@@kjhgfdsd76654 There were reports that an update was in the works for quite some time now. At one point I heard summer 2024, but I think there have been more delays...🤷🏼♂️
One thing I liked was the I found with section headings in historic passages like 1 Kgs. 1:26 citation to 1 Ch.29:21-25. A nice touch I believe. It also does this in the gospels. I have a personal size large print , Cherry Brown, it was on a table for sale and it caught my eye, it has been my primary reader for the last three weeks. I know this will make my rotation of teaching and preaching preparation.
@A Frisch Perspective I'm not sure if you've heard, but the publisher after many delays finally released their long promised update to the MEV within the last few weeks. Sadly, it is currently limited to the YouVersion Bible app (and maybe a couple other places that I may not know about), and I'm not in the MEV facebook group to know if or when they are putting out more physical copies (many editions have been out of stock, out of print for a while now).
@@anatoliystrizheus I found the charisma house hase a thinline version. So when I get paid Friday I'm ordering one in case they just completely stop printing it.
@@anatoliystrizheus hopefully so, I'm really getting more into liking the TR translations and seeing how they pull more from the LXX and it's significance.
One of the best things about the NKJV is the notes, where they inform the reader about new manuscripts that differ in slight ways. MEV not having that seems to be a small negative when compared to NKJV, which seems to be the closest translation to the MEV.
Thank you for your post, Tim. I haven't really considered reading the MEV before watching this video. That said, as someone who grew up with the KJV and is comfortable with the Textus Receptus this appears to be translation I could relate to.
I used the MEV for multiple months several years back (2016 I think?). I enjoyed it a lot but felt it didn't really do anything better than the NKJV (in fact I felt it read a but sloppy than the NKJV in a lot of passages). I went back to the NKJV as my daily reader simply because there's not a lot of options regarding the MEV in comparison to the NKJV. I appreciate it for what it is and wouldn't have any issue using it as my daily reader but the NKJV does the same thing (and in my opinion does it better) and it's way easier to find a copy of the NKJV you like (verse-by-verse, single column, study bibles, paragraph, and so on are all available in the NKJV).
I have an MEV among my Bibles, and I really like it. Thank you for giving it a review--I got it by chance, and hadn't seen anything about the translation before or since.
Love the MEV, I just wish Passio supported it better. It really needs an update to fix the typos, etc. I went back to the NKJV as my primary translation. Thanks for the video, the MEV needs the exposure
My issue with the MEV is that it never satisfactorily answers the most important question: "What does it have to offer that someone can't already get from the NKJV?" That's where Charisma House has fallen short: it's the publisher's responsibility to answer that question coherently. Crossway managed to address a similar question with their marketing ("What does the ESV have to offer that someone can't already get from the NASB Updated Edition?") by demonstrating that their translation preserved the superior literary merit of the RSV even as it moved toward the NASB's conservatism. So it's possible to pull off if you have a good angle. It doesn't help that the MEV is so similar in style and philosophy to the NKJV. If it were just a tiny bit less literal (closer to the HCSB, perhaps), it could position itself as a suitable companion to Thomas Nelson's bestseller . . . or as a more useful supplement to the KJV. While it's a tad more modern than the NKJV, the difference isn't big enough to reach people who struggle with the NKJV.
Greetings, just curious what is meant by a “more conservative translation”? Seems to me that all literal / word-for-word translations that truly adhere to the original texts will be conservative. Paraphrase … we’ll that’s another story.
@@sheldon3996 The RSV is a word-for-word translation. It just happened to be a controversial one. Isaiah 7.14 RSV: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah 7.14 ESV: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah 7.14 NKJV: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. As you can see, the wording is almost identical between these three translations. The main difference is that the RSV is translating the Hebrew word "almah" as it would be understood in most contexts (as the female equivalent of the word for "young man"), while the ESV and NKJV are translating it based on how the Greek Septuagint translated it (and, by extension, how Matthew translated it in his New Testament Gospel). As a result, the RSV is not considered conservative, though it is just as word-for-word as the ESV and NKJV right here.
The most important question to ask, is are there any words missing that affect doctrines? ALL of the modern English translations have thousands of words gone that affect 356 doctrinal passages! Some have words drastically changed.
