the true translation in the 1600's and thought the kjv was a perversion.
There is no such thing as original manuscripts. Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy, etc.
This goes back to the founding of Israel. When you read Leviticus, you'll find that the Levites were:
Priests, detectives, real estate agents, judges, doctors, auditors, health inspectors, and more.
There was not one manuscript that was passed along to millions of people - they were all copies. Over time, manuscripts deteriorate and more copies are made. Fast forward to Luke 4:14-21 where Jesus read from Isaiah and Acts 8:27-35 where the Ethiopian eunuch was carrying Isaiah with him. These were clearly not the same scripts nor were they the same scripts from 760 B.C. to 690 B.C. (the 70 period where Isaiah wrote his book see Is. 1:1).
You also have to look at the "original manuscripts" you are citing. Are you speaking of the Masoretic Text (from Israel) and the Textus Receptus (from Antioch) or are you referring to the Septuagint/LXX (from Egypt) and the Vaticanus (from Rome).
What you'll find is that the KJV is the ONLY Bible to come from the Masoretic and Textus Receptus and has ZERO contradictions. All other "Bibles" come from the Egyptian and Roman sources and are filled with a plethora of contradictions.
"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 for ever." - Psalm 12:6-7
1) Masoretic Text (Hebrew) - 99% of the OT
2) Original Aramaic - 1% of the OT (parts of the book of Daniel)
3) Textus Receptus (Greek) - New Testament
4) Old Syriac
5) Old Latin
6) German
7) English
The seven languages used to purify the words of the Lord. That list was obviously an extremely simplified history.
The test to see which Bible is true is very simple. Look at Colossians 1:18
"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."
Which Bible gives Christ the preeminence? Is it the NIV that claims Satan and Jesus are the same person? Is it the 250 other versions that take away His title of Lord and remove His words? You must study these things.
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." - 2 Timothy 2:15
I hope this helps :)
@alexclark626
compare how both the KJV and the NKJV both translate Haggai 1:10...
Numbers 21:14
Song of Solomon 3:9
Acts 17:22
from the Greek and Hebrew text...
that should tell you what you need to know...
@@jeffcarlson3269What makes the KJV right?
I love the KJV of the bible, it's understandable but sometimes the language is difficult, is there a Dictionary that you use?😅
Yes. I use Websters 1828 Dictionary; it was the final version that cited the Bible. You can download the app for free or go here:
webstersdictionary1828.com/
Hope this helps!
A lot of words are understandable like whosoever, its just words added together and when you read it outloud or in your head, it makes sense and all the Bibles has vocab you don't know, so you need to look it up! Just like how we still sing songs with old English and that we learn new jargon in work/school/sports, if we arne't rewritting shakespeare and can be willing to learn new words in work/school/play, we should also be okay with learning new words for the Bible!!
Good stuff my brother. Mind blowing 🤯 Not touching my NKJV anymore- only KJV from now on. Thanks a lot!
Thank You!!
Have you checked out Revelation 13 verse 16? The words IN and ON
The Bible states in Revelation 13:16-17 that people will have to take his mark in their right hand or in their forehead in order to purchase the basic necessities of life. This is more than just a simple mark done for economic purposes. Those that take the mark of the beast are worshipping him and sealing their eternal fate (Rev. 14:9-11).
There are many speculations involving emerging technology that explain why repentance is not possible for those that take the mark of the beast. Currently, medical doctors and scientists are developing microchips that emit pulses in order to change a person's mood and can alter a person's brain chemistry in a process called "deep brain stimulation". Researchers at DARPA, University of California, and Massachusetts General Hospital are looking for permanent ways to remove the need for medications which can have harmful side effects. On the surface this sounds amazing as it can essentially cure PTSD, various mood disorders, and even Parkinson's Disease as research suggests. Could it be that when a person takes the mark of the beast (which the Bible shows to be voluntary even if it is under duress), the reason that they cannot accept Christ is because their brain is permanently altered?
That would explain why the Bible says "in".
