0:00 Introduction 0:28 Introducing Mark Ward 2:35 How Concerning are Bad Translations? 4:01 How Can a Translation Go Bad? 6:07 How did You Pick These Top 7? 7:31 (1). The NWT 12:19 (2). Muslim Translations 18:33 (3). The TPT 24:45 (4). The NRSVUE 30:51 (5). The TLV 37:57 (6). The MSG 41:31 The Controversial NRSVUE Verse 45:32 (7). The "KJV" 50:16 Principles of Key Translations 56:04 What About Gender Neutrality? 58:40 What Bible Translation Should I Use? 59:14 Tell Us About Yourself 59:53 Conclusion
You can’t be serious. Why would you read a book that denies the deity of Jesus? Unless of course you’re a JW believing in a completely different Jesus that can’t save!!!
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
@@HarryNicNicholas Dude, God wants to give everyone a chance to follow Jesus Christ or anti christ. man/mammon king or God King. The dude sporting a fish hat sasshaying around in long flowing robes saying I man king forgive you saying long repetitious chants to another god and remain carnal. Or our heavenly father.
@@HarryNicNicholas Actually God gives all rights. As in choice of good or evil. It is called free will. If no choice he could have just built robots. The greatest punishment for disobedience to God is natural consequences.
I’m Greek living in an English speaking country. I was raised in a home where my parents spoke Greek as their first language. I have an app where I can easily look up the Greek words as I love to see what Greek word was used for the English translation. What struck me the most was how every day language the Greek words of the original are. Whereas in the kjv for example, the words are so formal and almost create this disconnect with God. The original Greek was not formal language but the every day language they used at that time. This made me realise that God really wants to relate to us in our every day language, not a language we can’t understand.
I agree, however when the KJV was written, they actually spoke like that! So it would have been just normal English at that time. But to us today, because of how much the language has changed, it does create that disconnect. I’ve never read the KJV because I can barely understand it haha.
Interesting. As you are Greek, could I ask you something that has been on my mind for a while now ? Is the Greek word use in English translation of Genesis 3:8 KJV : "And they heard the *voice of the LORD God* walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD" is also the *Word* in Greek ? If this is so, that means Jesus was walking in the garden of Eden with Adam and Eve as we all know the "Word" in John 1: 1 is Jesus Christ Himself. I would appreciate it very much if you could confirm this. Thank you very much.😊
@@jessicalamb8312 hi there, so as the Old Testament is written in Hebrew and the New Testament is in Greek I tend to stick with the NT when interpreting. So were you wondering if Jesus was the one walking with Adam and Eve in the garden in cool of the day? I’ve never really pondered that question. Jesus was with God at creation and it says that the worlds were made through Him. Jesus was concealed or hidden throughout the Old Testament but revealed in the New Testament. We could say that through all of the old covenant, there are many types and shadows of Christ. So God may be revealing to you a type and shadow of Christ in this particular verse you are quoting.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 📜 *The video discusses bad Bible translations and how to find a good one, featuring Dr. Mark Ward as a guest.* 03:37 🛑 *Concerns about bad Bible translations are raised, focusing on defending vernacular careful translation over time.* 06:00 🌐 *The discussion delves into ways translations can go bad, categorizing them into sectarian Bibles and crackpot Bibles.* 07:36 📘 *The top seven bad translations are introduced, starting with the New World Translation by Jehovah's Witnesses.* 18:38 📖 *The Passion Translation is highlighted as a bad translation, with concerns about unclear methodology, Aramaic usage, and questionable linguistic concepts.* 22:03 📜 *Some Bible translations, like the Passion Translation, can be criticized for making questionable connections and interpretations, leading to potentially misleading ideas.* 23:53 📚 *Before reading the Passion Translation, it is recommended to have a solid foundation in standard translations like ESV, NIV, Christian Standard Bible, and New King James Version.* 25:16 🤔 *The New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition has a potential issue in First Corinthians 6:9, where the translation may over-specify and over-generalize, possibly influenced by certain cultural pressures.* 26:09 💬 *There is a concern about the NRSV Updated Edition's translation of certain terms in First Corinthians 6:9, potentially obscuring the intended meaning about homosexuality.* 31:01 📖 *The Tree of Life Version, associated with Messianic Judaism, is criticized for its fixation on Jewish traditions, such as substituting "Adonai" for "Yahweh" and using Hebrew transliterations excessively.* 34:43 🌐 *The Tree of Life Version's inclusion of Hebrew transliterations in an English translation is seen as a superstitious practice, deviating from the historical Christian perspective that God can speak in any language.* 38:25 🤷♂️ *The Message, while valuable for its fresh perspective and potential as a study aid, can be problematic when misused as a preaching Bible due to its paraphrased nature.* 41:43 📖 *Concerns are raised about Eugene Peterson's clarity on the historic Christian view of marriage, as seen in his translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 in The Message.* 43:20 📖 *Mark Ward discusses the use of paraphrases like Peterson's "The Message" and acknowledges potential concerns but emphasizes their value when treated as paraphrases rather than authoritative translations.* 45:55 📚 *Mark Ward criticizes the misuse of the King James Version, stating that while it was an excellent translation in its time, its use without considering changes in language over time is problematic. He advocates for a thoughtful evaluation of language and vernacular translation.* 50:31 🌐 *Mark Ward explains the spectrum of translation approaches, from formal (like NASB) to dynamic (like NIV), highlighting the value in using both for a richer understanding of the biblical text.* 53:33 🤔 *Ward acknowledges that every translation has some downsides or potential areas of concern. He exemplifies this with a small issue he found in the NIV related to the interpretation of "spiritual body" in 1 Corinthians 15.* 56:17 ⚖️ *Mark Ward, a complementarian, defends the use of "gender-neutral" translations like the NIV, urging consideration of scholarly perspectives, such as those of D.A. Carson and Doug Moo, to understand the linguistic rationale behind such translations.* 58:53 📚 *In response to the common question about Bible translation recommendations, Mark Ward suggests using all the good, modern, evangelical English translations, promoting the idea that having multiple translations is an asset for understanding the Bible better.* 59:20 🎥 *Mark Ward promotes his RUclips channel, "Mark Ward on Words," where he discusses topics related to Bible translation, King James Onlyism, and aims for a gracious appeal to those who hold different views, with a broader goal of helping the church.* Made with HARPA AI
"Bad Translations" 1. NWT (New World Translation) @7:33 2. Arabic Translations @12:21 3. TPT (The Passion Translation) @ 18:42 4. NRSVue (New Revised Standard Version Update) @24:47 5. TLV (Tree of Life Version) @30:55 6. TMT (The Message Translation) @38:01 7. KJV (King James Version) @45:45 Good Translations @50:48 NASB (Literal / Formal), NIV (Functional) What bible translation should you use? @59:02
At 23:55 he actually lists the KJV as a good version. So, I don't think he is saying it is a bad trabslation per se. As for my opinion, I think it was a good translation into English, but modern English is quite different these days. So I like the NKJV also. I haven't gotten to what hw said about the KJV yet.
I am a NASB guy and am still using the 71 version by lockman. My grandfather was a Christian publisher so I got that full version as early as was possible. My next choice is the ESV. I still use the KJV regularly because it is still a really great translation. Like many I go to Blue Letter Bible and look at many versions.
you say it's the worst but give no evidence of it. After over 50 years of bible study with several theological degrees and having used most of the english versions out there I would disagree with you@@tabularasa0606
I agree. In fact, living on the other side of the Atlantic, I use the Second Edition (1971/72) of the RSV, which is almost identical to the NASB and also the ESV. These are the translations formally approved by my Church - fortunately they are also my own personal choice. I like the KJV, of course, just as I like Shakespeare. The KJV remains a good and accurate translation, but the English language has changed over the last five hundred years. For example “prevent us, Lord, in all our doings”. Five hundred years ago, this meant “Go before us, Lord and clear the way for us in all that we do.” Now, it means, “Stop us, Lord, from doing what we are doing.” The old English means the opposite of the modern English. So, the Word of God has not changed. The English language has changed.
language sure has changed which is why the KJV has been continuously updated re: language . I notice a lot of tv preachers use the NKJV and if I am home on the puter I go to blue letter bible and check out multiple translations. I have a copy of Barcleys NT translation and of course the NAS but that is all I own anymore. Everything else has been "borrowed"out and never returned@@Mark3ABE
As an Arabic speaker and former translator, my favorite Arabic Bible by far is the Van Dyck Version. It's absolutely beautiful, albeit challenging in the same way that the KJV and Geneva Bible are for English speakers. It's definitely not catered to Muslims either; it uses many terms and names that are unique to Christianity and/or borrowed from Aramaic. My copy has a glossary of difficult words in the back. I love it.
Understand however that even towards english translations, there are words that can not be translated. The same goes with translations done to english from Arabic, concerning the Qu'ran or the Hadiths as I'm sure you'll know. The original languages the Bible has been translated from are Hebrew, Aramaic, and (Koine) Greek. Needless to say, Koine Greek is not exactly the same as modern Greek. As a translator, you might appreciate the 2019 NET Full Notes Bible.
@@Rain-DirtFor sure. KJV is easy IMO. I grew up with it. I am studying Hebrew and I didn't realize ancient Hebrew is fairly different. Lol 🤣 I hope to learn ancient eventually and maybe even some Aramaic. My husband studies Greek and had the same realization. So we both use the modern languages for a base with some of the other dialects thrown in, hoping to have a better hold on both of we live that long/keep our sense! 😅 In our late 30s and told it's hard to learn language at this age. I think it's hog wash to stop people from learning later in life when wise and looking to learn for greater meaning beyond some public school staff directing them TO a language. But that's my tin foil hat! 😂 It's interesting how we can't make the same noises as people born into Hebrew speaking families can. But I try! I think speaking some Spanish, French, and a sprinkling of ASL and Gaelic have helped me. It's fun to try to translate words into all languages to keep it maintained. And of course to use it in everyday language and Google keyboard in that language. But it's wild how the keyboard and even lessons in Duolingo don't have the vowel markings so that gets confusing.
I became a Christian at a multi-denominational Bible study group. We'd take it in turns to read a few verses, and we all had different Bible versions. If anyone had something interestingly- different, we'd stop and talk about it.
Another kind to look out for is the "spoken word ministry." They don't want their congregation to read the Bible. They want them to just take the pastor's word.
@@jimjuri6490 Hello Jimjuri, if you were replying to that comment about leaders not wanting their congregations to understand: If I was a leader, I'd want my flock to get good teaching, not bad, and the accessibility of rotten teaching, today, would make me want to shield them from it- maybe censoring and controlling. But I don't think that ultimately would be helpful. Surely, the goal is to help each person grow into the maturity of faith and wisdom and relationship with the Lord, to be able to face the onslaught of the world, and be ready when storms, temptations or confusing teachings come, so that they can distinguish between the things of God, and the things that are not? I'd want my flock to be like the Bereans and search and learn scripture so that, with the Holy Spirit and the church family alongside, them, they can think for themselves.
