I owe you more than i could ever repay. I appreciate everything you've done! I make mention of you in my prayers every day praising God for guiding me to you and for your patience in dealing with me for over a year. The godly council you gave me did not return void. Glory to God alone.
I was NOT expecting a 150 false friends video to close out the year. I think we all know it took you a lot of work to get to 100. But the fact you went to 150 and put in the study (pun intended) and work behind the scenes to give us an extra 50 by surprise is well appreciated.
This is pure gold! I need to watch this again. Super interesting and sometimes even funny. (I'll have to keep "superfluidity of naughtiness" in my back pocket!😂) I can't wait for your book to come out so I can highlight it and quickly flip to various words as a resource. I hope you keep adding more to your book or add a second volume. God bless!
Thank you Mark Ward. You have helped me and my family more then you can understand! Imagine denying the Christianity of someone who reads a different English Translation of the Bible written in Greek and Hebrew... What's sad about the KJVO crowd, is the vile disgusting comments of many who hold to the extreme KJVO position. They deny they believe in double inspiration and Ruckmanism, however this is exactly what some believe, they just do not realize it.
@thomasthewatchman the PROBLEM with all of the modern translations however is that Most (if Not all) of the translators working on the modern translations.. do NOT scrutinize.. the textual use and meanings of the words they use in their translations as in the case of Mark Ward.. after reading thru several modern translations over the years... I have found countless times.. where words are ABUSED.. and translated into words meaning.. NOTHING of what the intended meaning was supposed to be when it was originally written in the original manuscripts.. I /. for one... think it is better to STUMBLE occasionally on a word.. that might seem a little "fuzzy".. in its usage in the KJV...and actually look up the possible definitions of THAT word.. so I can grasp for myself.. with the Help of the Holy Spirit what a particular verse is trying to tell me... rather than except.. a MISTRANSLATION.. of one of the modern translators.. and glooss over.. something read.. without having a second thought as to whether the word used is right or not.. simply because it is a word that I can understand.. to me ....that seems like a total beguilement on the part of the modern translators... they are serpents in the garden of bible readers.. flattering them with words which are easy to read and understand... but may Not always be totally accurate.. but what do the modern translators care?.. as long as they get paid for their work their happy whether or Not their work is top notch... that is why I will continue to be a KJV Onlyist in spite of what people like Mark Ward or James White.. wish to peddle upon.. KJV users.. Frank Logsdon..one of the workers on the NASB... asked God in later years for forgiveness for the abomination he was a part of creating... here is is testimony.... here is the link... theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1057
Mark, thank you for your exhaustive, conscientious work in researching these words. I grew up in churches that used the KJV and memorized many verses so I have great respect for that historic version, but by the time I was in college I discovered the NASB and that became the Bible that I read. I have followed your explanation of these obsolete words with great attention. I look forward to your upcoming book. BTW, as a Mount Vernon resident, I laughed out loud when I saw you walking up to "The International Center for KJV False Friends"! I'll have to stop into the office next time I'm down town. 😃
I am still not sure that you are really done with this, but though there are many issues I would not agree with you on, I think everyone who loves the King James will benefit from your work. Some perhaps with less thanks than others, but your videos have pointed out many things I had not noticed, and I appreciate it. I hope we will see a well done revision of the KJV that changes no more than necessary, but does adequately address the obscurities that are in the text for modern readers, as well as the false friends that you have identified.
@ Just a language nerd (five languages). And a Bible nerd. And I was in the ministry myself years ago (but now only do occasional guest speaking). So basically, a nerd.
Just a quick comment regarding "mean" in this list: I immediately thought of the verse of What Child is This? that asks, "why lies he in such mean estate...?" It's one of the rare times in modern English that mean is used in that older sense of low-quality. Many of our hymns are the last home of some of English's more archaic forms. Meeting them is so familiarly unfamiliar.
Well done, Mark. I enjoyed your campaign against the KJVo crowd. Thank you for all the hard work. I want to direct yourself and anyone who reads this comment to please go read Psa 37:37 in the KJV ( yes the KJV) for a fun comment about yourself. Enjoy!
I know that when you can find false friends that have tripped up the likes of Gill and Henry that that strikes at the very root of the Reformed conscience.
Target - I would connect to the Scottish Targe shield in its etymology. As a type can often become the word for the category, this may be how it meant small shield in Early modern English
It would be nice to have an audio production of the kjv bible in your british accent...it might even become a best seller!!! I know I would truly enjoy it!!! Just like I enjoyed Alexander Scourby's audio bible!
Many Calvinists use the verse where God says he creates "evil" as a proof text that God determined all moral wickedness, rather than just calamity and disaster, so it is a very dangerous false friend.
English is not my native tongue, but in Isaiah 37:14 of FF 140 Mourn (1:34:02) there is a word: "undertake" at the end of the verse. Can this also be a false friend? Kind regards! In the online Merriam Webster there is for example an archaic sense as an intransitive verb: "to give surety or assume responsibility"
I wonder... is "end of the world" part of the reason for the futurism being so big right now? Also, this is the second false friend I've noticed that made it into the Chinese Union Version, which mistranslates Matthew 28:20 as "end of the world". I suppose this one isn't super clear because there is a small chance that the translators in 1911 did intend "age" and that meaning fell out of use in Chinese, but at least the other one is more certainly a mistake ("rude in speech").
#126 leaves me quite curious whether Headmaster means the top administrator or the top teacher. Especially when it’s unclear in government schools today whether we’re actually teaching. Which I guess goes to show we decipher words inside our understanding of our current circumstances!
@@wardonwords Well, yes, now I know that only because you've just taught it. However just going about living my life, I thought the opposite was true, simply because I just assumed "master" meant authority over the school. There are things to learn beyond KJVo that will improve our lives!
Mark, let me encourage you to read the novel Wisdom Hunter by Randall Arthur. The book highlights the destructiveness of "know it all," legalistic pastors. Many KJV-only pastors fall into this category. And, of course, if someone "knows it all," they will refuse to be corrected. Why? Because they already "know it all."