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Yeah... its more likely its "in" as microchips or something that will be a barcode to checkout.. Amazon is rolling out Amazon One and there is a lot of other things going on.. well, don't take the mark and share the gospel! time is ticking.
I just got a 150$ Bible for Christmas and now your telling me I have to buy another one? Plus I can’t send it back we already wrote in it 😢😢😢😢😢
I completely understand your frustration. Before I really started studying the history of the Bible, the KJV's history, and the changes made to the 250+ modern "versions", I had spent over $600 on various translations and commentaries.
Even after knowing that the other "versions" were subtracting and changing God's words it took me a few months before I got rid of them. I struggled with throwing away $600+ dollars worth of materials.
If I may, what I would recommend is to take this to the Lord in prayer and be honest with Him. Tell him about this struggle and help Him guide you on what to do.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 I have a question for you :)
I searched a ton of kjv bibles and found one that I love The Humble Lamb Bible, very expensive but I want it to last me for years, only thing it has pictures and now the mean devil is telling me it’s bad to use one with illustrations, I need your opinion? Please help? :)
@@moodrevolverget an authorized King James Bible it’s like 20$ at Walmart. You shouldn’t be spending more than 30$ on your Bible
You dont have to spend that much to get your hands on a kjv bible. They go for like $20
Everyone should check out “truth is christ”’s channel. He has a video called “words of God” that is terrific for exposing these new age bible versions. Further, his research into bible code (probably not what you think) is absolutely brilliant.
In kjv Psalm 16v2 it says my goodness extendeth not to thee
What does it mean
But all translation says I have nothing good beside you or My goodness is nothing apart from YOU and the the translation in my native language also says I have nothing good beside you
Notice that v2 ends with a semicolon meaning we cannot take it out of context from verse 3.
2 O my soul, thou hast said unto the Lord, Thou art my Lord: my goodness extendeth not to thee;
3 But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight.
King David is saying his goodness doesn't add anything to God's goodness. God's goodness is perfect, so much that only God can be said to be truly "good" (Matt. 19:16-17). This would mean that what goodness David had, profited the saints here on Earth. He (David) delights in excellent saints (real saints that love God - not fakers).
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Thank's for the clarification
Can you explain why Lucifer used. in kjv many say Lucifer is a Latin word and in strongs it says morning star
and thanks again
Sure. The word "Lucifer" is a Latin word meaning "a bearer of light" and is a translation of the Hebrew word הֵילֵל which means "the shining one". 2 Cor. 11:14 tells us that he transforms (keyword) into "an angel of light".
You have to be careful when using modern lexicons as they heavily rely upon the Septuagint. The Septuagint was a perverted Greek "translation" of the Hebrew texts and originated in Alexandria, Egypt. Remember that Satan's goal is to imitate and take God's place. Hence why he had modern "translators" give him Christ's name as "the morning star".
@@truthunchainedministries1564Lucifer a Latin word for the planet Venus meaning morning star. No Latin word should be in an English translation. The KJV translators used the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. Isaiah 14 v 12 is a prophecy about the king of Babylon. Nothing to do with Satan. You forgot to mention that the KJV translators put Daystar in the margin. Also Christ's name is Morning Star not morning star, as in the Isaiah 14 v 12. Also the KJV has "the morning stars that sang together". Were they all names for Christ as well? Are you saying that Jesus is an angel? Agreeing with the Jehovah Witnesses. Why are the KJV only cultists so dishonest. They have to lie to try and justify the KJV only deception. Also Alexandria where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy was taught that Jesus was a created being. What is corrupted are the teachings of the KJV only cult.
@@truthunchainedministries1564Alexandria Egypt where the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was defended. Antioch where the Arianism heresy arose, teaching that the Lord Jesus Christ was a created being. Yes Satan who is not Lucifer seeks to cast doubt on the word of God. The KJV only heresy is a great example.
According to the Bible charts,the NASB is more word for word the the KJV
Bro... I had NO idea the NKJV was so corrupt!