@@tommarshall7247 : Here is what God said about priests. (Not those who had God's authority for Temple Service as provided in the Law Covenant). To self appointed priests and leaders. Micah 3:11 Her leaders judge for a bribe, Her priests instruct for a price, And her prophets practice divination for money. And yet they lean on Jehovah, saying: “Is not Jehovah with us? No calamity will come upon us.” Jesus has only one group of DISCIPLES. To them he said, Matthew 13:11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them (ie. The Priests and Rabbis) it is not granted. It means that God reveals true understanding of his Word to only those who are Jesus' True Disciples. Others will read the scriptures. But no understanding is given them. Compare Daniel 12:9,10. Remember the incident involving the Ethiopian Eunuch. God sent Philip to help him understand the scriptures. (Acts 8:26-35). I'd get the help of JWs today. They all believe and teach one set of Bible teachings. Compare 1 Corinthians 1:10.
I really appreciate this video! I learned so much. I struggled to understand which bible I should be using and now realized I was one of those that put up small walls against others that used translations I thought were not good. Thank you for opening my eyes and heart to truth.
Very informative. Challenged me to think about things I hadn't put much time into. Sean, you are one of the best interviewers I've seen/heard. You ask great questions - questions that dig into the heart of your topic. And rather than prefacing each one with a long commentary of your own (pet peeve w/ other podcasters who interview) you give plenty of space for the one you are interviewing to cover the bases. Great job!
I totally agree with you, he interviewed well. He also did not interject his views to the point of suffocating the other guy out. I've seen this happen way too much, it almost makes me want to stop listening at times.😮
Very measured without falling into so much nuance that there's nothing of value to say. Thank you Dr. Ward for that display of grace and truth in speech.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching this and a more scholarly discussion on Bible Translations. In my childhood I was primarily taught from the King James while heavily exposed to The Living Bible paraphrase. Later on, I spend much time studying from the New American Standard and currently primarily study from the NIV. In academic studies, I learned that the KJV, often referred to as the "Authorized Version" was the first "sanctioned" translation of scripture to the language of the common people in England. Truly, it is no longer the language of common English speaking people, though still quite useful. Certainly, I believe better understanding can be gained through studying multiple "good" translations of scriptures.
Very true. One example of this is the fact that people throwing the stone of subjective ( and, therefore, contextually unfair and invalid) comparison in order to subconsciously justify contempt and hatred shatters the golden rule through its contextual unfairness.
I love the Elizabethan language of KJV. I grew up as a child on it and as a teen moved into the NKJV which is indeed easier to understand in whole. I just added to my collection last year the NIV- which I love. I was searching for a good study Bible as I started school for leadership and ministry and I prefer the Thompson chain-reference BEFORE digging into any others or supplements. To see what it is that God reveals to me without the input of others first. Then I added ESV global study Bible as it was a requirement for my OT survey class, the Israel Bible, the Septuagint, the NIV life application study Bible, and I am currently awaiting my NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible to arrive. I also have used the inter linear Bible app on my computer, and have the ESV membership to access those and the basic youversion Bible app. I love comparing them all and when I read a passage that I know is not the correct word, I go through them all to see who translated it correctly.
I would suggest " Spirit Filled" study bible by Jack Hayford. One of the best nonbias study bibles out there. A lot of bibles say study bible, but it is just a rehash of the persons denomination or school he or she went to. The Spirit Filled bible is just the opposite, it allows the reader to make his or her own choice on the nonessentials and is crystal clear when it come to the absolutes of our faith. Look it up and check out the reviews, they just came out with a 3rd edition which says a lot, very popular bible. Lord Bless.
Well I'm glad someone enjoyed the language in the KJV. I always hated it. It seems to me that it makes God's Word unrelateable and contrived. I can really appreciate your care to examine scriptures side by side with multiple translations
@@skylee5029 That's because it was written 400 yrs ago. It was written for the common peeps in those days, farmers, drunks, hookers and the like. The educated actually put it down because it was to common, to easy to read and still is if you take the time. Using the word hate to describe God's word is really lacking respect towards the Lord, try expressing yourself differently or take the time and learn how to read the KJV. It will bless you beyond measure, look up on youtube why some prefer to read KJV. I read several but my heart is NKJV and there are many reason why. Lord Bless
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
I'm 84 and have known at least since high school, when I had not at that time read the King James Version, that "halt" could mean "limping" or "lame". Perhaps I had heard t he expression, :" the halt and the blind" and automatically made sense of it. "Halting" was used with the meaning "hesitating" or "uncertain" or :"stumbling." And now, my problem isn't with the Elizabethan English it's with RUclips English.
I am braziliam I love my New King James Bible, it's receptus text, we can see 1Tim 3:16, God in flesh, 1John 5; 7, you can see, and compare John 10:30, Mat. 28;19, etc. My best english Bible, I love it.
(KJV was the english of the period of King James Stewart V of scotland, I of england, so is technically jacobean, not Tudor. He was the king after Lizzie the first died childless) HA HA ! RUclips english! Totally. I hear you!
I understood the term "Halt" from childhood. How? You hear it, remember it but don't know where. There are plenty of words in the King James that have changed meaning, giving false impressions. The word "conversation" use to mean manner of life, not talking. The word "cousin" between Mary and Elizabeth use to mean, kin, or someone from the same area or country. The word "doctors" meant "teachers", not someone with a stethoscope around their neck. Bewitchment meant leading astray. The word "meet" was what was "fitting" or "proper". The King James is fine as long as you understand changes to vocabulary is a normal human process and do not hang doctrines upon dictionary word lookups.
@@SpaceCadet4Jesus CORRECTION if you go online to the 1828 Webster's Dictionary you will find this was originally a bible helps book keyed in every word to scripture. And it has the Original Meanings of each word. There are over a dozen words in the KJV that not a single bible believing pastor today understands. I started reading the KJV cover to cover at age 13. The Generations of pastors that read the bible cover to cover all the days of their lives IS LONG GONE. I have observed the last two standing generations i went to bible school with hundreds of these 48 years ago and to my shock I only found 2 students that had read the bible cover to cover by the sheer volume of what they Could quote. THAT WAS OUT OF 800 STUDENTS many of whom never bothered to read a single Gospel. AVOID ANY PASTOR WHO CAN NOT DEMONSTRATE THEY HAVE READ THE BIBLE COVER TO COVER.
I love the NIV, because I am dyslexic, and by the grace of God, it’s one of the few Bibles, I can actually read, thank you Jesus for the wealth of knowledge you’ve given us
@@cathygray3467 Have you ever considered that the KJV has ADDED verses in it? We know that Erasmus, who compiled what would later be called the textus receptus, added verses for which he had no textual backing. As I recall, he had no Greek Text for the end of Revelation so he simpply translated the Latin Vulgate of that passage into Greek so as to fill out his text. Now, I do not find any of those "additions" to be harmful to the overall message of the Scriptures, so I have no problem with using the KJV. Even though I use the 1984 NIV when I preach in my church, whenever I preach in a church pastored by one of my friends, I use the KJV for that is what my friends use in their churches. As of yet, I have not had any problems preaching the same message from either translation, and I have been a pastor for about 40 years.
Not sure why those who haven’t spent a day in seminary will place all their bets on false claims. NIV and most of the popular translations have been put together by Bible scholars and reference the earliest available manuscripts. Please don’t buy into the KJV only hype unless you are wholly familiar with old English and the meanings of they words and linguistic structure of the language. I can tell you with confidence that your average Joe cannot discern the true meaning of certain words or phrases used in the 17th century. Btw, the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it because a charismatic preacher said so.
Great interview. I think Mark is right. We have an embarrassment of riches in English translations. I love rhe ESV, but i have taken to start preaching from the CSB lately for the sake of those in the congregation I serve. The concept of intelligibility that Mark talks about has been really help. There is no one translation at our church. People come with NLT, NIV, GNB and ESV. Our lead pastor usea the NLT. We often joke with each other as which is better. But I just wantes people to understand. I think it is important to take into account the education level of those to whom you are ministering too, and the accuracy of the text. Thats why i have switch to CSB for preaching personally...I definitely prefer my ESV, but for the sake of other i made the change. And i have noticed there are times where the CSB is better than the ESV. But thanks for a great interview. Grace and peace
This response is more in line with my practices. I was raised on the KJV and was biased heavily toward it for a long time. However, when God sent me to teach a high school group, I taught more from the NIV and NLT. After exploring options for myself as a next-step translation, I tried the CSB but eventually landed on the ESV as my primary study translation because it felt the closest to the KJV. This helps me because I spent years learning and memorizing Scripture from the KJV.
This has been unbelievably helpful. My husband and I were Bible translators for the Kire speaking people in Papua New Guinea. Trying to keep in accurate and having to you phrases for words they did not have made it very complicated. Many other culture differences from Greek and Hebrew really made things complicated too . We had 2 men from every one of our villages join us to study every single verse and then go home to there villages and read it around their camp fires and come back to make sure we were getting the true meaning across on every verse. It was not an easy task. So I truly understood all you were saying and appreciated your attitude of love, and unity , realizing god could use it all. god bless your ministry.
Hello Sharon, I see that you show respect to your country by capitalizing ~ Papa New Guinea. Respectfully, I want to point out, incase you were not aware, we should show even more respect for our Heavenly Father by always capitalizing the G> in God, in reverence to Him. Especially since, in this age, lowercase god implies of false idol gods. Have a blessed day sister 🙂
1928 Prayer Book Anglican here. We use the KJV for all our liturgical readings. I agree new translations were/are needed. That said, the literary value of the KJV is unparalleled. It's a shame that it isn't being read more.
It IS being READ & UNDERSTOOD, but you wouldn't think so because the masses have been taught & manipulated to use the NEW BOOKS, IF one was to dig down deep on this subject one would find that those who use the KJV as their primary source or only source HAS LEFT the church systems as those systems LEFT the SOURCE, the very FIRST SIGNS of places called churches leaving sound teaching , doctrine is using DIFFERENT SOURCES of so called "truth". Different translations comes 1st or 2nd to a plethora of OTHER books & materials being used.
@@REVNUMANEWBERNFolks who are born again and are led by by the Holy Spirit. Will also reject the KJV only heresy, one of Satan's most subtle deceptions.
I am just a simple frail guy, saved by grace through faith because of Jesus Christ. I cannot help being educated and mightily encouraged when serious and dedicated scholars, such as yourselves, are so careful and humble with your words, yet whilst not flinching from the bold ministry given to us all by Jesus. Thank you .. and I thank God for you.
Don't be fooled by their cool explanations they are promoting their own agenda, a Bible which does not have God's name in it like the kjversion should be considered bad. The oldest manuscripts have God's name over 7000 times which many theologians agree but say that they don't use God's name because it is reverd or sacred, they admit that at the beginning of most Bibles saying that it has deliberately been omitted. But the Bible says to call on the name of jehovah so pray tell me how can they call on the name of God when you so called intellectuals have omitted it from the Bible. Jesus knew and used his father's name.