The funny think I noticed is in Ex 5:17 Pharaoh says: "You are slackers! Slackers!" Slacker is a pretty modern word, but I don't see any more culturally modern words in the MEV IMHO
Modern renderings can be great though: I have a translation called "THE UNVARNISHED" that renders "Our Father Who Art In Heaven" as "Our Father in the skies" I don't think that is an accurate translation, but it is poetic. But the word "Slackers" has too much cultural baggage today. @@AFrischPerspective
Thank you bro. Tim can you reach out to them for an interview. That we may be able to hear them tell us about their plans. B-cause not fair we’ve been waiting long time. I now looking to the Majority texts from Bible hub 😅
@A Frisch Perspective we need to do another show on the various types of Bibles. You can bring some of your other Tims @A Nickels Worth Bible Reviews too.
Thank you for this, there are some places I disagree with it, but after reading through it for 2 hrs and using it earlier today on my facebook live, I'm starting to really like it, and to be honest it seems like more of an update to the Geneva more than the KJV
Tim, how similar is the MEV to the NKJV? I haven't read the MEV much, but it doesn't seem too different from the NKJV. If that is true, I wonder if there is truly a good market for the MEV... What are your thoughts?
Any comments on the MEV "Light goes out"? PSALM 97:11 MEV Light goes out for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. KJV & NKJV Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart.
Me too! A bit awkward at first reading. But, the MEV is favored by the US military, and it IS TR-based. I am a TR person, thus seeing the US military as a huge influence for the TR in this case.🙏📖@@AFrischPerspective
I have an MEV when it first came out. Only now starting to go through it, as mine came on April 18, 2019 (Just before everything came to a halt, half disaster, half messed up life!!!). But it seems to be very promising to read it casually and understand, and the Authorized KJV is for deeper study, for me. I will never give up on the KJV when God fearing scholars translated the Bible, and not half-baked "probably no God" learned men were just trying to catch a paycheck. Okay, that is too harsh, but it is the way I feel about it. Wish the Deuterocanicals could be returned into the KJV.
1st John 5:7-8 doesn't appear in the Gideon ESV, either. My reading on this indicates that Erasmus himself didn't want it to be included but was pressured into doing so.
Though some try to say that there is not enough manuscript support for 1 John 5:7-8? Then they want to give “carte Blanche” to the minuscule 3 manuscripts of Alexandrian/critical text: Codex Alexandrius, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, when they are spurious at best in their origins? Ignoring the more than 5000 plus of the TR/Majoriy Text/Byzantine type text? This is not at all a red flag 🚩 🤨😵💫🙃? Besides the regular manuscripts with 1 John 5:6-8, we have early Church leaders quotes: ie Poly Carp-John’s disciple, and Cyprian(200-248 died a martyr). Then we have ancient Bibles: Greek Orthodox Bible mid-2nd century AD(for English only use the KJV), and the Old Latin 90-130 AD: started by the Apostle John, with Poly Carp, and Papias his disciples. Completed by Poly Carp, Papias, and their disciples Irenaeus, Tertullian, Justin Martyr. These two Bibles technically are the oldest manuscripts we have, both have 1 John 5:7-8, and match the KJV.
Is it true that Bible translations have to be 20% different to get a copyright? The reason I am asking is because that would mean some of the wording is changed just to get to the 20% and that would explain why some verses are worded different when they don’t need to be.