Wow! A pleasant surprise. Another 50! Too many verses to comment on, but I did look up every single verse discussed here in the NWT. Just selecting a few noteworthy or ‘odd’ translatings... (I broke up viewing the 2 hour time in order to watch the whole thing.) Proverbs 18:9 “waster” - I like the NWT keeping the ‘tense’ and meaning both - “the one who causes ruin.” Luke 19:14 “message” - NWT; “sent out a body of ambassadors” Revelation 18:3 “Delicacies” - NWT; “owing to the power of her shameless luxury.” CURIOUSLY - Psalm 59:15 “grudge” - NWT; 1950 edition “or stay overnight” 2013 edition “[not] find a lodging place.” Mark 6:20 “observed” NWT again, as always in keeping with the correct tense “was keeping him safe.” “ion” “System of things” Matthew 13:39 and nearly everywhere in the NWT 1 Cor. 9:17 “dispensation” NWT “stewardship” Romans 3:24 “freely” NWT “and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous” Noteworthy since many people incorrectly conlude Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in “earning salvation” something they don’t believe. Dan 5:12,16 “doubts” NWT 1950 “the untying of knots”, “untie knots” NWT 2013 “knotty problems” “room” Under certain occasions we may say “make room for...” which does mean “place,” but, yes, otherwise “place” is clearer. Isaiah 40:2 “comfortably” NWT “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem” Jude 19, James 3:15 “sensual” NWT “animalistic” Good catch! I have had people use Isaiah 45:7 to “prove” God created evil. NWT renders it “calamity.” 2 Timothy 4:2 “doctrine” NWT “art of teaching” Genesis 1:11 “his” NWT “according to their kinds” James 1:21 “naughtiness” NWT “every trace of badness” Unless I missed them - two more ‘false friends’.. Trespass = sin and “worship” can mean reverent godly worship, but also just to bow down, genuflect. Looking forward to the printed book! Thanks for your hard work!
First, you've done the entire church a great service in pointing out these issues - service that will not be appreciated by those who most need it. Secondly, those who are unfriendly friends are going to take your book, extract your "false friends," compile a list while ignoring all the implications you draw from your analysis and then teach said list as their own, using it as justification for why they do not need to change the KJV because "we already know that the language has changed and we have already fixed it!" Then, someone in the KJV camp will publish their own book on "Better Interpretation" of the KJV and become a popular speaker/lecturer at all the Cool Kid KJV conferences and never, ever mention your name. Having said that, well done!
@@wardonwords You are very gracious. I have to smile at where some of my material has ended up - but it still grates when they do not see the bigger picture! 🙂
@@wardonwords Both the Greek glōssa (γλῶσσα) and the Hebrew "lashown" (לשון) have two primary senses: 1) the physical organ of the tongue in the mouth, and 2) a spoken language. In contemporary English, the word tongue can sometimes have this second sense, e.g. in the expression "native tongue" and "sharp-tongued". But for the most part, we don't use the word "tongue" to refer to a language. The OED doesn't mark the usage as archaic under the relevant sense (II.8.a.), but I would be surprised if you could find any compelling, non-idiomatic examples from over the past 50-100 years. As a result, the rendering of "tongues" from the KJV in Acts 19:6 "they spake with tongues" (and elsewhere, e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:39) has been (mis)interpreted as a distinct idiomatic expression, as if "speaking with tongues" is to be contrasted as a distinct sense from "speaking in [other] languages". Because of the influence of the Pentecostal & Charismatic movements, the phrase "speaking in tongues" has acquired a new, idiomatic religious meaning (noted as an additional sense by the OED in 2024) which would be anachronistic to the Elizabethans. Note that the (controversial) theological question regarding the nature of these languages is irrelevant to the question of what the translators of the KJV meant by "tongues" in this case. They meant "languages", as did Wycliffe who translated this verse as "they spake with languages". Of course, this could lead to misunderstanding by modern English speakers, because when they hear "they spake with tongues", they are likely to think that this refers exclusively to a special religious phenomenon, since it uses what is, to contemporary readers, special religious jargon, and they are likely to think that it would rule out the more contemporary rendering "they spoke with languages". Unfortunately, few translators are bold enough to translate glōssa as language - the CSB is probably the most notable exception. Part of the issue is that there is clever wordplay in Acts 2:2-3, where the Hebraism "leshonot ash" (לשנוח אש), meaning flames, literally "fire-tongues" is carried into the Greek (glōssai hōsei pyros). This makes a pun with verse 3 where the different languages (glōssais) are spoken. Perhaps the idiomatic meaning of "flame" was lost on the KJV translators who used the overly-literal rending "tongues like as of fire", although this is often the case with Hebraisms in the KJV. Again, modern translations don't seem to depart much from the KJV except the CSB which correctly uses the word "flame" but in conjunction with "tongue" to preserve the pun. See also Qumran manuscript 4Q376.
I think tongue is still understood as sometimes meaning language. See the movie Zootopia. A character doesn't understand another character and says "I thought she was speaking in tongues or something!"
@@salvadaXgracia Right, but that's actually a great demonstration of my point: in that Zootopia quote "Speaking in tongues" means "speaking incomprehensibly". This is a modern, idiomatic usage, which the OED added this last year as "to speak (spontaneously) in an unknown or incomprehensible language, esp. during religious worship." That's what modern readers would understand the phrase to mean, and that's what it means in Zootopia. But that's not what the KJV translators meant by "spake with tongues". They just meant "spoke with languages" generically, not necessarily in an incomprehensible way and not necessarily with any religious connotation inherently.
Brother Mark Ward, wherefore dost thou assail thy brethren and the sacred oracles of God? Repent thee of thy wicked deeds. For did not our Lord Jesus Christ say unto Paul on the Damascus road, 'Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?'
This video confirms that this entire exercise is really about attacking the meaning of KJB words, because every word in the KJB has a meaning, and each word, letter and punctuation mark is in some way doctrinal or contributing to doctrine, and so attacks now appear on various precise and exact KJB words because the video maker wishes to express a different thought or move towards a different doctrine. This video's approach has now transformed into being the same as a modern translation maker's approach. We await only now "beginning", "created" and finally "light" to be dispatched, since "heaven", "moved" and "firmament" have already been overtaken. Instead of calling it "Newspeak", it is called "150 False Friends".