Interesting discussion. Having started with KJV as an early teen and basically given up on understanding it. Then trying again in my later teens and struggling again. Then taking up a Living Bible and devouring it. Then moving to NASB and devouring it. Then moving back to the KJV and loving it. Then trying NIV and having issues with it. I have a bit of personal history. I have many translations but have only read through the Living, the NASB, and the KJV. I lean toward the KJV at this point in my life. I am not KJV only. Earlier i was NASB only. However, one only has a finite span of life here and there is not end of books and many English translations. In the interest of maximizing the time I lean toward avoiding "warts" and false teachings. If one knows the truth, the lies and deceptions become apparent when one is introduced to them and the Holy Spirit uses that the Truth to expose them. God is faithful even when we are not.
Protestant Bibles are corrupted bcse Luther removed 7 books and added the word Sola, meaning the Bible alone. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950s they were translated. The Bible as used by the Catholic Church was found to be 100% identical to the Scrolls. Protestant bibles were not and were hurriedly burned and newer but still inaccurate versions produced. Protestant bibles are also adapted to Protestant theology of which there are TWO? Which one is correct? The first King James was full of errors and was nicknamed the Adulterous bible. The second edition still has many errors. The Catholic version has NIHIL OBSTAT and IMPRIMATUR printed on the inside of the cover. That is the correct version which is identical to the Scrolls. Finally, the Bible is a Catholic book, put together by the Catholic Church 400 yrs after the death of Jesus. For those 400 yrs the Church grew rapidly without any Bible and the Bible says 'The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth'. So, Protestants who think the Catholic Church is false, should throw away or burn their bibles! Then what have they got? Nothing!
I use the You version - Bible app - mainly because i can easily switch versions and see what is said in different translations to try and dig deep into what the verse is saying. Most of my daily reading is in either NLT or ESV. I had memorized a ton of scripture in KJV as a child, and I think that the older style of language made a lot of the true meaning of the scripture went right over my head. I memorized several books in NIV, and recently, our pastor was preaching on a passage I had memorized, and they had the passage up on the screen and it said it was NIV, but the words were a little off from what I remembered. Which is when I learned that the NIV has been updated... I was hunting through each translation on the app, trying to figure out how I had gotten so mixed up... lol I also really appreciate being able to read a passage in five, six, ten different translations when the pastor or teacher is stressing the importance of the way a verse is specifically worded, since it's usually not worded the same, so is the meaning they are stressing still there if we read a different translation? Some times it is, sometimes, well, I think some teachers or pastors get really stuck on just one translation and it's like they have blinders on to anything else. I do have to give a little shout out for the Message, though. I had grown up immersed in KJV or NIV, and it definitely shocked me out of my rut! 1 Corinthians 13 really came to life for me. And was actually the catalyst for my husband and I reexamining our divorce and we wound up getting remarried and just celebrated 23 years. I sure appreciated the view points expressed!
That’s wonderful that “the love chapter” in The Message paraphrase reconciled you and your husband! I wasn’t too hip on it at first. I still don’t read it a lot. However, the Psalms came alive in The Message because of the way Eugene Peterson interpreted David’s conversations with God. David was passionate, not stoic (at least, not in the way we were used to with the KJV). David was almost in God’s face as an close friend would in expressing his frustrations and griefs but he always came back to holy reverence, thanks & faith in God’s faithfulness.
I used to listen to K-Love when I lived in Indiana. Every day around noon, they would read out of The Message on air. While I don't use The Message to study out of, I appreciate the fact that it made me want to get into my bibles and actually read them. I appreciated that The Message brought to life the scriptures for me as if I was just reading a novel. For studying the Bible, I prefer the ESV. When something doesn't make sense to me, I will refer to the NLT because, well, my education comes from a rural town in SE Alabama so I need a translations that is at a 6th grade level (LOL). But, if I am just not feeling the desire to read my bible daily, I think The Message is good for just reading like a novel, but not meant for daily bible study/devotion. I grew up in a So. Baptist church where we read out of the KJV before they eventually switched to the NIV. Most of the Bible verses I memorized as a child were from the KJV. But, I'm sorry to say that though I think Psalm and Proverbs is beautiful in the KJV, the rest of the books are like reading a foreign language to me. And I think that people tend to forget that the KJV was like the 16th translation at that time for a King that was wanting to divorce his wife. Language evolves so for me, I have to have a bible that I can understand what I'm reading. For me, that's ESV, NLT, and NIV.
I, too, noticed that the NIV has been updated. In the updated version it has gotten even weaker on God's Word. It shows the slippery slope of moving away from Truth using slight-of-hand, practically. Have you noticed how many translations are out there now? As the time of Jesus' return gets closer, more close-but-not-quite versions are showing up. Remember that false teachings may have 99% of truth but 1% of lies which ends up being absorbed, and remembered, with the rest. "Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump." 1 Corinthians 5:7-9
No, they weren't "crap". The King James Version was like either the 13th or 16th translation at the time. But Biblical archeology is ongoing, new discoveries are being made with writings/tablets and fragments thereof, etc. So I think it would be wrong for people who are in the King James Version only camp to discount more modern translations. After all, they are ALL translations, including the King James Version.
I think Mark’s comments on the Messianic Jews is showing a bit of lack of understanding - in that the Jewish people more often than not speak English with a LOT of Hebrew interspersed throughout even in everyday language. I don’t think this was a superstitious use or mystic traditional use - they do speak a “crazy hybrid language”
Thank you for this comment. I'm Messianic myself. I'm glad the only real critique was we're a little cooky, passionate, and insert some Hebrew/ Jewish-ness in some places. I was more concerned we got a transliteration completely wrong. Yes, I've wondered why the New Testament didn't have Greek listed instead of Hebrew throughout both in TLV and CJB. It would make sense because the texts that were found were in Greek (mostly). This is a common question in Messianic congregations. Both English and Hebrew are transliterations of New Testament scripture. Also, the audience is for primarily Jewish readers first and foremost. It is to be more palatable for a Jewish reader. For anyone curious about Messianic Judaism, if there are Jewish people in the faith, and if Messianics have biblical scholars I would suggest checking out One For Israel.
It"s so elementary simple. Because they have been egregiously distorted to the very core by satanic cults like illuminati, freemasonry, catholicism, orthodoxy, JWs, mormons, diverse psychic cults, and presented into the broad spectre of gullible, ignorant of God Audience which, due to their careless negligence are unable to discern a pig from rocket science. The satanic cults do take advantage of that to bamboozle and double-cross this clueless headless Audience, leading it further and further from the Living God and away into hellfire with satan. Folks badly need to wake up and cry out to The Living YESHUA The Messiah before it"s too late!
Fantastic conversation. I just went through a cursory study on translating and some translations. this is right in line with what I was learning. It's always good to know that other Godly men are presenting the same ideas. This helped to fill out my knowledge and ways to view translations a bit more. Loved the view on the Message. I have used it as a secondary source from time to time to get a "fresh" wording of a passage that I am having a hard time digging into, especially if I had seen it a specific way for SO long that I have kind of become numb to it.
Thank you for a great discussion. With Bible apps being so prevalent, even my senior's group bounces between literal and dynamic translations to get to the meaning of a passage :)
I'm perplexed that at no time was prayer for understanding, when reading the Bible, mentioned. The KJV was gibberish to me, until I was saved. Then it was a thing of great beauty and opened like a flower, more and more with each time I read it. I never stop learning from the KJV, with the Holy Spirit as my leader/instructor. If a word has changed meaning, or has an additional meaning (as is more often the case), or if I don't understand something this time around, I pray, as always, and sooner or later, God reveals the meaning. This type of study, alone with God, focusing on each word and the purpose for that word, makes it impossible to attend "book focused" Bible studies with other Christians, however. My study, relying on such a different source (prayer), makes it that I can't help but focus on the errors and flaws in the books and workbooks. So I don't do that. But, in defense of the KJV, I even heard Mr. Ward himself, within the interview, recite the KJV. When something is written in such a way, it is easy to memorize and recall. Written in currently spoken English, not so much. Not word for word, anyway. But I have a friend who graduated from Biola in the '70's. She is very liberal. During one of our discussions comparing her liberal and my conservative views, I quoted a scripture, which she was sure wasn't in the Bible. I showed it to her, in my KJV. Then she told me that during her 12 years at Christian school, she had memorized a large portion of the Bible. But when she entered Biola, they discouraged her from using the KJV. When she changed to the paraphrase version that they were using, she lost all of her memorized scripture. Now, decades later, though she still reads daily, she doesn't even know what all is in her Bible. It's hard to memorize a paraphrase. But not hard to memorize the KJV. It reads like a poem. Maybe by design? Anyway I think it's just wrong to lead people to believe that a man can teach them what God cannot. Prayer must always be a huge part of reading, to accurately understand the Bible. And also to know that we build on what we've learned. We don't have a PHD in understanding the Bible, when we are reading it for the first or second or third time. If we expect to fully understand in first grade, what will actually take us many grades, we are already in trouble.