Even if that is the case, the only way that it would be a concern is if two translations were revising the same earlier translation. The NIV and CEB don't sound different because one was trying to avoid infringing the copyright of the other, but because one translator's work will inevitably sound quite different from another's, especially if they are not striving to be excessively literal. For comparison, look at these very different translations of the opening lines of Homer's Iliad. They are naturally distinct enough to avoid copyright infringement: "The wrath sing, goddess, of Peleus' son, Achilles, that destructive wrath which brought countless woes upon the Achaeans, and sent forth to Hades many valiant souls of heroes, and made them themselves spoil for dogs and every bird; thus the plan of Zeus came to fulfillment, from the time when1 first they parted in strife Atreus' son, king of men, and brilliant Achilles" (A.T. Murray). "Goddess, sing me the anger, of Achilles, Peleus’ son, that fatal anger that brought countless sorrows on the Greeks, and sent many valiant souls of warriors down to Hades, leaving their bodies as spoil for dogs and carrion birds: for thus was the will of Zeus brought to fulfilment. Sing of it from the moment when Agamemnon, Atreus’ son, that king of men, parted in wrath from noble Achilles" (A.S. Kline). "Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans. Many a brave soul did it send hurrying down to Hades, and many a hero did it yield a prey to dogs and vultures, for so was the will of Zeus fulfilled from the day on which the son of Atreus, king of men, and great Achilles, first fell out with one another" (Samuel Butler). "Achilles sing, O Goddess! Peleus’ son; His wrath pernicious, who ten thousand woes Caused to Achaia’s host, sent many a soul Illustrious into Ades premature, And Heroes gave (so stood the will of Jove) To dogs and to all ravening fowls a prey, When fierce dispute had separated once The noble Chief Achilles from the son Of Atreus, Agamemnon, King of men" (William Cowper).
For example Luke 24:25, the CSB says “slow to believe” and then gives a footnote that says “Lit slow of heart”. Why change it? Slow of heart is good English for today, everyone understands it, and it is what most think that is what the Bible says there, so why change it? The NKJ says “slow of heart to believe” and that would have fit perfectly in the CSB. I can think of only one reason to change it, you needed too. There are numerous examples in the Psalms that the wording is changed and a footnote given, saying “Lit” or “Or”, so again why change it?
And in some cases it does change the meaning of the verse, in particular in Psalms and Proverbs. I know we are supposed to be thankful for the “embarrassment of riches we have” in all the newly found texts, but it really bothers me and causes me many sleepless nights. I don’t like using the KJV for obvious reasons, especially since I deal with teenagers and college age a lot, but all the new translations cause just as many problems as the KJV does because they want to know why does this one say this and that one says that. I try to explain to them about text and textual criticism and such, and in my opinion it only causes problems and in some cases it has caused doubts. That is why I am asking.
@@61ranger188 Do people understand "slow of heart," though? We typically use the word "heart" to refer to our emotions, but the Biblical authors instead used it in reference to the rational will (closer to our figurative use of "brain").
I have no idea what that means. Perhaps you could clarify why you stay away from the ESV and provide examples of what you're referring to. Thanks.@@KevC1111
Wow we have such a rich group of solid translations that it seems picky and childish to pick at issues or renderings that DOES NOT CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD its pathetic we Americans have become so spoiled little children fighting over who gets to sit next to the teacher.
Thanks for your presentation of MEV version of the Bible. I have a copy and I enjoy the way it is so easy to read and understand.
I'm looking forward to seeing the update coming out next year. I really enjoy this translation.
How do you know an update is coming?
@@kjhgfdsd76654 There were reports that an update was in the works for quite some time now. At one point I heard summer 2024, but I think there have been more delays...🤷🏼♂️
One thing I liked was the I found with section headings in historic passages like 1 Kgs. 1:26 citation to 1 Ch.29:21-25. A nice touch I believe. It also does this in the gospels. I have a personal size large print , Cherry Brown, it was on a table for sale and it caught my eye, it has been my primary reader for the last three weeks. I know this will make my rotation of teaching and preaching preparation.
@A Frisch Perspective
I'm not sure if you've heard, but the publisher after many delays finally released their long promised update to the MEV within the last few weeks. Sadly, it is currently limited to the YouVersion Bible app (and maybe a couple other places that I may not know about), and I'm not in the MEV facebook group to know if or when they are putting out more physical copies (many editions have been out of stock, out of print for a while now).
Thanks for the update!
This is kind of anti-climactic and disappointing. It almost seems like the folks at MEV are trying to keep the newly completed revision a secret. 🤔
Great video, I love the MEV and I really hope with the new edition coming out next year it gains traction and takes off!
The MEV is a great update of the KJV. For those who prefer the TR, it's a worthy addition to the family.