The KJV doesn't use a unique English with special meanings, IThere is no such animal as a "KJB word". They were updating the Bishop's Bible into THEIR "Contemporary English"! You have Elizabethean ENGLISH words!
How is "hell" more exact when it confuses multiple greek words? Can the KJV infallibly declare that "hades" and "gehanna" are the same? Also, how do you propose someone can figure out the exact meaning of words? Even words outside these 150 false friends could have had a slightly different connotation in the 1600s. And if you care about the exact meaning, I once again bring up words like "baptize" and "bishop", and their intended meaning by the translators, especially considering that the King required keeping the ecclesiastical words. By "baptize", the translators meant to apply water in any manner. By "bishop", the translators meant an office that is distinct from elder in an episcopal church government. Most KJV onlyist disagree with at least the second and probably the first as well. I do recognize that these are actually words that etymologically come from their Greek originals, and so they also demonstrate some blurriness between the referent and the definition of a word. Finally, if the KJB is a special language, then every English-speaking Christian is expected to understand it. This contradicts 1 Cor 12:30 ("do all interpret [tongues]?").
@@matthewmencel5978 The Scripture has special meanings, and the Scripture in English has special meanings, and the words used in the KJB therefore have special meanings. The words in the KJB are Biblical English. Biblical English is a form of English which supersedes the time and span of English from 1611 to the future. The KJB is not an "Elizabethan" book, to demote it in that way is to fight providence and to treat the KJB as merely a natural phenomenon. And yes, we can understand the Scripture, it uses words we can understand, after all, the Scripture does include talking about things like Saul visiting a cave. We are talking about understanding God's message here, not (as I know some would mistakenly assume I am saying) AVolatry.
@@maxxiong Going to the "Greek" etc. is where the confusion is. Hell is straightforward, a simple 4 letter English word that we actually understand, not the convolutions about some Jewish/Dante/mythical underworld. It's so interesting to see the gaslighting on the KJB, as if words, and all kinds of words the whole way through, apparently have a different meaning today to what it is alleged to have meant in 1611. Thankfully, we don't measure or understand truth that way, we understand truth as being perennial and enduring: the same truth of today exists both past and future, we are not being led astray by what "is". Also, believers do care about exactness of words, I do care about "baptize" and "bishop". When the Scripture said baptized into one body (Christ), we are able to understand it properly. Perhaps you are willing to argue that it just meant "sprinkled" into something: you should try to go "into" the sprinkle drops of his body. But no, the word of God is not limited by some people's doctrines. When we read "bishop" we really believe it means "bishop", a rank of a kind of overseer over pastors. So a "bishop" is not the same as an elder. In English we are looking at right words, whether or not such words came from the Greek like "Christ" or "Baptize". Right words came from the Anglo-Saxon too, like "God", "Son", "Holy Ghost", etc. And finally, yes, the KJB is a special language, and normal people can understand the Scripture. Of course, we are talking about Scripture, which has concepts which random average people do have to learn, and that requires a level of words people have to learn, but that is normal. It happens in every special interest group, science and in-group. Also, you missed the Scripture where it shows anyone may interpret, and it was talking about tongues not Bible translations (see 1 Cor. 14:13).
The whole construct of false friends is based on the assumption that the word of God is determined by a past world consciousness construct of language, as if definitions of language are some kind of eternal Platonic forms, that the definitions of the past is what is eternally preserved, as if some kind of an abstract metaphysical dictionary (or the OED) is more word of God than the word of God. But if words are preserved, and definitions and meanings are separate from words, then definitions SHOULD change - meanings and definitions are not preserved. Definitions of the past are generated by sinful history and culture, and must be destroyed. Modern definitions of the false friends arise from how the Bible used the words, and thus modern definitions are what God wants.
@markwardonwords why not? Life in scripture is associated with movement. Spirit is associated with movement (Gen. 1:2), and words are spirit. And words are fast, you're seeing these words while I'm far away. No real contradiction to the statement if it means fast.
The original autographs were written in Koine Greek, a now-dead language. This means the particular symbols God inspired quite literally have no meaning today. So is God's Word meaningless? Certainly not. That necessarily means that what God intended to preserve was the underlying truths (definitions) of those symbols. May God bless you and I in the new year, friend
So when a false friend occurs in the Bible quoting someone's speech, what that person said changes over time? This does violence to inerrancy. And there is the contranym of "letteth" in 2 Thess 2:7. And the obvious problem that you allow the meaning of God's words to change over time.
@@maxxiong Well said. When I read the original comment last night I thought of commenting about 2 Thessalonians 2:7 and how the current meaning of "let" is the complete opposite of the original meaning, but I didn't have the energy last night.
As much as I disagree with a lot of your content (particularly because of cultural differences in understanding a lot of the candidates you have proposed), I commend you for the integrity and sincerity behind your work. And you have only further encouraged me to pay more attention to verses I am doing a study on. Perhaps your work may start a revival for the masses to adopt the KJV again: a Barbara Streisand effect if you will. Imagine this effect causes the evolvement of contemporary English to go back to the roots of early modern English - I yearn for the adoption of singular and plural pronouns in use again! Anyhow, God bless thee with thy future, brother.
Thank you for this! As long as people understand what they're reading, I don't object to a KJV revival! I truly don't! Kind people who disagree with me and do so kindly-those are a rarity. Thank you for this.
Uh, I actually have 150 Reasons for the King James Bible being the perfect Word of God. It is a free PDF writeup I have been working on for a long time now. It will be available in a few months (Lord willing). Is this a coincidence? Did you get wind of my writeup name? Granted, it is fine that you create this title, it is just a little odd that you chose that number. I believe I have pointed out a few times about my writeup title on the internet. In either case, may God bless you (even if we disagree on this topic).