Please, take the Geneva Bible translation instead. Or Tree of Life Version / Complete Jewish Bible / Jewish Bible. They are accurate translations. KJV is a freemasonry translation edited by Francis Bacon, chief freemason in King James' service who was head of England"s freemasonry. The KJV was just a swank stepstone for king James to self-establish himself as tyranic monarch who went the whole hog to put England under his foot . First and foremost, there wouldn't be ANY so-called "King James Bible" had it not been for one avid and thirsty for power tyrant who couldn't part with, but rather clutched to this power-insane desire to retain his one single bottom on the two whole thrones of England and Scotland. And who was also obsessed by the concept of "The Divine Right of Kings" , a teddybear surrealistic fabulous theory of his own fancy which, from his point of view, gave him a license to act like a vicar of God on Planet Earth. However, The Geneva Bible being in predominant circulation of the folks of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland didn't agree with this surrealistic theory of his and called a spade a spade in every aspect of the English, Scottish and Irish (and, later, American) life. So he made up his mind to burk it completely by inventing his own brainchild that would comfortably sit well with his political and social aspirations and suit his power-thirsty notions likewise. Here are specific facts and figures which go the whole hog and depict this KJV version together with its pompously tough sponsor James all nine yards. 1.. Genesis 22;1 the KJV says: "And after these things God did tempt Abraham". Now, does God really tempt a person? Is God involved in the business of temptation? When even in KJV in The Epistle of James in the N.T. it is explicitly indicated: "for God tempts no one, neither is tempted by evil..." So how come, then, the KJV translators depict God as the tempter in the O.T. and speak well of God Almighty the way it duly becomes of Him in the New one? Does God change????????????????????? WHO, what creature is in the business of tempting people? Is it not satan? In contrast, The Geneva Bible reads: "And after these things God did PROVE Abraham" which I believe is the TRUE and correct conveyance from the Hebrew original. The terms "TEMPT" and "PROVE" are never synonyms! I hope you would kindly agree with it . God NEVER tempts anyone, God TESTS us, but NEVER tempts - the business of tempting belongs to satan and his demons (Luke 4:1-4) .2. Genesis 15:6 "And Abraham believed in God and God credited it to him as righteousness". Good grief... didn't Abraham commence to believing IN God since the very inception when God called out to him in Genesis chapter 12 to "leave his country and his people and go to the land God was about to show Abraham"? Did not Abraham believe in God's existence back then? According to the Book of Jasher, Abraham was considered to be the disciple of Noah. And, using Noah, God had been in the thorough process of teaching and guiding Abraham in all things. Therefore, before Abraham had ever reached Genesis chapter 15, he already was in cognition of God, doubtlessly being aware of His entire existence! In contrast The Geneva Bible signifies lucidly in Genesis 15:6 that. "Abraham BELIEVED The Lord" (not IN the Lord)! And there is also a reference to this verse in Hebrews quoting this verse without "IN"! 3. Psalm 24:6 the KJV says: "of those who seek your face, O Jacob". Now a question, WHOSE face it's deemed for everyone to seek? The face of God, or the face of Jacob, who himself was the one who sought God and prayed to Him? In contrast, The Geneva Bible says in this verse: "of those who seek your face, this is Jacob" which appears t be the paramount pertinent, intrinsic and lucid one due to its palpable logically reasonable consistence. 4. In N.T. in The Book of Acts chapter 14 it is being narrated about the Passover taking place in the days of Unleavened Bread with king Herod killing Apostle James with the sword and "because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also". The KJV names this period as "The Easter" which can by no means be attributed to this Glorious Event ! But much rather, easter is a revelry-boozing,impurity-cracking pagan feast which was totally illegal in Israel under the penalty of the participants being stoned to death! In contrast, The Geneva Bible you made yourself at liberty to hurl pointless affronts at, this Holy Book , in spite of your super boffin remarks, puts THE CORRECT TERM to this Event: "The Passover" instead of this negligibly obscure term "ester". 5. 1 Samuel chapter 16 verse 14, where the KJV puts it, that "The Spirit of The Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit of The Lord vexed him". A grievous insult upon The Lord again! Do evil spirits co-exist in the Lord"s Kingdom? In contrast, the Geneva Bible translated it this way: "and an evil spirit SENT of The Lord, vexed him "(emphasis mine). THIS word SENT makes a bombastic, mind-blowing difference indeed. It clearly points out, that The Lord is Sovereign in the Universe, commanding everyone and everything He deems necessary to, for the purpose of carrying out His Sovereign Will! 6. Isaiah 60:1, KJV "Arise, shine. For thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee." Can anyone perspiciously explicate WHO is being addressed here? WHOM is all this speech conveyed to? The Geneva Bible says it clearly: "Arise, O Jrusalem, be bright. For thy light is come. And the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee". Here the subject is at face salience. It is Jerusalem that the emphasis is focused upon. 7. Mark 16:18 " They shall take up serpents (KJV). Sorry... what is the point for the disciples to take up serpents? Were they\ disciples meant to caress the serpents like babies in their arms? Does it make any sense? In contrast, the Geneva Bible is crystal clear about it: "And they shall take away serpents". "Take up" and "Take away' are not one and same peas in a pod! It is a different story altigether. And it is paramount evident that the "Take away" option is more relevant here, because it emphatically and robustly corroborates what The Lord told the disciples: "I give you power to tread on serpents and scorpions and nothing shall, by any means hurt you". . 8. John 3:36, KJV: "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him John 3:36 )Geneva) "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him" . So these are just a few facts of distorted translation which are clear and evident to making a point and difference as to what Bible version is worthy of trust and reliance on.
I read the kjv. I started reading when I was 27 and quickly realized that though the language of the kjv is different what makes it a great translation is that you learn the meaningsof the words as you read it. The pastors who miss use it will do so with every other translation. Not all pastors are good pastors.
I respect Mark's tenacity in responding accurately. I admire his measured and gracious communication. I love my NIV published in 1985. I do not prefer the newly issued NIV.
Sad to break the bubble of love for the NIV but you should be careful of the hidden purpose of that version, it was created by a group of people that included two openly gay individuals that used “inclusive” wording to justify homosexuality, not counting the fact that it’s missing 26 whole verses and it never gives Jesus his Glory.
the NIV translation for the male parent turned into (both) parents is not correct! The original Bible context was to mean the male was to be respected as the Christ- centered provider and protector of the family, since 2 different God loving people can not always agree on everything- so both may need to agree to disagree, with one of the 2 probably having to 'give in' -still loving and respecting each😮 other . Jesus called God Almighty His Father. God called Jesus [my] Son. There is no disputing the need to distinguish between male and female when the inspired Word was written.
I was a TJ for many years, until I noticed how they replaced the name LORD with Jehova in the NT EXCEPT ROMANS 10:9 when All other translations I've seen don't have the name Jehova in the new testament. I prefer KJ.
@@azarellediaz4892The NIV was translated by godly born again Christians, don't know about the baby sprinkling Anglicans who translated the KJV. Especially the alcoholic and adulterer on the KJV translation committee. No homosexuals were on the NIV, that is the lie the KJV only cult loves to tell. We know of course that lying is as much a sin as the homosexual act. So you are a two faced lying hypocrite. Have you been listening to pathological liar and KJV only heretic Gail Riplinger? The NIV is very clear that homosexuality is, unnatural, a sin and an abomination in the sight of God. Much clearer than the KJV. Also there is absolutely no hidden agenda in the NIV translation. That is just the usual conspiracy theories of the KJV only cult that Satan has raised up. No verses are missing, because it was translated from older more accurate manuscripts without the added uninspired verses that are in the KJV. The KJV a translation translated from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope with all those added uninspired verses. The Catholic influence on the KJV is evident, with mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Also Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. The more correct translation is "morning star" even the KJV had day star in the margin. Because of the translators of the KJV were not too familiar with Hebrew. They used a Latin word. Now Satan has deceived so many into thinking that he is Lucifer even though he isn't. No doubt that is why Satan prefers you to read the KJV rather than the more accurate modern translations like the NIV. Of course he would not sooner read the scripture at all. Also the NIV glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ. Makes it clear that he is Almighty God. Salvation only found in him. Name above all names. The NIV is far far stronger on the deity of Christ than the KJV, which calls the Son of God an angel in Daniel ch 3. Also the KJV denies the deity of the Holy Spirit four times denying his deity. No wonder the cults that deny the deity of Christ and the Trinity used the KJV to teach their heresies. Cults like the Mormons, the Christian Scientists, Jehovah Witnesses before they used their own version. Also the KJV only cult started by a Seventh day Adventist cultist. A cult based on a failed prophecy and the false teachings of Ellen G White. Yet still the KJV only cult seek to deceive us, with their rediculous ludicrous claims about the KJV. And their slanderous accusations about the excellent more accurate modern translations of God's word like the NIV. A translation that God is using and blessing to bring many to Christ. That proves what a blasphemous idolatrous cult KJV onlyism truly is. Nothing more than a doctrine of devils. Full of false teachers with double standards.
I keep the NIV 1984 (?), NASB, ESV, NKJV, and KJV at my side at all times because I like to follow along with the pastor/teacher I am studying with. Each of them are equally highlighted and underlined with notations in the margins or attached sticky notes. I also own and occasionally read the CSB because it was recommended by someone I trust, and I am enjoying the Holman CSB Study Bible because of the notes. My Christian walk started with the KJV, then transitioned to the NIV, and then back to the KJV. I took Kay Arthur's Inductive Bible Study classes which used the NASB as the predominant source, so that was how that particular version entered my library. My sister introduced me to the ESV, and I found that I preferred that version over the New American Standard. I have only recently purchased and started occasionally reading the RSV and the NLT because a couple of the Bible Review channels I watch speak highly of them. But, my foundation is the King James Version and it's the one I go to more than any other.
At least the KJV has God’s Name in it 4 times. Those other Bible translations don’t. The Holman Bible has God’s Name in it but later removed when it became the Christian Standard Translation. How disappointing.
I had heard of a New Age believer being led to true Christianity from reading The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ. It was a starting point for this soul. So even a bad translation can be better than no translation at all.
So many people mistakenly believe that the Bible has been rewritten and changed, but God was at hand with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which showed no changes of any significance over 2000 years completed to today. The Holy Spirit is always at work protecting God’s Word!
Thanks to both of you for this video. I went from using the NIV, to NASB, to ESV, now the KJV. I have had to learn and look words up in older dictionaries to gain a better comprehension and I have been surprised at how my reasoning skills have improved by doing this. The main problem I do believe for most KJV users is the scholars selecting verses that are clearly in the Translation before the KJV and also in the KJV, and not including those verse in the current English translations of today. This I do believe is the real issue in why many will choose to stay with the KJV, and until this issue is addressed in a clear and precise substitutive way reconciliations between the two sides will stay as a reason for disunity. I understand the urge to have other Christians to put aside their idiosyncrasy to reestablish a unified body of Christ but is it not also an urge to have a unified front? I would think and do say let God be praised in unity and disunity for God is our redeemer not anyone of us. One more thing we can let Jesus build his church or we can try to build it for him and fall short every time or recognize who our redeemer is which is Jesus Christ the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords who walked out of that tomb on Sunday morning.
@@fredthe47th Thanks for your comment but this is the type of claim that a KJVO would say in return. What I would say is forgive as our Lord and Savior has paid the debt that we all should pay so that we can be forgiven both lovingly and legally. I would rebuke someone for lying if I know that is what that person has done, or thieving, or killing, or other obvious actions that are clearly sinful. But when it comes to what should be translated into any language is a matter not for me but to pray that God be with those He chooses to translate for His purposes not my will be done but Jesus Christs will be done.
@@fredthe47th I do appreciate your continued engagement in this matter of importance. When we are in doubt then we should seek advice through prayer from our King of Kings Jesus Christ. With this I will endeavor to express my opinion on the matter mentioned in the text typed so far. In the Greek manuscripts there are passage that are in many and not in others so the question is which should be translated into the English language. The reasons given by those that choose to not translate those passage are not always congruent with mans fallen nature. So, without prayerful consideration of what the Holy Spirit will guide us in, then making these decision without this seems to suggest that we do not seek His help when He is the inspiration of the written word. The is especially helpful with deciding which portion of the Greek should be chosen for translation into English.
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
@@HarryNicNicholas You are correct it does but it also protects people who choose to leave the satanic temple and join Christianity. In other words if a satanic temple stops any of the individuals from leaving then they violate the 1st Amendment of the Constitution for each individual.
A great way to introduce to KJV to people is giving them NKJV to go along with the KJV even and a strong concordance + dictionaries as you said. It's a good mental exercise
If you are a KJVer, to confirm what Mark meant by listing the KJV under “bad” translations look in the transcript around the 45:50 mark, and Mark clearly says the KJV is an excellent English translation, and what he was getting at is that many don’t understand that English any longer.
I started watching/listening to this video. I thought I would not go the distance with this one but I am passed the midpoint and finding this good, useful, somewhat refreshing and encouraging. This is good brother. Your guest and brother explains things well.