The NKJV is not corrupt
What is corrupt about the NKJV? What are you comparing it to? The imperfect uninspired KJV? Since when was the KJV the standard? A translation from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. With mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Which the NKJV translates correctly. Still that is the insanity of the KJV only heresy. Strange how these so called "truth ministries" peddle out the same old lies
@@elijahbaxter7163 yes it is.
@@GodisGracious1031Ministries no it’s not
@@elijahbaxter7163 th-cam.com/video/uOjphpmztfY/w-d-xo.html
Acts 10:37. "word ....was published throughout all Judea"
Yes, stick with the KJB.
Why stick with the KJV? Especially as we have far more accurate modern translations.
So, what are your thoughts on Titus 2:13 kjv vs nkjv?
Your premise is that the NKJV demotes the diety of Christ, but in Titus 2:13 the diety of Christ is much clearer in the NKJV rather than the KJV.
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;" - Titus 2:13 KJV
"looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," - Titus 2:13 NKJV
I'm not sure how the NKJV is "clearer". All they did was changed "that" to "the", removed a comma, removed "the", and removed "our". This is a wonderful example of the NKJV authors meeting the 25% legal textual changes requirement in order to consider their work original and charge money for it. You should research U.S. copyright laws - specifically the requirements for changing an original work in order to make a profit off of that work. There's a reason why you'll only find the KJV in a Dollar Store :)
@@truthunchainedministries1564 Yes I understand the copyright laws and how that affects modern translations. My point was that a modern reader would find the diety of Christ much clearer in the NKJV rendering of Titus 2:13 than in the KJV rendering. The KJV makes it seem like the reference is to two different persons, 1 being the great God and 2 being our Savior Jesus Christ, due to the Granville Sharp rule not being known or understood by the majority of modern readers. The NKJV rendering is much more obvious that the reference is to one person, our savior Jesus Christ who is also our great God. The NKJV is my preferred translation, I was KJV-only for years, but since doing a lot of research on translation history, textual criticism, manuscript tradition, etc, I switched to the NKJV and it has been a huge blessing. Much more understandable than the KJV, and the Bible does say that “in all your getting, get understanding.”(Prov 4:7)
The whole point of a translation is to convey the message of God to the reader, and my view is that as long as a translation is a formal equivalence type, then whichever translation belonging to that group that someone can best understand, that is the best translation for them. Many people cannot understand the 17th century form of English, so if they need an NKJV or even an NASB or ESV. Now personally, I’m still a TR guy, I like the concept of the CT, but the influence of Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and Alexandrinus is what makes me choose the TR over the CT. If those three manuscripts did not influence the CT, it would be a different story. So for me, I’ve chosen the NKJV, a modern translation of what I believe to be the most reliable manuscripts. The NKJV improves on the KJV in a couple different ways, one key way being that they translate Hades as Hades, Tartarus as Tartarus, and Gehenna as hell. KJV translates them all as hell. Specifics matter.
I love the KJV, but to truly understand the scriptures one must consult a variety of translations, just as the KJV translators themselves stated in the preface to the reader.
Anyways, that’s my two cents opinion lol. Have a great day and God bless. 😊✝️
@@Matthew-307you don’t have to acknowledge this video. There’s nothing wrong with the NKJV. The KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NASB are all wonderful translations of God’s Word. All bashing a translation does is separate the body of Christ. The KJV is great but it is NOT perfect. No translation is. If he’s gonna bash a translation, bash the Message Bible or the Jehovah witness “Bible”. Videos like these do nothing for the children of God
@@hoc1992 Yes I agree, the only reason that I occasionally comment on kjvo videos is because I got tricked into kjvo for quite a few years, and now that I’m out of it I want others to be free as well. They’re robbing themselves of understanding.
This video was really well done. Thanks!! I just hope reading the KJV gets easier for me.
Glad it was helpful!