The KJV was the word of God as it was written. In fact, I'm unaware of any glaring errors made by the translators. However, it's not "perfect" - only God is perfect, and he only directly inspired the writings of the original documents that eventually came together in our Bibles, but we don't have any of those documents. Thus, inspiration is not enough - God also "preserved" his writings through the manuscript tradition. So God is perfect, he perfectly inspired, and now he continually perfectly preserves. There is not a single passage in Scripture that indicates that his preservation extends to translations of the inspired text. I'm very interested to see your paper. I hope it's not riddled with numerology.
@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 - Greetings in Jesus Christ, and thank you for your interest. My free PDF write-up, 150 Reasons for the KJV, is focused on providing a scholarly approach. It will not include a discussion on biblical numerics, as the majority of my arguments center on historical, textual, and linguistic evidence. For those interested in biblical numerics, I may consider offering a separate edition that includes this topic as a small subsection. However, it will be promoted specifically to those who believe in biblical numerics, rather than the broader Christian community. My primary aim is to present a version suitable for the wider KJV community, many of whom may not share an interest in numerics. As such, the first edition is tailored for those seeking a scholarly examination of the KJV’s merits. Biblical numerics is not a primary focus of mine; I view it more as an occasional apologetic tool for certain individuals. While I recognize its potential value for some, I do not live my life by numbers, nor do I engage in extensive studies on the subject. I firmly believe that the Greek and Hebrew texts underlying the KJV are perfect. My approach involves examining the meaning of words in both the KJV’s English and the original languages, confirming their meanings through context, cross-references, and relevant literature, including writings from early church fathers. Additionally, I delve into manuscript witnesses, history, and the Bible itself to build a comprehensive case for the KJV.
@@biblehighlighter "I firmly believe that the Greek and Hebrew texts underlying the KJV are perfect." Which texts are these, exactly? Do we still have them today?
Which KJV? The 1611? One of the hundreds of revisions prior to 1769? The 1769 Cambridge edition? The 1769 Oxford edition? Pick one, because they all differ, and only one can be "perfect".
@@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 - I believe the Hebrew can be found in the Masoretic Ben Chayyim text. For the Greek, it is primarily based on Theodore Beza's fifth edition Greek New Testament (1598), covering 99.9%. The differences between the choices of the KJV translators and Beza’s text amount to approximately 20 translatable variations, which are documented in Scrivener’s Greek text underlying the KJV.
Why does ward not go to the Greek of the KJV to explain his reasoning? On these apparent false friends? Because the Greek is different in many of these words in the TR compared to the Greek used for the modern versions. So Ward has to just try explain away the meaning as being false when actually the Greek is different!!!!!!!
Not true. The overwhelming majority of these examples, if not all, strictly have to do with English. In the majority if not all of the verse examples, do not have textual variants between Greek texts.
Mark Antidisestablishmentarianism Ward. Why art thou so disingenuous toward thine Christian brother who hath held the King James Bible in such high esteem 😢 Thou thinkest one art doing a good deed and thinkest thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light to thine King James onlyist but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself unfaithfulness toward God due to firstly dishonouring his word and secondly neglecting the faithfulness of almighty God’s true word. Thou hast not brought forth a good fruit; but a corrupt fruit because if thou wast faithful thou would hath constructed thine own texts with one’s own revision and present that. But we know thine motive in your quest of thine secret rejection and hate for our textual lineage! May almighty God forgive thee for this dishonesty 🙏🏽
Please Mark stay honest to your word and stop this dishonesty and leave us who hold to the KJV alone! Thank you God for answering our prayers 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
@@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 well for starters that he stays away from the KJV as he has said this is his finale act, because we who follow the TR/KJV lineage know that if you do not look 100% from our position with all the facts then you will come to the conclusion that those against it are right! Most people who come to our position started in opposition to it but by thoroughly studying the facts and come to realise the deception and lies that has led to the opposition! But of course as an unbeliever once thought so do those from opposition to the TR lineage position that’s how they think and are duped by the lies
We thank you for your service sir. This issue needs all the calm, reasonable and cogent voices it can get.
I owe you more than i could ever repay. I appreciate everything you've done!
I make mention of you in my prayers every day praising God for guiding me to you and for your patience in dealing with me for over a year. The godly council you gave me did not return void.
Glory to God alone.
Very grateful for your friendship and insights.
I feel like I gain 10 IQ points each time I listen to Mark Ward. Thank you for your work, sir!
Love you brother. Thank you for your valuable work. Looking forward to what you decide to do next.
What a great way to bring in the new year!
Happy New year Mark and may God bless you as you embark on this new stage of your work.
Thank you, Mark! Happy New Year to you and your family! Blessed by your ministry, brother! Enjoyed the 150 false friends of the King James Bible.
If only there were a heavy metal rock band called "Superfluity of Naughtiness."
Happy new year.
I was NOT expecting a 150 false friends video to close out the year.
I think we all know it took you a lot of work to get to 100. But the fact you went to 150 and put in the study (pun intended) and work behind the scenes to give us an extra 50 by surprise is well appreciated.
This is pure gold! I need to watch this again. Super interesting and sometimes even funny. (I'll have to keep "superfluidity of naughtiness" in my back pocket!😂) I can't wait for your book to come out so I can highlight it and quickly flip to various words as a resource. I hope you keep adding more to your book or add a second volume. God bless!
Well done, sir. Well done.
You have an excellent voice for an audio Bible my friend! God bless and Happy New Year🎉
Happy new year!
Happy new years. And I’m glad you seen it to the last minute.
Thank you so much for your hard work and diligence. Bless you and yours.
Same to you!
I learned "world" today for the first time before watching, and coincidentally you've further explained it in this video.
Thank you, thank you Mark! This video will be well used commuting to and from work this month. Jan 1, 2026 at 00:01 - release date for 151-200. :)
Ha! Nope. Not gonna do that. I could do it. But I won't!
@@wardonwords Your "could" gives us all hope. Love you brother!
Thank you Mark Ward. You have helped me and my family more then you can understand! Imagine denying the Christianity of someone who reads a different English Translation of the Bible written in Greek and Hebrew... What's sad about the KJVO crowd, is the vile disgusting comments of many who hold to the extreme KJVO position. They deny they believe in double inspiration and Ruckmanism, however this is exactly what some believe, they just do not realize it.