I'm just having a hard time finding one that isn't just the basic paperback or the Fire Bible variant. I already have that study Bible in the ESV
@@weast6388 that's their biggest downside. I wish they Zondervan or TN owned it.
@@anatoliystrizheus I found the charisma house hase a thinline version. So when I get paid Friday I'm ordering one in case they just completely stop printing it.
@@weast6388 they're promising to release more later this year. But we'll see 🤷♂️
@@anatoliystrizheus hopefully so, I'm really getting more into liking the TR translations and seeing how they pull more from the LXX and it's significance.
I’ve been looking forward to this video.
I do hope that the update is released soon. I first heard about the update back in 2019 and have been eagerly waiting ever since.
Thank you for this overview. I love to look at different translations
One of the best things about the NKJV is the notes, where they inform the reader about new manuscripts that differ in slight ways. MEV not having that seems to be a small negative when compared to NKJV, which seems to be the closest translation to the MEV.
I enjoyed the paper and the print darkness. I used to read this a few years ago. It’s been a quiet translation I do enjoy it
Hi Tim I'm not a King James person, but I really enjoyed this video thank you very much. God Bless
Thank you for your post, Tim. I haven't really considered reading the MEV before watching this video. That said, as someone who grew up with the KJV and is comfortable with the Textus Receptus this appears to be translation I could relate to.
I used the MEV for multiple months several years back (2016 I think?). I enjoyed it a lot but felt it didn't really do anything better than the NKJV (in fact I felt it read a but sloppy than the NKJV in a lot of passages). I went back to the NKJV as my daily reader simply because there's not a lot of options regarding the MEV in comparison to the NKJV.
I appreciate it for what it is and wouldn't have any issue using it as my daily reader but the NKJV does the same thing (and in my opinion does it better) and it's way easier to find a copy of the NKJV you like (verse-by-verse, single column, study bibles, paragraph, and so on are all available in the NKJV).
I really like my MEV. It's a worthy translation and worth including in anyone's collection.
I have an MEV among my Bibles, and I really like it. Thank you for giving it a review--I got it by chance, and hadn't seen anything about the translation before or since.
I’ve read the MEV.
To me, it’s a bible for those who are not KJVO but also really want to read the KJV & actually understand what they’re reading.
Love the MEV, I just wish Passio supported it better. It really needs an update to fix the typos, etc.
I went back to the NKJV as my primary translation. Thanks for the video, the MEV needs the exposure
I've heard there are typos but can't find much info about what flaws are present.
Thank you, Brother Tim 🌹⭐🌹
My issue with the MEV is that it never satisfactorily answers the most important question: "What does it have to offer that someone can't already get from the NKJV?" That's where Charisma House has fallen short: it's the publisher's responsibility to answer that question coherently.
Crossway managed to address a similar question with their marketing ("What does the ESV have to offer that someone can't already get from the NASB Updated Edition?") by demonstrating that their translation preserved the superior literary merit of the RSV even as it moved toward the NASB's conservatism. So it's possible to pull off if you have a good angle.
It doesn't help that the MEV is so similar in style and philosophy to the NKJV. If it were just a tiny bit less literal (closer to the HCSB, perhaps), it could position itself as a suitable companion to Thomas Nelson's bestseller . . . or as a more useful supplement to the KJV. While it's a tad more modern than the NKJV, the difference isn't big enough to reach people who struggle with the NKJV.
Greetings, just curious what is meant by a “more conservative translation”? Seems to me that all literal / word-for-word translations that truly adhere to the original texts will be conservative. Paraphrase … we’ll that’s another story.
@@sheldon3996 Conservative = traditional Christian interpretations of the Hebrew Bible. See Isaiah 7.14, for instance.
@@MAMoreno I guess I’ve never used a Bible other than a word-for-word translation, what a difference. Thanks for enlightening me!
@@sheldon3996 The RSV is a word-for-word translation. It just happened to be a controversial one.
Isaiah 7.14 RSV: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7.14 ESV: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7.14 NKJV: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
As you can see, the wording is almost identical between these three translations. The main difference is that the RSV is translating the Hebrew word "almah" as it would be understood in most contexts (as the female equivalent of the word for "young man"), while the ESV and NKJV are translating it based on how the Greek Septuagint translated it (and, by extension, how Matthew translated it in his New Testament Gospel). As a result, the RSV is not considered conservative, though it is just as word-for-word as the ESV and NKJV right here.