The Bible isn't a novel it's the Book of Life a d can not be understood with the carnal mind of a man,remember Jesus said My Words they are Spirit and they are Life, He also said until I come give attendance to reading and the Lord give thee understanding. So if we do our part He's will do His,also read it out loud and ita written faith comes by hearing ,and hearing by the Word of God.If you diligently seek The Lord with all of your heart ,you will find Him and also remember the organ for believing is not the brains it's the heart for with the heart man believes unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation
In Israel a North Wind brings rain off the Mediterranean Sea a south wind is dry and comes off the desert. So it is the KJV that is incorrect. Think of the context of the passage. Written by someone in Israel setting forth the situation in Israel. You are correct in some parts of the world it is the south wind that brings rain. Where I live it is mostly the east and west winds. It varies across the Globe the UK for example it is a west wind coming across the Atlantic that brings rain.
I will have to check your other comments about other verses. I fully agree with you we need to check our facts like the Bereans.
May God bless you in your work
David Wilson - Tasmania Australia
The NKJV does use the Masoretic text as well as the Scrivener's Textus Receptus. Sure the OSB bible has a Septuagint OT as its text based, but thats pureply for orthodox christians, as they will always use a majority text type.
Also if the Orthodox church can accept the NKJV for their liturgy then that means there is no vaticanus or alexandrian manuscripts.
Oh boy, as a new 62 year old lady, I’m so confused as to which Bible i should read now. I did not grow up in a Bible believing family.
I bought the NKJV version and a CSB Bible recently. both in Super giant print lol so I can read the Bible.
I have watched a few U tube videos about different Bibles and came to conclusion of the above. Now watching this video I’m really, really confused lol
I have never read the Bible completely at all.
I bought the above ones because they are much more simple to read and understand.
I’m completely alone in this journey even though I have a husband who doesn’t believe. Or he says he doesn’t know what to believe. I have tried many, many times to show him but it is not working at all. He kind of gets annoyed with me. So I don’t know what to do.
I’m from Western Australia 🇦🇺
Hi! Finding the right Bible is something that definitely takes a lot of studying, but it is well worth it. I was saved for twenty years before I realized the changes made to the 300+ versions and came to the conclusion that only the KJV is perfect.
Regarding your husband (and lost people in general), take a look at Jude 22 and 23:
"And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
Essentially, a person will either get saved because they are drawn to Christ because of what He did on the cross or they will accept Christ because they do not want to go to Hell. The latter is the reason I got saved. The most successful tactic I've used when witnessing is to ask a person if they would let complete strangers move into their house - that is what people are expecting of God because they want to go to Heaven while rejecting His Son (John 3:16-18). Questions like that really get a person to think.
I hope this helps and I'm always available :)
Why KJV use LORD in place Jehovah or YEHOVA it uses only in seven times but the word is used many times from genesis to Malachi but ASV and young literal translation used Jehovah and legacy standard bible used Yahweh
🎯 bulls eye !
Another reason why the Bible knows things in science before society found through science.
What did kjv has heaven in genesis 1v1 where as NKJV and others have heavens in verse 1 it has shamayim which is a plural word then why did they keep heaven
Because in Genesis 1:1 there was only one heaven that was created. If you'll go through Genesis 1, you'll find the other heavens created which is why 2:1 states "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." There are three heavens in the Bible: the sky, outer space, and where the Lord's throne is located. Please see the verses below as evidence.
The first heaven is the sky and the Bible shows us this in multiple verses:
"If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;" - 2 Chronicles 7:13
"By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation, which sing among the branches." - Psalm 104:12
"Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness." - Acts 14:17
"And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit." - James 5:18
The second heaven is what we call outer space. We can find this heaven defined in the following verses:
"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good." - Genesis 1:14-18
"For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine." - Isaiah 13:10
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:" - Matthew 24:29
"And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind." - Revelation 6:13
The third heaven, what most people simply refer to as "Heaven", is where God dwells:
"And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left." - 1 Kings 22:19
"But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:" - Matthew 5:34
"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." - John 3:13
I hope this helps!
So who did all of this investigation in 1611?
I like the NKJV, and have liked it since 1984.