@thomasthewatchman
the PROBLEM with all of the modern translations however is that Most
(if Not all) of the translators working on the modern translations.. do NOT scrutinize.. the textual use and meanings of the words they use in their translations as in the case of Mark Ward..
after reading thru several modern translations over the years... I have found countless times.. where words are ABUSED.. and translated into words meaning.. NOTHING of what the intended meaning was supposed to be when it was originally written in the original manuscripts..
I /. for one... think it is better to STUMBLE occasionally on a word.. that might seem a little "fuzzy".. in its usage in the KJV...and actually look up the possible definitions of THAT word.. so I can grasp for myself.. with the Help of the Holy Spirit what a particular verse is trying to tell me... rather than except.. a MISTRANSLATION.. of one of the modern translators.. and glooss over.. something read.. without having a second thought as to whether the word used is right or not.. simply because it is a word that I can understand..
to me ....that seems like a total beguilement on the part of the modern translators... they are serpents in the garden of bible readers.. flattering them with words which are easy to read and understand... but may Not always be totally accurate..
but what do the modern translators care?.. as long as they get paid for their work their happy whether or Not their work is top notch...
that is why I will continue to be a KJV Onlyist in spite of what people like Mark Ward or James White.. wish to peddle upon.. KJV users..
Frank Logsdon..one of the workers on the NASB... asked God in later years for forgiveness for the abomination he was a part of creating... here is is testimony....
here is the link...
theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1057
Thank you Dr. Mark! Now, go enjoy life and your family for a while!
Mark, thank you for your exhaustive, conscientious work in researching these words. I grew up in churches that used the KJV and memorized many verses so I have great respect for that historic version, but by the time I was in college I discovered the NASB and that became the Bible that I read. I have followed your explanation of these obsolete words with great attention. I look forward to your upcoming book.
BTW, as a Mount Vernon resident, I laughed out loud when I saw you walking up to "The International Center for KJV False Friends"! I'll have to stop into the office next time I'm down town. 😃
Read this to my wife! We had good laugh!
Regarding “delicacy,” I suspect that the related word, “delicate”, similarly (and more so) meets the requirements of this list.
Thank you, Brother Mark, for what you've shared over the years.🌹🌟🔥🌟🌹
You are so welcome!
I am still not sure that you are really done with this, but though there are many issues I would not agree with you on, I think everyone who loves the King James will benefit from your work. Some perhaps with less thanks than others, but your videos have pointed out many things I had not noticed, and I appreciate it. I hope we will see a well done revision of the KJV that changes no more than necessary, but does adequately address the obscurities that are in the text for modern readers, as well as the false friends that you have identified.
Happy New Year! No false friends in that.
Yes! #121 Dispensation deserves a full video. Fascinating!
Agreed!
yup. I've seen Dispenationalists quote the KJV reading of those passages to prove Dispensationalism is biblical.
When I was at secondary school in the 1970s we were issued with scholars dinner tickets that allowed us to get meals.
An update of the KJV is clearly needed. This is just too many words that the average reader is likely to unknowingly misunderstand. I’m convinced.
People can barely understand "modern" words these days! Nobody reads anymore!
Happy New Year Mark!
Same to you!
I've actually heard of another KJVo that left his position and I believe your videos had a part in it
Wow!
Observe means to guard, as in to keep watch.
Nice! How did you know that!?
@ Just a language nerd (five languages). And a Bible nerd. And I was in the ministry myself years ago (but now only do occasional guest speaking). So basically, a nerd.
And a lawyer. Lawyers are word nerds, too.
@@geektome4781I’m very impressed!
I like the way Herman Bavinck ( 1854-1921) ends his section on The Holy Scriptures in his book entitled “ The Wonderful Works of God “ .
This is an indispensable list of words for anyone reading the KJV exclusively.
Just a quick comment regarding "mean" in this list:
I immediately thought of the verse of What Child is This? that asks, "why lies he in such mean estate...?"
It's one of the rare times in modern English that mean is used in that older sense of low-quality.
Many of our hymns are the last home of some of English's more archaic forms. Meeting them is so familiarly unfamiliar.
False Friends Finale? You’ve hidden treasure. Finally: False Friends 101-150
We understand our Bible better at every gem you reveal.
Well done, Mark. I enjoyed your campaign against the KJVo crowd. Thank you for all the hard work. I want to direct yourself and anyone who reads this comment to please go read Psa 37:37 in the KJV ( yes the KJV) for a fun comment about yourself. Enjoy!
My life verse! Almost makes me want to be KJVO! 😅
Ha!
@@wardonwords "Almost" thou art persuaded?
Rapid fire false friends 😂
For “observe”, the KJV Bible also says to observe the commandments etc. it means to keep or guard.
I know that when you can find false friends that have tripped up the likes of Gill and Henry that that strikes at the very root of the Reformed conscience.
Target - I would connect to the Scottish Targe shield in its etymology.
As a type can often become the word for the category, this may be how it meant small shield in Early modern English
It would be nice to have an audio production of the kjv bible in your british accent...it might even become a best seller!!! I know I would truly enjoy it!!! Just like I enjoyed Alexander Scourby's audio bible!
Mark, you totally walked across the street without the walk sign saying go!
lol. 😂😂🎉
You caught me! And so now can the police! ;)
Many Calvinists use the verse where God says he creates "evil" as a proof text that God determined all moral wickedness, rather than just calamity and disaster, so it is a very dangerous false friend.
English is not my native tongue, but in Isaiah 37:14 of FF 140 Mourn (1:34:02) there is a word: "undertake" at the end of the verse. Can this also be a false friend? Kind regards! In the online Merriam Webster there is for example an archaic sense as an intransitive verb: "to give surety or assume responsibility"
I wonder... is "end of the world" part of the reason for the futurism being so big right now?
Also, this is the second false friend I've noticed that made it into the Chinese Union Version, which mistranslates Matthew 28:20 as "end of the world". I suppose this one isn't super clear because there is a small chance that the translators in 1911 did intend "age" and that meaning fell out of use in Chinese, but at least the other one is more certainly a mistake ("rude in speech").