I remember being obsessed with this translation when i was tr only, it was about 6 years ago, and i think that’s the core audience
The most important question to ask, is are there any words missing that affect doctrines? ALL of the modern English translations have thousands of words gone that affect 356 doctrinal passages! Some have words drastically changed.
The funny think I noticed is in Ex 5:17 Pharaoh says: "You are slackers! Slackers!"
Slacker is a pretty modern word, but I don't see any more culturally modern words in the MEV
IMHO
Yes, that sounds funny to my ear too.
Modern renderings can be great though: I have a translation called "THE UNVARNISHED" that renders "Our Father Who Art In Heaven" as "Our Father in the skies" I don't think that is an accurate translation, but it is poetic. But the word "Slackers" has too much cultural baggage today. @@AFrischPerspective
Thank you bro. Tim can you reach out to them for an interview. That we may be able to hear them tell us about their plans. B-cause not fair we’ve been waiting long time. I now looking to the Majority texts from Bible hub 😅
@A Frisch Perspective we need to do another show on the various types of Bibles. You can bring some of your other Tims @A Nickels Worth Bible Reviews too.
For sure. Good idea!
Is this compromise for Nickels & Wildsmith in the big debate on updating the NKJV?
Thank you for this, there are some places I disagree with it, but after reading through it for 2 hrs and using it earlier today on my facebook live, I'm starting to really like it, and to be honest it seems like more of an update to the Geneva more than the KJV
I think you mentioned in a previous critique of the MEV that there is an updated version coming out this spring…is this accurate?
Why use this version when we have the great NKJV?
Tim, how similar is the MEV to the NKJV? I haven't read the MEV much, but it doesn't seem too different from the NKJV. If that is true, I wonder if there is truly a good market for the MEV... What are your thoughts?
Any comments on the MEV "Light goes out"? PSALM 97:11 MEV Light goes out for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. KJV & NKJV Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart.
I think "goes out" is a way of saying "shines forth" though admittedly very easily misunderstood wording there
Me too! A bit awkward at first reading. But, the MEV is favored by the US military, and it IS TR-based. I am a TR person, thus seeing the US military as a huge influence for the TR in this case.🙏📖@@AFrischPerspective
We use the KJV in church, but at home I have used the MEV since it was first published. I think it retains the beauty of the KJV.
I have an MEV when it first came out. Only now starting to go through it, as mine came on April 18, 2019 (Just before everything came to a halt, half disaster, half messed up life!!!). But it seems to be very promising to read it casually and understand, and the Authorized KJV is for deeper study, for me. I will never give up on the KJV when God fearing scholars translated the Bible, and not half-baked "probably no God" learned men were just trying to catch a paycheck. Okay, that is too harsh, but it is the way I feel about it. Wish the Deuterocanicals could be returned into the KJV.
1st John 5:7-8 doesn't appear in the Gideon ESV, either. My reading on this indicates that Erasmus himself didn't want it to be included but was pressured into doing so.
First 2 editions of Erasmus lack it, 3rd and onward include it; take that as you may.
Though some try to say that there is not enough manuscript support for 1 John 5:7-8? Then they want to give “carte Blanche” to the minuscule 3 manuscripts of Alexandrian/critical text: Codex Alexandrius, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, when they are spurious at best in their origins? Ignoring the more than 5000 plus of the TR/Majoriy Text/Byzantine type text? This is not at all a red flag 🚩 🤨😵💫🙃? Besides the regular manuscripts with 1 John 5:6-8, we have early Church leaders quotes: ie Poly Carp-John’s disciple, and Cyprian(200-248 died a martyr). Then we have ancient Bibles: Greek Orthodox Bible mid-2nd century AD(for English only use the KJV), and the Old Latin 90-130 AD: started by the Apostle John, with Poly Carp, and Papias his disciples. Completed by Poly Carp, Papias, and their disciples Irenaeus, Tertullian, Justin Martyr. These two Bibles technically are the oldest manuscripts we have, both have 1 John 5:7-8, and match the KJV.