If we really have Jesus living in us and His Spirit is leading us to all truth, these other translations can be useful tools. I've used a number of them and I still do.
The new kjv is a lot easier to read than the first version. But I like the RSV, NIV, NAS, and NKJV. They also sell bibles with 2 or 3 versions in one Bible
I love the KJV. When I can not understand something in this Bible, I go to the source. I think the more translations, the more of our human is found in these books.
"When I can not understand something in this Bible" The problem with the KJV is that there are many places where you don't know that you don't understand something. That occurs with words Mark Ward terms "false friends" Examples include "So that", "conversation", "Study", "and "commends" All these words seem as though they fit in our modern usage of English, but in reality they mean something different today than they used to mean.
My son was given a Holman Christian Standard Version from a Nazarene church upon graduation. I got one for myself to read since I had never heard of it. I spent about a year reading it daily alongside my NASB and wrote down the differences. I didn't find glaring warts. I enjoy reading it now devotionally. Would you recommend the HCSB for institutional study?
While I am not an expert, I have studied the Greek text a lot, and the Holman very often hits the nail on the head with its translation. I often thought it was very accurate translation. My primary study Bible was NASB at the time, but I loved the Holman too.
I did some research on HCSV, and it truly blew my mind. There's actually a well-published document on HCSV that I found. It's the Bible I used alongside the old KJ version. It's really fascinating stuff!
HCSB is no longer in print, at least not under that name. The HCSB has become the CSB. There are some differences between them but for the most part it's a rebranding to remove the name of a specific publisher from the name of the translation.
Not since I was a child in the early 60s have I only used one translation. I grew up in a protestant household, Presbyterian, where we had the new English Bible, the revised standard, and the king James. I was in high school when I got my first NASB. Now, pushing 70, I still have a half dozen Bible translations on my desk at any time it is and can be a habit to look at more than one translation and to enjoy many of them. Great interview, I truly enjoyed it!
I actually like the KJV as kind of a historical reference in helping modern English speakers understand where their language came from and how it got where it is now. I think it's important to understand why we don't use "thou" any more. It also helps them understand other historical documents like the Declaration of Independence and letters from our Founding Fathers. If our understanding of the English language gets too shallow and recent, we will lose the real meaning of it.
When I bought a Greek Interlinear, I could only get it in KJV. Strong's Concordance comes in an enhanced version: "The Strongest Strong's." Again, you only get the KJV. So I love those Bible aids. But I read daily from the NKJV because archaic Elizabethan words are sometimes laborious to deal with. I was not born in 17th century England, so I don't THINK in their thoughts. ESV and NIV will never work for me, but I'm glad people have heir choices. On the other hand "Passion" Mistranslation makes me wanna vomit. Could be just an offending of tastes? Not very sure on that. Reading the 1776 to 1865 documents does help us see how printed communication has evolved. I ASSUME that most Americans in 1790, did not make every speech to sound like The Declaration. If a pastor spoke without a written speech to read, then he could make it easier to hear, and would commonly use shorter sentences. But that's an assumption. Maybe they would think in sentences as long as Paul would use.
@@wayneboyer7648 Well, I don't know. The first stanza of The Star Spangled Banner is all one sentence. I actually think people had a better command of English in those days than we have today. They used a wider vocabulary and more people could read than we think they did today. Calligraphy was considered just penmanship. A lot of time and thought was put into writing letters. In some ways, it's hard for people today to imagine the reality of the 1700's or even the 1800's.
As far as I am aware, the NKJV is the most accurate translation available in modern English. Some of the new translations try to make it "more readable" or "easier to understand" and by doing that, they often mistranslate what the Greek actually says and means.
@@raedaily9854 I agree with many points you made. I was saying the written language does not tell us how people spoke. Even Shakespeare used occasional short sentences. Did he originate "Brevity is the soul of wit." ?? He _DID_ use that principle. The 1776 documents and 18th century hymns contained compacted ideas. This is not how people think. When we study linguistics, it shows that language efficiency trends toward simplicity, conciseness. We dropped the goeth, cometh, heareth. I would grant you in the "debate" that some people COULD think in 30 to 50 word sentences. But that's only useful in reading when you have the time to study it. A listener to a speech, [immediate analysis] does not need 30 to 50 word sentences, in any language. It breeds confusion.
@@wayneboyer7648 I would say that even in everyday speech, people used more precise words than they do today. Dropping the "th" at the end of "go" is a far cry from dropping the whole idea of addressing people with singular pronouns. I find modern people don't understand the full meaning of a word because they don't understand where it came from. I think modern society would profit from people slowing down a little to digest more complex thoughts that take some longer and more complex sentence and word lengths.
A very well spent hour or learning! I appreciate BOTH OF YOU BROTHERS for your insights and commitment to GODS WORD. Thank you so much for this discussion. IT IS SORELY NEEDED in today's church culture. There are so many people who are Bible illiterate. Mark, I appreciate you mentioning the CSB. I use that translation as my daily driver. I also like the ESV and NASB translations, as well as the Full Notes NET. Sean, I regularly recommend Evidence That Demands A Verdict, because it is the STANDARD in Apologetics. Thanks again brothers. I love and appreciate both of you!
So many great points! I have over 20 Bibles - they are each special, from the KJV I was given at 6 months old, to The Message that breathed new life into the text during college, to the Action Bible, because who doesn’t want to see the Bible as a comic? As well as my go-to NASB for studying and NLT for daily reading, and several study Bibles with great commentary. We do indeed have an embarrassment of riches. I look at my shelf full of God’s Word and appreciate that I am so blessed, but also feel sad that so many people can’t even get their hands on a single translation…and apparently the validity of those translations can also be an issue. Anyway, thanks for all the good info :)
As a missionary pilot back in the late eighties, I flew Brian and Candy Simmons. As tribal missionaries they were awesome. Then, Brian had a kind of mysterious breakdown. Then they left our mission organization due to doctrinal issues. I was devastated by their departure. It’s kind of eerie but not terribly surprising to see what they’ve been up to in the years since. What was THAT all about God? So glad God knows hearts and He sorts it all out.
Sad, doctrinal issues we need to sort them out as doctrine is of utmost import. As Jesus told us Mt 13:33 kjv even thee very word would would become leavened! See Proverbs 26:7,9 kjv and Ezekiel 17:2 kjv, what is a parable? Btw, "fool on the two proverbs would be better translated, understood as [thee] self confident, who of course is a fool. Keep in mind what He glories in doing, see Proverbs 25:2 kjv.
Thanks Sean and Mark for the informative look on Biblical translations. I am wondering what your thoughts are on the Amplified version? I actually find this translation to be quite interesting in its approach. From what I understand, the intention of the translation is to add more detail to what could be observed in the Greek and Hebrew that cannot be fully translated equivalently to an English word or phrase.
I enjoyed your guest speaker Mark Ward, PhD, such a godly man with wisdom and humility. This was very helpful in considering all of the common translations and their value in today's world.
I understand both "halt" and "coasts" correctly in the KJV, and I have no idea why, other than I've used the context clues to understand, as you explained. I take a little issue with calling KJV "bad" even with quotes. It is more difficult to understand now than it was 400 years ago, but it can be learned. Mark Ward learned it as a child. I learned it as a child. I know grown adults who are mature Christians who misunderstand certain words or phrases, but are quick to grasp the meaning when taught. I think we lose something when we say that is a reason to call the translation "bad." To learn about the changes in language over the centuries is to enrich our minds and lives. I suppose I think we should call it a good translation with a particular weakness instead of a "bad" translation that is really not bad. That seems like a more accurate description to me.
I agree plus the argument about not liking the KJV is not because of bad translation but because the guy doesn't understand certain words. That is hardly a reason to list the KJV as a bad translation as per the title of the video. I often have to look up words when reading certain books because I didn't know the meaning. My vocabulary is now much greater thanks to the KJV.
@@StewartMitchell-xl8cmDon't all the "drs" of theology do that now? The only translation that the world hates on is the KJV. That's telling. Also, with the advent of "modern" watered down versions, we have watered down churches that use them - I don't believe it's coincidence! The KJV has power and authority and the ldevil hates it.👿
With my own study and search in mind, this video was quite well presented. (It's funny, but I have a copy of Mr. Ward's "authorized" book on my shelf just a few feet away.) Frankly, my heart breaks on several aspects of this topic, both with certain "only-isms" AND on the other extreme of taking in "all" translations as equal. Being asked both what I read (and why) as well as asked for recommendations myself (even just in sharing the Gospel), I always greatly appreciate just hearing others attempting to rightly sift through the topic. It makes me feel a little less "odd", perhaps, (LOL?) for doing likewise and seeing it as important. So, thank you both, gentlemen.
I have used different translations over the years. I was giving the living Bible as a baptismal gift for my church. And University I used a new international version. Ended my career days I switched over to the English Standard Version. Well I have used a King James Bible over the years in between I noticed that I have a hard time looking at bible verses on my phone app with the ESV because I seem to remember the verses or segments that I'm trying to find the verses for in a King James version LOL! I find myself Googling the Bible verses more than using the app.
Mark is one of the most authentically gracious intellectuals I have ever listened to with so much humility and tenacity for balance as well as desire not to throw the baby away with bathwater. ...so wonderful! Thank you, Sean,for featuring Mark Ward . Thank you, Mark, for an excellent work from an excellent spirit. More grace to you both.
Are you for real, his a protestant. a pro - testant heretic. Full of his own waffle. The Catholic Church chose the books of the bible around the year 389 and only they can interpret their bible. They talk of in the Church or outside the Church when they are outside the church themselves. There is only one Church and that Church is the Church who gave us the Bible, that is a fact
Exactly, that whole gibberish about the Lord telling him he could take any 2 books what a joke😮 You can see he's being led by a deceptive spirit..........