I beg to differ on "world" being a false friend. A reading of 2 Peter chapter 3 shows what the end of this "age" entails.
#126 leaves me quite curious whether Headmaster means the top administrator or the top teacher. Especially when it’s unclear in government schools today whether we’re actually teaching. Which I guess goes to show we decipher words inside our understanding of our current circumstances!
It HAS to be head teacher, just has to be. Etymologically, that is.
@@wardonwords Well, yes, now I know that only because you've just taught it. However just going about living my life, I thought the opposite was true, simply because I just assumed "master" meant authority over the school. There are things to learn beyond KJVo that will improve our lives!
@@stevegroom58 Yes! So right!
Mark, let me encourage you to read the novel Wisdom Hunter by Randall Arthur. The book highlights the destructiveness of "know it all," legalistic pastors. Many KJV-only pastors fall into this category. And, of course, if someone "knows it all," they will refuse to be corrected. Why? Because they already "know it all."
Wow! A pleasant surprise. Another 50! Too many verses to comment on, but I did look up every single verse discussed here in the NWT. Just selecting a few noteworthy or ‘odd’ translatings... (I broke up viewing the 2 hour time in order to watch the whole thing.)
Proverbs 18:9 “waster” - I like the NWT keeping the ‘tense’ and meaning both - “the one who causes ruin.”
Luke 19:14 “message” - NWT; “sent out a body of ambassadors”
Revelation 18:3 “Delicacies” - NWT; “owing to the power of her shameless luxury.”
CURIOUSLY - Psalm 59:15 “grudge” - NWT; 1950 edition “or stay overnight” 2013 edition “[not] find a lodging place.”
Mark 6:20 “observed” NWT again, as always in keeping with the correct tense “was keeping him safe.”
“ion” “System of things” Matthew 13:39 and nearly everywhere in the NWT
1 Cor. 9:17 “dispensation” NWT “stewardship”
Romans 3:24 “freely” NWT “and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous” Noteworthy since many people incorrectly conlude Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in “earning salvation” something they don’t believe.
Dan 5:12,16 “doubts” NWT 1950 “the untying of knots”, “untie knots” NWT 2013 “knotty problems”
“room” Under certain occasions we may say “make room for...” which does mean “place,”
but, yes, otherwise “place” is clearer.
Isaiah 40:2 “comfortably” NWT “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem”
Jude 19, James 3:15 “sensual” NWT “animalistic”
Good catch! I have had people use Isaiah 45:7 to “prove” God created evil. NWT renders it “calamity.”
2 Timothy 4:2 “doctrine” NWT “art of teaching”
Genesis 1:11 “his” NWT “according to their kinds”
James 1:21 “naughtiness” NWT “every trace of badness”
Unless I missed them - two more ‘false friends’.. Trespass = sin and “worship” can mean reverent godly worship, but also just to bow down, genuflect.
Looking forward to the printed book! Thanks for your hard work!
First, you've done the entire church a great service in pointing out these issues - service that will not be appreciated by those who most need it.
Secondly, those who are unfriendly friends are going to take your book, extract your "false friends," compile a list while ignoring all the implications you draw from your analysis and then teach said list as their own, using it as justification for why they do not need to change the KJV because "we already know that the language has changed and we have already fixed it!"
Then, someone in the KJV camp will publish their own book on "Better Interpretation" of the KJV and become a popular speaker/lecturer at all the Cool Kid KJV conferences and never, ever mention your name. Having said that, well done!
I would not mind if they did this! As long as people learn to read the KJV.
@@wardonwords You are very gracious. I have to smile at where some of my material has ended up - but it still grates when they do not see the bigger picture! 🙂
Galatians 4:25
“answereth” a false friend here for this verse?
I propose "tongue" as a false friend.
Yeah?
Complete foolishness Sir !
@@wardonwords Both the Greek glōssa (γλῶσσα) and the Hebrew "lashown" (לשון) have two primary senses: 1) the physical organ of the tongue in the mouth, and 2) a spoken language.
In contemporary English, the word tongue can sometimes have this second sense, e.g. in the expression "native tongue" and "sharp-tongued". But for the most part, we don't use the word "tongue" to refer to a language. The OED doesn't mark the usage as archaic under the relevant sense (II.8.a.), but I would be surprised if you could find any compelling, non-idiomatic examples from over the past 50-100 years.
As a result, the rendering of "tongues" from the KJV in Acts 19:6 "they spake with tongues" (and elsewhere, e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:39) has been (mis)interpreted as a distinct idiomatic expression, as if "speaking with tongues" is to be contrasted as a distinct sense from "speaking in [other] languages". Because of the influence of the Pentecostal & Charismatic movements, the phrase "speaking in tongues" has acquired a new, idiomatic religious meaning (noted as an additional sense by the OED in 2024) which would be anachronistic to the Elizabethans.
Note that the (controversial) theological question regarding the nature of these languages is irrelevant to the question of what the translators of the KJV meant by "tongues" in this case. They meant "languages", as did Wycliffe who translated this verse as "they spake with languages".
Of course, this could lead to misunderstanding by modern English speakers, because when they hear "they spake with tongues", they are likely to think that this refers exclusively to a special religious phenomenon, since it uses what is, to contemporary readers, special religious jargon, and they are likely to think that it would rule out the more contemporary rendering "they spoke with languages". Unfortunately, few translators are bold enough to translate glōssa as language - the CSB is probably the most notable exception.
Part of the issue is that there is clever wordplay in Acts 2:2-3, where the Hebraism "leshonot ash" (לשנוח אש), meaning flames, literally "fire-tongues" is carried into the Greek (glōssai hōsei pyros). This makes a pun with verse 3 where the different languages (glōssais) are spoken. Perhaps the idiomatic meaning of "flame" was lost on the KJV translators who used the overly-literal rending "tongues like as of fire", although this is often the case with Hebraisms in the KJV. Again, modern translations don't seem to depart much from the KJV except the CSB which correctly uses the word "flame" but in conjunction with "tongue" to preserve the pun. See also Qumran manuscript 4Q376.