I believe it is largely, or completely based on the same manuscript family as the KJV. I have noticed differences from THE KJV, but it is still an excellent version, and I believe completely trustworthy.
I use the KJV, but I am no longer KJVO. I see that idea as erroneous.
No, I'm not a scholar, but a person who has done her own minor research. I can also be opinionated.
I do use the kjv but you do know that the battle of carchemish was pharo allied with asysyria againts the babylonian army allied with the median army.
I read the nasb1995
I read the nasb 1995 too , but it has the same translation of proverbs 25.23 as nkjv which I was surprised.
The Nas’95 is the closet translation to the original Greek. Thats why it’s an excellent translation. Its so sad videos like these are being made to cause division in the body of Christ
23:38 shouldn’t get our swords from the world. Should get them from the church. They’re great Bible publishers that are churches out there and the Bible’s are so much better than any you can get for the price.
But kjv use the same word at different situations like suffer little children to come onto me and
2 Timothy 1:12 KJVS
For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.
Here suffer is used in context of pain but at other place it is to allow
And it use prevent with different meanings like the sanres of death prevent me
and in other place thou preventest me with goodness
New readers to the bible or non English speaking people or who came to faith recently may misunderstand these words it may lead to Misunderstood the context it says
By recently i heard a debate they say that textus receptus contradicts with itself there are many edition some editions differ from eachother
Can we use other bible translation based on textus receptus like modern english version
I understand what you are saying, however, the other "versions" create contradictions and blasphemies. Wouldn't it make more sense to suggest a person look up an unknown word in the dictionary? That is what we tell people to do in every other instance.
@@truthunchainedministries1564 then what about that textus receptus contradicts with itself and not every edition is same that they differ each other
If textus receptus is accurate then what about the bible translation in other languages that are not based on tr but translated using Alexandria manuscript from what I understand is that in India the translation from bible society of India didn't mention which manuscript they used but it has some incomplete verse like 1john 5v7 it has half verse like modern translation if they don't have bible translated form tr but many are being saved and what about other English speaking person that use modern version like NKJV, ESV or nasb they are yielding in spirit I am not debating with you but I have expressing my doubts
Don't you think that kjvonly is going towards idolatry and kjv worship, which distract us from becoming close and having fellow ship with Jesus
I am. Saying this because the bible says the heart is deceitful above all
@@truthunchainedministries1564 but what about those who say TEXTUS RECEPTUS contradicts with itself and not all editions are same
And what about the Bible in other languages which were translated using Alexandria manuscript
And many English speaking people using modern translation like NKJV ESV or nasb they edifying in spirit by reading those versions I am not debating with you but I am expressing my doubts previous I read NKJV and i used kjv for strongs
Don't you think that kjvonlyism going towards idolatry worship kjv rather than GOD and distracting from fellow ship with god because many people hear form people arguing kjv is only we should read and some says no we use any version to read which leads many people in dilemma and becoming a hindrance that many people don't read Bible due to this argument and the bible says the heart is deceitful above all
And if really those new version contradicts and Satan involved in those versions don't you think god is capable of using them for his glory to make Satan ashamed like what happened with Esther
It isn't idolatry at all. If you lived in the ancient world and you wanted to know what God said, you had to read Hebrew and that text came from Israel. Moving forward to Roman times when Greek was the primary language throughout the known world (thanks to Alexander the Great spreading Greek and then the Romans connecting the countries via roads), if you wanted to read the New Testament writings you had to know Greek.
The Alexandrian manuscripts and LXX both came from Egypt (which is never a good place in the Bible) and were produced over 100 years AFTER the complete of the NT (which was finished around 90 AD). The Textus Receptus came from Antioch, which if you know your Bible, was where believers were first called Christians.
The Masoratic Text and the Textus Receptus were both written in Jewish and Christian environments - all others came from pagan countries like Egypt (Alexandrian and LXX) and Rome (Codex Vaticanus).