Being Messianic Jewish myself, I will try to explain a few things as best as I can. Yes, Jesus' name in Hebrew is Yeshua. Yeshua means "salvation" in Hebrew. Looking at Matthew 2 in that context it makes sense. "You shall call His name Yeshua (salvation) for He will save His people from their sins." Yeshua was Jewish. The Old Testament was the Bible He read. He kept the kosher dietary laws in Leviticus 11 as well as Deuteronomy 14 and God's feasts in Leviticus 23. It was in the synagogue on the Sabbath when He read the scroll from Isaiah 61 and said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing" that He announced Himself as the Messiah. His last supper was a Passover seder. "I desire to eat the Passover with you before I suffer." He was crucified and then taken off the cross as Passover, a High Sabbath, started at sundown. His resurrection happened three days later, on the Feast of First Fruits. "He is the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep." Ten days after his ascension was the Feast of Weeks, in Hebrew Shavuot, which was 50 days after Passover. "From the first Sabbath after Passover you shall count seven Sabbaths (49 days), and the next day after is a feast to the Lord." That is the day the Torah/Law (more accurate translation is "instructions") was given at Sinai, as the Israelites left Egypt on that first Passover. So on the Shavuot after Yeshua's resurrection was when the Holy Spirit was given to everyone. The feast of Trumpets, in Hebrew Yom Teruah, is when we believe Yeshua will return. 1 Thessalonians says "He will return in the clouds with a great blast of the trumpet." The trumpets used in ancient Israel were made of ram's horns, they are called shofars. The day of Atonement, in Hebrew Yom Kippur, is when God will judge the earth. The feast of Tabernacles, in Hebrew Sukkot, is the wedding supper of the Lamb described in Revelation. The spring feasts have been fulfilled. The fall ones have not yet. What we believe honors Yeshua as the Jew He is. God says all throughout the Bible that His covenant is forever. He is not man that He should lie, nor does He change His mind. He is the same yesterday, today and forever, and if we love Him we are to keep His commandments, those found in the Torah. Yeshua kept them Himself, and so should we. He is our Messiah and our example. In Romans it says that we uphold the Torah by our faith, we don't nullify it. Following the Torah doesn't save us but it is evidence of our faith. I have not read the Tree of Life translation. But using Hebrew doesn't "dilute our Christian heritage", it honors our Jewish Messiah by speaking His language. My personal favorite Bible is the Interlinear as I can read it in the Hebrew and Greek with transliterations and translation. For everyday reading I prefer the Complete Jewish Bible translation by Dr Daniel Stern.
Amen and Amen! Baruch HaShem! You’re 100% in everything you said! You understand Scripture! Blessed one of the Father through our Mashiach Yeshua! I’m also Messianic based in South Africa but with Lemba Jewish DNA from Israel (Lemba are Jews expelled by Ezra for intermarriage after Babylon and ended up in Southern Africa). Do you read the black cover Interlinear by Authors for Christ, Inc.? I also have CJB & went big with OJB, NMV, YLT, and AMP for ease or reading with good rendering! Also have interlinear by Hunderwadel! Yeshua is Jewish, but I guess it’s easier for me as non-European Caucasian, it’s a Pluto have neutral Middle Eastern teacher as Messiah that is is not blonde as etc…, so I do understand why it’s difficult for some people to accept a Jewish Messiah who won’t look like Scandinavian blonde!, & replace easy to understand terms in English which non-mother-tongue English speakers like us would need a dictionary 😳 to understand! Shalom & Shalom
Yeshua was quite emphatic on two things: You shall love the Lord with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, (and with all your strength-added later). AND you shall love your neighbor as thyself. Mark 12:30-31. On these two commandments hang ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS. Matt 22:40
I am a 67yo Chinese, converted since I was 12. I read the Bible (OT+NT) daily. What you said is very true to what I have learned in the Bible. THANKS YOU, SIR, for the detail description about Jesus/Jeshua. Hallelujah. Praise the Lord.
Absolutely WONDERFUL! I have various translations and have always wondered...the best...the worst...the good/bad. This discussion was so helpful in the explanation of ways to evaluate translations. Have never run into to Mark Word online, but I will put him in my list of trusted experts! Thanks to both of you so very much!
I really appreciate you guys posting this. I used to be KJV only, but now I'm exploring other translations. I was taught that other translations were basically the devil. I am now trying to figure out which ones are good and which ones to avoid.
Well if it’s wrong to add to or remove Gods word which God specifically stated it is then at least stick with a textus receptus translation. Mark Ward has now moved all the way into the critical text camp of Wescott and Hort.
@@davidchupp4460you are basically arguing KJV only because of KJV only, ie stick to the TR because the TR is the only Greek source for Gods word. It begs the question. I love the KJV as well as other translations of Gods word.
I spent a few years studying biblical and modern Hebrew from a messianic Jew who was raised in Israel and converted to Christianity after moving to the US. She is also fluent in half a dozen languages. What I learnt from her is that because Biblical Hebrew has such depth of meaning, no one translation can do it justice. She gave examples of passages where English had gotten the meaning right but had totally missed the energy and passion of the Hebrew. She gave me tips for understanding the importance of certain passages. For example, when you see the word 'behold', what follows is really important. Also Hebrew verbs are much more active than how they come across in English. Hear means to hear and obey. What we tend to do is hear and then think 'that's nice' or 'that's interesting' and leave it at that. Hebrew word order can also indicate relative importance of the words in a sentence, whether it's the subject, the verb or the object. So I have to agree with Mark that we can and should read several different good translations, but even then we miss a lot. Having a good knowledge of the whole of scripture will help in knowing when something doesn't seem right. And above all be like the Bereans.
I used to attend the same church that Mark attended in Greenville, SC, but years before Mark was there, I think, as I was there just a while in 1989. This is a great discussion here and I appreciate you, Sean and MArk addressing these issues. I just subscribed and look forward to listening to more.
Yup. All con men do exactly that. “For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” Romans 16:18 KJV
Thank you guys for covering this! I recently encountered a "pastor" on tik tok spouting off a series of beliefs based on poor translations, mainly regarding sexuality. I called him out on it, and after calling me names, he blocked my account. After that exchange Tik Tok proceeded to recommend several other videos along the same lines by various Progressive pastors. Have you guys considered, or do you already have a Tik Tok account to address these types of false teachers?
17:50 the trinity is mentioned where in the Bible? How is this a central truth? As far as I remember yeshua described it best. YHWY is his father. Never heard the ice liquid solid analogy written about in the Bible.
Also, I agree with his wart analogy. If I think there is an intentional change to Gods word, I will NOT read anything from that source. This is a reason i will not read the Passion Translation among a few others. It is also the reason I stopped watching 'The Chosen' after the first season. I ordered their devotional for season 1 and 2 and on day two or three of season one they put up a scripture and replaced "man" with "woman" so I stopped immediately. Seems like overkill to most Christians, but I have zero tolerance for intentional changing of scripture. I understand the Challenges in translation and why there are slight differences in the different translations, I am fine with that. But I want to read my Bible and know that the translators are trying to get the scriptures to current English as accurately as possible.
I want to say that the Message was how i was able to finally approach the Old Testament. I've since moved on to the ESV. But I'm very grateful for how approachable the Message is.
We are obligated, in God’s wisdom, to vet all new information for ourselves. “See to it that no one misleads you. Many will come in My name…” Matthew 24
Be wary of the large number of KJV onlyists here who believe that somehow a more modern translation can be more accurate than an older copy of the original Greek and Hebrew. It doesn't make any logical sense and it's simply not true.
I will stick to the King James with thee,thus and so on, it's the only one I read and have ever read. Thigh when I started reading it 28ish years ago and I would only read 2 or 3 verses a day, I didn't understand it nor try to because I feared The Lord too much to try and make it say what I thought it said, but... I fasted 4 days without food years later just to get closer to The Lord and...on the 4th night I laid my newborn down in his baby bed and picked up my bible at 1:00 am and had to make myself put it down at 7:00 am and go to bed 🙌🙌🙌 The Lord opened up His word that night and it breathed and had a heartbeat, because It and He Is The Word of God and it has never been the same since 🙌🙌🙌 I haven't missed 10 days in 13 years and won't 🙌🙌🙌THANK YOU AGAIN HOLY LORD GOD ALMIGHTY YESHUA YESHUA YESHUA 🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
It's funny how many people think of "thee" as meaning something 'royal' or high-minded... when actually it just means not even the regular "you", but a more informal "you", sort of like "dude", or "you, guy" today. Unfortunately such a distinction no longer exists in English but is found in other languages-- "du" informal versus "Sie" formal polite in German; or "tu" informal versus "Usted" formal polite in Spanish. "Thee" is what was leftover from "du", as English slowly split from German/Scandinavian.
Above comment. What a dumb way to read the bible .two of three verses a day you could never unddrstand. You need to read who is speaking to whom ,what Period of time, is the thing written things to com?e ect
@@MargaretRobinson-fj2eg I read chapters for years and years, the whole word of God. I have read it 28 years and haven't missed 10 days in 25 years. Can you say that? Also I read Revelation every night out of my son's bible and Daniel starting at verse 21 every morning out of my son's other bible that is beside me while I sleep.
Many people are opposed to the 2013 New World Translation because "it upsets their apple cart", such as "dashing to pieces" the "Holy Trinity", having an accurate reading at John 1:1, 2 as: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God." This coincides with the Codex Vaticanus of about 350 C.E. (as well as the Codex Sinaticus of about 375 C.E.), that reads in the interlinear: "In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, a god was the Word. This was in a beginning with the God."(Emphatic Diaglott, pub in 1864 C.E.) And at 1 Timothy 3:16, it says: "Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He (Greek hos, G3739, meaning "who, which, what, that", and NOT theos that means "God", as the KJV reads here, in order to give support to the Trinity) was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory.’ " For example, at Genesis 13:1-4, the King James Bible mistranslates the Hebrew word negeb as "south" and thus has Abram (or Abraham) as going "south" from Egypt towards Bethel, when in fact, he was going north. It failed to differentiate between the compass direction and the geographical location (and also failed to place God's name of Jehovah there, substituting "Lord"), for the Hebrew word negeb (H5045) means "the south, specifically, the Negeb or the southern district of Judah".(Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible) The King James Bible reads there: "And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai; Unto the place of the altar, which he had make there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of the Lord." The 2013 New World Translation accurately reads here: "Aʹbram then went up out of Egypt to the Negʹeb (or southern district of Judah), he and his wife and all that he had, together with Lot. Aʹbram was very rich in livestock, silver, and gold. He camped in one place after another as he traveled from the Negʹeb to Bethʹel, until he arrived at the place where his tent had been between Bethʹel and Aʹi, to the place where he had previously built an altar. There Aʹbram called on the name of Jehovah." When a sincere Bible reader examines the 2013 New World Translation against such ancient Hebrew manuscript at Codex Leningrad B19a of 1008 C.E. (along with R. Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (BHK), seventh, eighth and ninth editions (1951-55), as well as Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), 1977 edition), that is found online at Scripture4all, they can see that it is accurately translated, and is NOT tainted with false religious ideologies such as "the Holy Trinity", hellfire, the cross, etc. For example, the Greek word stauros (G4716, found 27 times in the Bible) is accurately translated as "stake" or "torture stake", as at Matthew 16:24, and NOT "cross", in which it accurately means "a stake or post (as set upright)." It adds "a pole or cross" (which shows it being tainted with apostate Christianity), but this is NOT what Jewish criminals were executed on, as seen at Deuteronomy 21:22, 23: "If a man commits a sin deserving the sentence of death and he has been put to death and you have hung him on a stake (Hebrew 'ets, meaning "a tree, wood", H6086, found 331 times in the Bible, many times as "tree", as at Gen 1:29; 2:16, 17; 3:3, 6, 11, 12, 17; 18:4), his dead body should not remain all night on the stake. Instead, you should be sure to bury him on that day, because the one hung up is something accursed of God, and you should not defile your land that Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance." The apostle Paul quoted Deuteronomy 21:23, saying at Galatians 3:13: "Christ purchased us, releasing us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written (at Deut 21:23): “Accursed is every man hung upon a stake.” So, 'ets has the same basic meaning as stauros and xylon (G3586, that means "timber, a stick, club or tree", which is the Greek word Paul used at Gal 3:13, and found 20 times in the Bible). At Joshua 10, of five kings that were intent on bringing the Gibeonites "back into the fold" when the Gibeonites made peace with the Israelites, were caught and killed, the account says: "Then Joshua struck them and put them to death and hung them on five stakes (Hebrew 'ets), and they remained hanging on the stakes (Hebrew 'ets) until the evening." "At sunset Joshua ordered that they be taken down off the stakes (Hebrew 'ets) and thrown into the cave where they had hidden themselves. Then large stones were placed at the mouth of the cave, and these remain to this very day."(Joshua 10:26, 27) And one final notice of showing 'ets as just a single piece of timber, and NOT "cross", is seen at Esther 5:14: "So Zeʹresh his wife and all his friends said to him: “Have a stake (Hebrew 'ets) put up, 50 cubits high (or about 75 ft tall)." "And in the morning tell the king that Morʹde·cai should be hanged on it. Then go with the king to enjoy yourself at the banquet.” This suggestion seemed good to Haʹman, so he had the stake (Hebrew 'ets) put up."(see also 1 Kings 6:15, whereby "He (Solomon) paneled the inside walls with timber" or 'ets) Because most people want to be "spoon fed" what a religious leader teaches, and are unwilling to "do the homework", "comparing notes", they will just accept whatever he says, rather than doing as the Beroeans did with regard to what the apostle Paul said when he visited the synagogue in Beroea: "Immediately by night the brothers sent both Paul and Silas to Be·roeʹa. On arriving, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thes·sa·lo·niʹca, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining ("carefully examining", Greek anakrino, meaning "investigate, examine, inquire into, scrutinize") the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."(Acts 17:10, 11) So, when a sincere, and NOT biased, person wants to know "the truth", the 2013 New World Translation is exactly what they need.