I think tongue is still understood as sometimes meaning language. See the movie Zootopia. A character doesn't understand another character and says "I thought she was speaking in tongues or something!"
@@salvadaXgracia Right, but that's actually a great demonstration of my point: in that Zootopia quote "Speaking in tongues" means "speaking incomprehensibly". This is a modern, idiomatic usage, which the OED added this last year as "to speak (spontaneously) in an unknown or incomprehensible language, esp. during religious worship." That's what modern readers would understand the phrase to mean, and that's what it means in Zootopia.
But that's not what the KJV translators meant by "spake with tongues". They just meant "spoke with languages" generically, not necessarily in an incomprehensible way and not necessarily with any religious connotation inherently.
40:00 Lust. This is where having some other linguistic background can help. The word in German is still cognate. 😊
Ich habe Lust = I want.
In 2025, will you write a book on false friends in Christmas hymns?
Brother Mark Ward, wherefore dost thou assail thy brethren and the sacred oracles of God? Repent thee of thy wicked deeds. For did not our Lord Jesus Christ say unto Paul on the Damascus road, 'Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?'
When did Mark assail his brethren?
This video confirms that this entire exercise is really about attacking the meaning of KJB words, because every word in the KJB has a meaning, and each word, letter and punctuation mark is in some way doctrinal or contributing to doctrine, and so attacks now appear on various precise and exact KJB words because the video maker wishes to express a different thought or move towards a different doctrine. This video's approach has now transformed into being the same as a modern translation maker's approach. We await only now "beginning", "created" and finally "light" to be dispatched, since "heaven", "moved" and "firmament" have already been overtaken. Instead of calling it "Newspeak", it is called "150 False Friends".
The KJV doesn't use a unique English with special meanings, IThere is no such animal as a "KJB word". They were updating the Bishop's Bible into THEIR "Contemporary English"! You have Elizabethean ENGLISH words!
How is "hell" more exact when it confuses multiple greek words? Can the KJV infallibly declare that "hades" and "gehanna" are the same? Also, how do you propose someone can figure out the exact meaning of words? Even words outside these 150 false friends could have had a slightly different connotation in the 1600s.
And if you care about the exact meaning, I once again bring up words like "baptize" and "bishop", and their intended meaning by the translators, especially considering that the King required keeping the ecclesiastical words. By "baptize", the translators meant to apply water in any manner. By "bishop", the translators meant an office that is distinct from elder in an episcopal church government. Most KJV onlyist disagree with at least the second and probably the first as well. I do recognize that these are actually words that etymologically come from their Greek originals, and so they also demonstrate some blurriness between the referent and the definition of a word.
Finally, if the KJB is a special language, then every English-speaking Christian is expected to understand it. This contradicts 1 Cor 12:30 ("do all interpret [tongues]?").
@@matthewmencel5978 The Scripture has special meanings, and the Scripture in English has special meanings, and the words used in the KJB therefore have special meanings. The words in the KJB are Biblical English. Biblical English is a form of English which supersedes the time and span of English from 1611 to the future. The KJB is not an "Elizabethan" book, to demote it in that way is to fight providence and to treat the KJB as merely a natural phenomenon. And yes, we can understand the Scripture, it uses words we can understand, after all, the Scripture does include talking about things like Saul visiting a cave.
We are talking about understanding God's message here, not (as I know some would mistakenly assume I am saying) AVolatry.
@@maxxiong Going to the "Greek" etc. is where the confusion is. Hell is straightforward, a simple 4 letter English word that we actually understand, not the convolutions about some Jewish/Dante/mythical underworld.
It's so interesting to see the gaslighting on the KJB, as if words, and all kinds of words the whole way through, apparently have a different meaning today to what it is alleged to have meant in 1611. Thankfully, we don't measure or understand truth that way, we understand truth as being perennial and enduring: the same truth of today exists both past and future, we are not being led astray by what "is".
Also, believers do care about exactness of words, I do care about "baptize" and "bishop". When the Scripture said baptized into one body (Christ), we are able to understand it properly. Perhaps you are willing to argue that it just meant "sprinkled" into something: you should try to go "into" the sprinkle drops of his body. But no, the word of God is not limited by some people's doctrines. When we read "bishop" we really believe it means "bishop", a rank of a kind of overseer over pastors. So a "bishop" is not the same as an elder.
In English we are looking at right words, whether or not such words came from the Greek like "Christ" or "Baptize". Right words came from the Anglo-Saxon too, like "God", "Son", "Holy Ghost", etc.
And finally, yes, the KJB is a special language, and normal people can understand the Scripture. Of course, we are talking about Scripture, which has concepts which random average people do have to learn, and that requires a level of words people have to learn, but that is normal. It happens in every special interest group, science and in-group.
Also, you missed the Scripture where it shows anyone may interpret, and it was talking about tongues not Bible translations (see 1 Cor. 14:13).
Pointing out thats words have changed meaning in English over 400 years≠attacking the meaning of KJV words.
The whole construct of false friends is based on the assumption that the word of God is determined by a past world consciousness construct of language, as if definitions of language are some kind of eternal Platonic forms, that the definitions of the past is what is eternally preserved, as if some kind of an abstract metaphysical dictionary (or the OED) is more word of God than the word of God.
But if words are preserved, and definitions and meanings are separate from words, then definitions SHOULD change - meanings and definitions are not preserved. Definitions of the past are generated by sinful history and culture, and must be destroyed.
Modern definitions of the false friends arise from how the Bible used the words, and thus modern definitions are what God wants.
The word of God is quick and powerful-means it’s fast?
@markwardonwords why not? Life in scripture is associated with movement. Spirit is associated with movement (Gen. 1:2), and words are spirit. And words are fast, you're seeing these words while I'm far away. No real contradiction to the statement if it means fast.
The original autographs were written in Koine Greek, a now-dead language. This means the particular symbols God inspired quite literally have no meaning today.