Is it true that Bible translations have to be 20% different to get a copyright? The reason I am asking is because that would mean some of the wording is changed just to get to the 20% and that would explain why some verses are worded different when they don’t need to be.
Even if that is the case, the only way that it would be a concern is if two translations were revising the same earlier translation. The NIV and CEB don't sound different because one was trying to avoid infringing the copyright of the other, but because one translator's work will inevitably sound quite different from another's, especially if they are not striving to be excessively literal.
For comparison, look at these very different translations of the opening lines of Homer's Iliad. They are naturally distinct enough to avoid copyright infringement:
"The wrath sing, goddess, of Peleus' son, Achilles, that destructive wrath which brought countless woes upon the Achaeans, and sent forth to Hades many valiant souls of heroes, and made them themselves spoil for dogs and every bird; thus the plan of Zeus came to fulfillment, from the time when1 first they parted in strife Atreus' son, king of men, and brilliant Achilles" (A.T. Murray).
"Goddess, sing me the anger, of Achilles, Peleus’ son, that fatal anger that brought countless sorrows on the Greeks, and sent many valiant souls of warriors down to Hades, leaving their bodies as spoil for dogs and carrion birds: for thus was the will of Zeus brought to fulfilment. Sing of it from the moment when Agamemnon, Atreus’ son, that king of men, parted in wrath from noble Achilles" (A.S. Kline).
"Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans. Many a brave soul did it send hurrying down to Hades, and many a hero did it yield a prey to dogs and vultures, for so was the will of Zeus fulfilled from the day on which the son of Atreus, king of men, and great Achilles, first fell out with one another" (Samuel Butler).
"Achilles sing, O Goddess! Peleus’ son;
His wrath pernicious, who ten thousand woes
Caused to Achaia’s host, sent many a soul
Illustrious into Ades premature,
And Heroes gave (so stood the will of Jove)
To dogs and to all ravening fowls a prey,
When fierce dispute had separated once
The noble Chief Achilles from the son
Of Atreus, Agamemnon, King of men" (William Cowper).
For example Luke 24:25, the CSB says “slow to believe” and then gives a footnote that says “Lit slow of heart”. Why change it? Slow of heart is good English for today, everyone understands it, and it is what most think that is what the Bible says there, so why change it? The NKJ says “slow of heart to believe” and that would have fit perfectly in the CSB. I can think of only one reason to change it, you needed too. There are numerous examples in the Psalms that the wording is changed and a footnote given, saying “Lit” or “Or”, so again why change it?
And in some cases it does change the meaning of the verse, in particular in Psalms and Proverbs. I know we are supposed to be thankful for the “embarrassment of riches we have” in all the newly found texts, but it really bothers me and causes me many sleepless nights. I don’t like using the KJV for obvious reasons, especially since I deal with teenagers and college age a lot, but all the new translations cause just as many problems as the KJV does because they want to know why does this one say this and that one says that. I try to explain to them about text and textual criticism and such, and in my opinion it only causes problems and in some cases it has caused doubts. That is why I am asking.
@@61ranger188 Do people understand "slow of heart," though? We typically use the word "heart" to refer to our emotions, but the Biblical authors instead used it in reference to the rational will (closer to our figurative use of "brain").
Forsooth, any fool who dares to court the favour of the Jacobean onlyists deserves their just deserts.
2 things. 1. Nick Sayers heavily criticised it.
2. Copyrighted
Just read the Esv folks 😉 😂
I stay away from the elect standard version.
@@KevC1111 😂
I've read the ESV, it is not one of my favorites.
I have no idea what that means. Perhaps you could clarify why you stay away from the ESV and provide examples of what you're referring to. Thanks.@@KevC1111
@@KevC1111just because you read it, doesn't make you a calvinist. I despise Calvinism and can't find it in there.
Wow we have such a rich group of solid translations that it seems picky and childish to pick at issues or renderings that DOES NOT CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD its pathetic we Americans have become so spoiled little children fighting over who gets to sit next to the teacher.
Just another fake KJV.
Forsooth, it doth not feign to be aught but what it is. King James hath naught to do with it.