My pastor uses KJV and encourages others to use it. Some do, some don’t. I grew up with it but I haven’t used it in probably 10 years. My go to translation is the NLT followed by the NKJV, ESV, and Amplified. It’s always such a treat to watch Mark.
Google 'Errors in the KJV' and observe the hits. The NWT despite a bias by those who want to believe the what they want, restore God's name to over 7,000 times. (Isaiah 42:8) I am Jehovah. That is MY NAME; I give my glory to no one else, Nor my praise to graven images. 'I am the LORD. That is my name' doesn't make any sense as the Lord is a title. Many had that title, including pagans.
"Despite a bias"? No it denies the divinity of Christ. God does NOT require a Christian to say the word. Maybe for Jews. We are Christians, the law is fulfilled, we are no longer under the law.
@@Dilley_G45 : If Jesus himself denied any divinity, how can some Bible translation change that fact? (cf John 8:40). 'No man has SEEN God AT ANY TIME (1 John 4:12). I believe that Jesus was SEEN by humans as is evident in the Bible. Thus, he couldn't have been God at any time, could he.
Dr Ward, are you concerned at all about the seemingly intentional ESV interpretations which present eternal functional subordination of the Son? This undermines the fundamental principle of equality within the trinity.
The translation of heautou/emautoú as “on his own authority” (Jn 7:17, Jn 8:28, Jn 10:18, Jn 12:49, Jn 14:10, Jn 16:13) yet this is not the translation in the 300+ other occurrences of this word. It is more often translated “of himself…own initiative” - but why does the ESV use the prior translation, and ONLY of the Son towards the Father? I cannot help but think that this is part of an intentional desire to strengthen complementarian roles - within the Trinity since this is tied so closely to complementarian interpretations of, say I Cor 11… The POV of the ESV translation team was that of bolstering complementarian gender roles, correct?
@@bethanypetrie4716 This is a perceptive question-but I honestly believe it to be a little too perceptive! I think you may be reading into the ESV something the translators never intended. I suppose it would take the personal testimony of several NT translators of the ESV to fully convince you, but it might help to note a few things. First, in Logos I can easily search for those Greek phrases ("from himself" and "from myself") and see in a grid how multiple translations render them. The NIV uses the offending phrase, too, in at least one passage. Second, I just think this is all too subtle. "On my/his own authority" is a) pretty clearly a possible rendering of the rather ambiguous Greek genitive at issue and b) not so clearly (to my mind) a promotion of some clear Trinitarian viewpoint. Did anyone get moved toward complementarianism by reading these ESV renderings? I would be very surprised if that were the case! And, third, rather importantly for your particular concerns about the ESV, **the ESV matches the RSV in every one of the passages that concerns you.** Well, all but one, in which it actually revises the RSV's "I can do nothing on my own authority" back to "I can do nothing on my own." Unless you want to pull the RSV translators into the conspiracy to subtly promote EFS and/or complementarianism, I think you're going to have to conclude that the ESV translators didn't do anything wrong here. In a sense, they didn't do anything at all. They simply let the RSV stand. I hope this helps! I think the most you'll ever prove of effectively any serious Bible translator is that they chose from among several genuinely viable renderings the one that best fit with their existing theology. But I'll bet that you could, for any given translation, also find places where they translated something very straightforwardly despite its causing an apparent weakness for their theological viewpoints.
@@azarellediaz4892 Sorry, I was referring to the Chinese government's version on the Bible. They are re-writing it to suit their political agenda,. Try an internet search on this for more info.
Thank you for discussing Bible Translations Sirs, though this topic may not get that much attention, it is still of great importance to study this to really know the message God is trying to impart through His Word.
When a god is incapable of ensuring that his word is clear and correctly understood by all of the people he chose to worship him, I would say that is a god who hasn't really thought things through very well. Having thousands of denominations all getting it wrong, apart from the correct one that each worshipper KNOWS' is the correct interpretation of the bible of course, and all the other denominations have it wrong, though not as wrong as all the other religions of course. This does not appear to be the actions of an omnipotent and omnipresent supernatural being in my view.
@@JustaNaughtyBoy You have a point but you missed the fact that the Omnipotent and Omniscient God is not controlling humans like robots but gave us all free will to choose our actions, including sin but with consequences (both believers and unbelievers). God's Word (The Bible) is Infallible in it's Original Writings as it is Verbally Inspired of God, denominations are built by humans, the Bible is translated by humans and studying came along with those things, we are to blame for wrong beliefs, building false religions and wrong translations, God is not to blame when we've done wrong things.
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree with you when you say that humans are to blame for building false religions. How do you determine what is a false religion? The Muslims say that Christianity and Hinduism are false religions, The Hindus say that Christianity and Islam are false religions. If I accept these claims of theists, it truly appears that all religions are false religions. You say that an Omnipotent and Omniscient God is not controlling humans, You suggest that your god is infallible in it's original writings. How did the original writings make it onto earth?
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree with you. Humans are to blame for creating false religions. What is your criteria for a false religion? Mine is the lack of credible evidence that their gods exists. Muslims say Christianity and Hinduism are false, Hindus say Christianity and Islam is false. I agree with both on those points and I think they use the same criteria as I do. You say your all powerful god is not controlling humans, I agree, It is a fallible god that chooses to have humans that he created to ensure his word is clear to all, I therefore dont think an infallible god exists. Are you saying that your god is fallible? To create humans incapable of doing this, is truly a careless thing to do. If I was a perfect god, I would ensure that my word could not be corrupted, if I was all powerful of course. How did these Infallible Original Writings get written? Did a man do the writing?
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree, Humans create false religions. What is your criteria for a false religion? Mine is a religion that has no credible evidence that their god exists. How have you determined that the religions of the Muslims and Hindus are false? I suspect they have determined Christianity is false because Christianity has somehow not shown their god to exist. An infallible god would ensure its word remained infallible and endure time, as this god is eternal. You say the original writings are infallible, was it a man who translated the word of god into these infallible original writings?
I use multiple translations for study: NASV, ESV, NRSV, but my newest translation that I am really impressed with is the Berean Standard Bible. It seems comparable to ESV but flows perfectly for reading aloud. I haven't seen it mentioned here.
I also prefer a multi-translation study approach mainly using NKJV, ESV and NASB as go-tos and CSB and NIV for more difficult passages that I need clearer "thought for thought" support to aid my understanding. I'm now curious about BSB. Can't wait to check it out! Thanks!
Love this dialogue. I especially appreciate how both Sean and Mark speak about The Message as a complimentary to a good Bible translation. As I contemplate my role as a Jesus-Follower in the reconciliation with the First Nations of Canada a trusted Christian friend shared an Indigenous Translation of the New Testament called the "First Nations Version". He cautioned me to use it as a complimentary source to a good english translation (I use the ESV most often). The introduction and prologue give insight to the methodology they used. It's pretty cool as a resource.
Please tell me more about this indigenous translation. Is this a good one only for Native American culture, or could it be a good Bible for helping someone else.
@@cherylaguilar5421 I think The Native Translation of the New Testament is good like The Message translation. I would not exclusively use it but i do think it has value. I’m not as experienced at valuation of documents like Sean or Mark, but I do read it along side my ESV
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
Great video... I preach from NASB2020 but in part of my prep I also use NLT / CSB and NKJV ... I think a balance is the best approach to taking in translations
@@REVNUMANEWBERN I am not sure exactly what you are trying to get at with this reply, but the answer is, Jesus did not need to use any "translation" because he literally had the original scrolls in a language that was still read and understood in his day. We do not have that luxury, therefore, we need to use all tools available in this day and age to form the best possible understanding of God's Word.
Do you think our God wants us to go farther away from His Word in translations, or forward; OR closer towards His Word in translations ? All translations can Not be correct? Some evidently are closer? What about versions that leave verses out totally?
Thank you Dr Sean! Amazing guest 🎉 I'm so happy over the years it's sensible to conclude you should use many legitimate translations together ❤ thank you Mark Ward
I started reading the KJV four years ago, whereas I used to read the NIV. It was slow going for the first several months, but it didn't take me long to begin understanding it. The longer I read it, the more I understand it, and it is better than any translation I've read. The language of the King James may be hard to understand at first, but if you try it it won't take long and is more than worth it. I believe it is the most accurate.
I'm an ESV and Logos Bible Study guy, but I still pick up the NKJV when I'm reading the Psalms (or certain other, lyrical passages.) The KJV has multiple faults, but it's still one of the unsurpassed works in the English language for its beauty. Much of my memory of verse still comes from my early KJV days and my mom's recitations that still ring, so beautifully, in my ear.
A new girl to our church brought a New World Translation to pre-teen camp because that was the only bible they had in their house! I made sure to get her a new one right away! I didn't realize that JWs gave out their text, I thought you had to read it with a "pastor" to get the understanding correct?
I actually managed to get one from JW’s on the street and they didn’t require me to study it with them. So I guess they’re quite open to give their translation to others.