So is God's Word meaningless? Certainly not. That necessarily means that what God intended to preserve was the underlying truths (definitions) of those symbols. May God bless you and I in the new year, friend
So when a false friend occurs in the Bible quoting someone's speech, what that person said changes over time? This does violence to inerrancy. And there is the contranym of "letteth" in 2 Thess 2:7.
And the obvious problem that you allow the meaning of God's words to change over time.
@@maxxiong Well said. When I read the original comment last night I thought of commenting about 2 Thessalonians 2:7 and how the current meaning of "let" is the complete opposite of the original meaning, but I didn't have the energy last night.
As much as I disagree with a lot of your content (particularly because of cultural differences in understanding a lot of the candidates you have proposed), I commend you for the integrity and sincerity behind your work. And you have only further encouraged me to pay more attention to verses I am doing a study on. Perhaps your work may start a revival for the masses to adopt the KJV again: a Barbara Streisand effect if you will. Imagine this effect causes the evolvement of contemporary English to go back to the roots of early modern English - I yearn for the adoption of singular and plural pronouns in use again!
Anyhow, God bless thee with thy future, brother.
Thank you for this! As long as people understand what they're reading, I don't object to a KJV revival! I truly don't!
Kind people who disagree with me and do so kindly-those are a rarity. Thank you for this.
Uh, I actually have 150 Reasons for the King James Bible being the perfect Word of God. It is a free PDF writeup I have been working on for a long time now. It will be available in a few months (Lord willing). Is this a coincidence? Did you get wind of my writeup name? Granted, it is fine that you create this title, it is just a little odd that you chose that number. I believe I have pointed out a few times about my writeup title on the internet. In either case, may God bless you (even if we disagree on this topic).
The KJV was the word of God as it was written. In fact, I'm unaware of any glaring errors made by the translators. However, it's not "perfect" - only God is perfect, and he only directly inspired the writings of the original documents that eventually came together in our Bibles, but we don't have any of those documents. Thus, inspiration is not enough - God also "preserved" his writings through the manuscript tradition. So God is perfect, he perfectly inspired, and now he continually perfectly preserves. There is not a single passage in Scripture that indicates that his preservation extends to translations of the inspired text. I'm very interested to see your paper. I hope it's not riddled with numerology.
@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 - Greetings in Jesus Christ, and thank you for your interest. My free PDF write-up, 150 Reasons for the KJV, is focused on providing a scholarly approach. It will not include a discussion on biblical numerics, as the majority of my arguments center on historical, textual, and linguistic evidence.
For those interested in biblical numerics, I may consider offering a separate edition that includes this topic as a small subsection. However, it will be promoted specifically to those who believe in biblical numerics, rather than the broader Christian community. My primary aim is to present a version suitable for the wider KJV community, many of whom may not share an interest in numerics. As such, the first edition is tailored for those seeking a scholarly examination of the KJV’s merits.
Biblical numerics is not a primary focus of mine; I view it more as an occasional apologetic tool for certain individuals. While I recognize its potential value for some, I do not live my life by numbers, nor do I engage in extensive studies on the subject.
I firmly believe that the Greek and Hebrew texts underlying the KJV are perfect. My approach involves examining the meaning of words in both the KJV’s English and the original languages, confirming their meanings through context, cross-references, and relevant literature, including writings from early church fathers. Additionally, I delve into manuscript witnesses, history, and the Bible itself to build a comprehensive case for the KJV.
@@biblehighlighter
"I firmly believe that the Greek and Hebrew texts underlying the KJV are perfect."
Which texts are these, exactly? Do we still have them today?
Which KJV? The 1611? One of the hundreds of revisions prior to 1769? The 1769 Cambridge edition? The 1769 Oxford edition? Pick one, because they all differ, and only one can be "perfect".
@@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 - I believe the Hebrew can be found in the Masoretic Ben Chayyim text. For the Greek, it is primarily based on Theodore Beza's fifth edition Greek New Testament (1598), covering 99.9%. The differences between the choices of the KJV translators and Beza’s text amount to approximately 20 translatable variations, which are documented in Scrivener’s Greek text underlying the KJV.
I'll stick with the KJV. Thanks...
False friend 151 Mark Ward !!!!!!!
Why does ward not go to the Greek of the KJV to explain his reasoning? On these apparent false friends?
Because the Greek is different in many of these words in the TR compared to the Greek used for the modern versions.
So Ward has to just try explain away the meaning as being false when actually the Greek is different!!!!!!!
Not true. The overwhelming majority of these examples, if not all, strictly have to do with English. In the majority if not all of the verse examples, do not have textual variants between Greek texts.
@HebrewGreekKnowledge overwhelming 🤨
So all???????
@@Morphwales go ahead and give me one example Mark brought up since your so sure.
@ Mathew 16:3
@@Morphwales which specific word in Matthew 16: 3 are you claiming he is redefining with a "different Greek" text?
Mark Antidisestablishmentarianism Ward.
Why art thou so disingenuous toward thine Christian brother who hath held the King James Bible in such high esteem 😢
Thou thinkest one art doing a good deed and thinkest thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light to thine King James onlyist but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself unfaithfulness toward God due to firstly dishonouring his word and secondly neglecting the faithfulness of almighty God’s true word.
Thou hast not brought forth a good fruit; but a corrupt fruit because if thou wast faithful thou would hath constructed thine own texts with one’s own revision and present that.
But we know thine motive in your quest of thine secret rejection and hate for our textual lineage!
May almighty God forgive thee for this dishonesty 🙏🏽
Please Mark stay honest to your word and stop this dishonesty and leave us who hold to the KJV alone!
Thank you God for answering our prayers 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
What did he say that was dishonest? Maybe he is being honest!
@@benrandalemoqlnkn9839 well for starters that he stays away from the KJV as he has said this is his finale act, because we who follow the TR/KJV lineage know that if you do not look 100% from our position with all the facts then you will come to the conclusion that those against it are right!
Most people who come to our position started in opposition to it but by thoroughly studying the facts and come to realise the deception and lies that has led to the opposition! But of course as an unbeliever once thought so do those from opposition to the TR lineage position that’s how they think and are duped by the lies
There's been zero dishonesty. Cease your slander.