I highly recommend you study the entire history of the King James Bible. How it came about and the history of the English language, then study the perversions that came out due to the Wescott and Hort cult. If you are curious about the latter, I did make a video on that here: th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html
If I was Satan, I would be encouraging and delighted for people to be using any and all of the modern so called bibles.
If I were Satan I would raise up the KJV only cult. Wait a minute he already has. The false teachers of the KJV only cult, would probably call Jesus a heretic
If I were Satan I would raise up the KJV only cult. Wait a minute, he already has.
This NKJV is fraught with errors. Look at Gen 22:8 which denied Jesus as God's for our sins by putting in an extra "For!" Contrast Jon 5:22,24&Rom.8:1, where it says shall not come into judgement but it conflicts Jon.5:27.
Not to mention the errors in the KJV
Geez!!!
You change anything, it is NOT God's Word. It is a transition bible to other corrupt versions.
Changing from original languages to English, , , is a big change, much is lost and added when changing languages. Language changes over time, nobody speaks the kings English, that's why even KJV itself has been updated
Jesus said until i come give attendance to reading and the Lord give the understanding, you can not understand the Word of God with your brains,the organ for believing is not the brains its the heart that man believes unto righteousness,Jesus said My Words they are Spirit and they are Life ,if we do our part in reading He will do His part in giving us the understanding ,we need to seek Him diligently with our whole heart,we need the wisdom from above that is pure peaceable and easy to be intreated,not some ungodly mans opinions
KJV Is easier than the NKJV and divination is evil....
The New King James Version is an excellent translation of the Bible.
nope.
@@GodisGracious1031MinistriesYep
Book of doctrines of demons ,its a book of antichrist spirit that's what it is
Never
It's a satanic masterpiece antichrist book of doctrines of demons, the Authorised Scriptures can not be changed by the pen of ungodly men, nkjv is a perversion correct me where im wrong
Have you looked into the ESV and SCB?
I have. All of the modern Bibles stem from the Revised Version. I did a history of the RV and those behind it in this video:
th-cam.com/video/cBlehI54tCI/w-d-xo.html
@@truthunchainedministries1564 yes I watched the playlist in order last night! Just came across your channel yesterday and I've found it very helpful and informative. Thanks for your research and teachings. God bless!
looks like you are fixin to burn your house down with that weird power cord situation going on behind you......
It was just temporary and is all good now lol
total shock
yeah that new king James isn't right ... ill just stick to the Message bible
Nonsense
Agreed! The NKJV is garbage!
yes, It's very different. made by same compay w/ NIV.
Love my brilliant NIV. Far stronger on the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit than the KJV ever was.
One thing about the NKJ as well as most all modern versions is they all completely eliminate one of the most important doctrines of salvation found in the KJB.
Example please. My modern translation is very clear about salvation. Absolutely no doctrine changed. Another lie from a KJV idolater.
@@henrylaurel1188 we are justified by the Faith of Christ not our own personal faith in Christ. (Gal 2:16)
Hummm, perhaps yet another doctrinal omission from a scholarship idolater.
You’re misinterpreting the NKJV.
Not at all. Just read the words on the page :)
Satanic antichrist doctrines of demons that's what it is
@@truthunchainedministries1564 yes you are
People always want to change what is already made perfect
Amen!
Only Almighty God is perfect. Not some imperfect uninspired translation of scripture called the KJV.
@@henrylaurel1188 show us where it contradicts itself
@@jrge9359Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Calling the Holy Spirit an "it" four times denying his deity. Calling the Son of God an angel in Daniel ch 3. Agreeing with the Jehovah Witnesses. No such creatures as unicorns. Nothing perfect about the KJV. So many words that have changed meaning making it even more inaccurate. Some words no longer in use. Nothing perfect about the KJV. The KJV translators knew that. They never claimed perfection, certainly not inspiration. They never intended their work to become the idol that it is with the KJV only cult.
@henrylaurel1188 wrong, harrod was celebrating easter as he was not a jew, but a pagan. Unicorns were also called rhinoceros as you can look in an 1828 dictionary.