I’m gonna try to explain as best as possible (my parents are JWs, and I was raised in the religion - never got baptized so I don’t count lol). Typically they don’t give them out willy nilly- first you knock, then it’s either a return visit or you start studying. In which case, it usually is the “what does the Bible teach?” Book- they revised it since. At some point they will offer to give you a nwt Bible and invite you to the Kingdom Hall. It’s weird because they have other translations on the app you can download, yet they have a disdain-? or superiority complex when it comes to someone using any- and I mean any- other translation. If you don’t know your Bible, they will pull you in. Added bonus for reading the Bible is that when they come around, you can preach to them and hopefully plant a few seeds. Hope that did it for explaining the whole thing.
@@cinnamondan4984 Well, the New World Translation does indeed deny that Jesus was and is God in John chapter one. So, I have to agree with the other person here who said the NWT is garbage. Wouldn't waste my time reading it, except maybe to see where the Jehovah's Wiitnesses altered Scripture to fit their agenda.
I love reading The Message Bible, but only because I think in KJV! I find The Message interesting and sometimes funny and very interesting. It's not a "Study" Bible. When I just want to relax but keep myself centered on My Savior!
0:00 Introduction
0:28 Introducing Mark Ward
2:35 How Concerning are Bad Translations?
4:01 How Can a Translation Go Bad?
6:07 How did You Pick These Top 7?
7:31 (1). The NWT
12:19 (2). Muslim Translations
18:33 (3). The TPT
24:45 (4). The NRSVUE
30:51 (5). The TLV
37:57 (6). The MSG
41:31 The Controversial NRSVUE Verse
45:32 (7). The "KJV"
50:16 Principles of Key Translations
56:04 What About Gender Neutrality?
58:40 What Bible Translation Should I Use?
59:14 Tell Us About Yourself
59:53 Conclusion
You can’t be serious. Why would you read a book that denies the deity of Jesus? Unless of course you’re a JW believing in a completely different Jesus that can’t save!!!
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment
"thou shalt worship whoever you want"
and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god.
is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
@@HarryNicNicholas Dude, God wants to give everyone a chance to follow Jesus Christ or anti christ.
man/mammon king or God King. The dude sporting a fish hat sasshaying around in long flowing robes saying I man king forgive you saying long repetitious chants to another god and remain carnal. Or our heavenly father.
@@HarryNicNicholas Actually God gives all rights. As in choice of good or evil. It is called free will. If no choice he could have just built robots. The greatest punishment for disobedience to God is natural consequences.
Bless you!
I’m Greek living in an English speaking country. I was raised in a home where my parents spoke Greek as their first language. I have an app where I can easily look up the Greek words as I love to see what Greek word was used for the English translation. What struck me the most was how every day language the Greek words of the original are. Whereas in the kjv for example, the words are so formal and almost create this disconnect with God. The original Greek was not formal language but the every day language they used at that time. This made me realise that God really wants to relate to us in our every day language, not a language we can’t understand.
Right!
I agree, however when the KJV was written, they actually spoke like that! So it would have been just normal English at that time. But to us today, because of how much the language has changed, it does create that disconnect. I’ve never read the KJV because I can barely understand it haha.
Interesting.
As you are Greek, could I ask you something that has been on my mind for a while now ?
Is the Greek word use in English translation of
Genesis 3:8 KJV : "And they heard the *voice of the LORD God* walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD" is also the *Word* in Greek ?
If this is so, that means Jesus was walking in the garden of Eden with Adam and Eve as we all know the "Word" in John 1: 1 is Jesus Christ Himself.
I would appreciate it very much if you could confirm this. Thank you very much.😊
@@hollybooth6946 exactly. Thee & thou were terms of familiarity when the KJV was written. Now they are seen as "affectations."
@@jessicalamb8312 hi there, so as the Old Testament is written in Hebrew and the New Testament is in Greek I tend to stick with the NT when interpreting. So were you wondering if Jesus was the one walking with Adam and Eve in the garden in cool of the day? I’ve never really pondered that question.
Jesus was with God at creation and it says that the worlds were made through Him. Jesus was concealed or hidden throughout the Old Testament but revealed in the New Testament. We could say that through all of the old covenant, there are many types and shadows of Christ. So God may be revealing to you a type and shadow of Christ in this particular verse you are quoting.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 📜 *The video discusses bad Bible translations and how to find a good one, featuring Dr. Mark Ward as a guest.*
03:37 🛑 *Concerns about bad Bible translations are raised, focusing on defending vernacular careful translation over time.*
06:00 🌐 *The discussion delves into ways translations can go bad, categorizing them into sectarian Bibles and crackpot Bibles.*
07:36 📘 *The top seven bad translations are introduced, starting with the New World Translation by Jehovah's Witnesses.*
18:38 📖 *The Passion Translation is highlighted as a bad translation, with concerns about unclear methodology, Aramaic usage, and questionable linguistic concepts.*
22:03 📜 *Some Bible translations, like the Passion Translation, can be criticized for making questionable connections and interpretations, leading to potentially misleading ideas.*
23:53 📚 *Before reading the Passion Translation, it is recommended to have a solid foundation in standard translations like ESV, NIV, Christian Standard Bible, and New King James Version.*
25:16 🤔 *The New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition has a potential issue in First Corinthians 6:9, where the translation may over-specify and over-generalize, possibly influenced by certain cultural pressures.*
26:09 💬 *There is a concern about the NRSV Updated Edition's translation of certain terms in First Corinthians 6:9, potentially obscuring the intended meaning about homosexuality.*
31:01 📖 *The Tree of Life Version, associated with Messianic Judaism, is criticized for its fixation on Jewish traditions, such as substituting "Adonai" for "Yahweh" and using Hebrew transliterations excessively.*
34:43 🌐 *The Tree of Life Version's inclusion of Hebrew transliterations in an English translation is seen as a superstitious practice, deviating from the historical Christian perspective that God can speak in any language.*
38:25 🤷♂️ *The Message, while valuable for its fresh perspective and potential as a study aid, can be problematic when misused as a preaching Bible due to its paraphrased nature.*
41:43 📖 *Concerns are raised about Eugene Peterson's clarity on the historic Christian view of marriage, as seen in his translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 in The Message.*
43:20 📖 *Mark Ward discusses the use of paraphrases like Peterson's "The Message" and acknowledges potential concerns but emphasizes their value when treated as paraphrases rather than authoritative translations.*
45:55 📚 *Mark Ward criticizes the misuse of the King James Version, stating that while it was an excellent translation in its time, its use without considering changes in language over time is problematic. He advocates for a thoughtful evaluation of language and vernacular translation.*
50:31 🌐 *Mark Ward explains the spectrum of translation approaches, from formal (like NASB) to dynamic (like NIV), highlighting the value in using both for a richer understanding of the biblical text.*
53:33 🤔 *Ward acknowledges that every translation has some downsides or potential areas of concern. He exemplifies this with a small issue he found in the NIV related to the interpretation of "spiritual body" in 1 Corinthians 15.*
56:17 ⚖️ *Mark Ward, a complementarian, defends the use of "gender-neutral" translations like the NIV, urging consideration of scholarly perspectives, such as those of D.A. Carson and Doug Moo, to understand the linguistic rationale behind such translations.*
58:53 📚 *In response to the common question about Bible translation recommendations, Mark Ward suggests using all the good, modern, evangelical English translations, promoting the idea that having multiple translations is an asset for understanding the Bible better.*
59:20 🎥 *Mark Ward promotes his RUclips channel, "Mark Ward on Words," where he discusses topics related to Bible translation, King James Onlyism, and aims for a gracious appeal to those who hold different views, with a broader goal of helping the church.*
Made with HARPA AI
Thank you
"Bad Translations"
1. NWT (New World Translation) @7:33
2. Arabic Translations @12:21
3. TPT (The Passion Translation) @ 18:42
4. NRSVue (New Revised Standard Version Update) @24:47
5. TLV (Tree of Life Version) @30:55
6. TMT (The Message Translation) @38:01
7. KJV (King James Version) @45:45
Good Translations @50:48
NASB (Literal / Formal), NIV (Functional)
What bible translation should you use?
@59:02
"to fear God" = respect God KJV is hard unless you are raised with it or study Shakespeare and similar.
The new kjv is easier to read
Thank you!
At 23:55 he actually lists the KJV as a good version.
So, I don't think he is saying it is a bad trabslation per se.
As for my opinion, I think it was a good translation into English, but modern English is quite different these days. So I like the NKJV also.
I haven't gotten to what hw said about the KJV yet.
Thanks!!!
I am a NASB guy and am still using the 71 version by lockman. My grandfather was a Christian publisher so I got that full version as early as was possible. My next choice is the ESV. I still use the KJV regularly because it is still a really great translation. Like many I go to Blue Letter Bible and look at many versions.
SO, you believe in a ever changing text, a fluid text, and or that Gods word was LOST at one time and NOW has to be restored
KJV is the worst one.
you say it's the worst but give no evidence of it. After over 50 years of bible study with several theological degrees and having used most of the english versions out there I would disagree with you@@tabularasa0606
I agree. In fact, living on the other side of the Atlantic, I use the Second Edition (1971/72) of the RSV, which is almost identical to the NASB and also the ESV. These are the translations formally approved by my Church - fortunately they are also my own personal choice. I like the KJV, of course, just as I like Shakespeare. The KJV remains a good and accurate translation, but the English language has changed over the last five hundred years. For example “prevent us, Lord, in all our doings”. Five hundred years ago, this meant “Go before us, Lord and clear the way for us in all that we do.” Now, it means, “Stop us, Lord, from doing what we are doing.” The old English means the opposite of the modern English. So, the Word of God has not changed. The English language has changed.
language sure has changed which is why the KJV has been continuously updated re: language . I notice a lot of tv preachers use the NKJV and if I am home on the puter I go to blue letter bible and check out multiple translations. I have a copy of Barcleys NT translation and of course the NAS but that is all I own anymore. Everything else has been "borrowed"out and never returned@@Mark3ABE
As an Arabic speaker and former translator, my favorite Arabic Bible by far is the Van Dyck Version. It's absolutely beautiful, albeit challenging in the same way that the KJV and Geneva Bible are for English speakers. It's definitely not catered to Muslims either; it uses many terms and names that are unique to Christianity and/or borrowed from Aramaic. My copy has a glossary of difficult words in the back. I love it.
Understand however that even towards english translations, there are words that can not be translated.
The same goes with translations done to english from Arabic, concerning the Qu'ran or the Hadiths as I'm sure you'll know.
The original languages the Bible has been translated from are Hebrew, Aramaic, and (Koine) Greek.
Needless to say, Koine Greek is not exactly the same as modern Greek.
As a translator, you might appreciate the 2019 NET Full Notes Bible.
@@Rain-DirtFor sure. KJV is easy IMO. I grew up with it. I am studying Hebrew and I didn't realize ancient Hebrew is fairly different. Lol 🤣 I hope to learn ancient eventually and maybe even some Aramaic.
My husband studies Greek and had the same realization. So we both use the modern languages for a base with some of the other dialects thrown in, hoping to have a better hold on both of we live that long/keep our sense! 😅
In our late 30s and told it's hard to learn language at this age. I think it's hog wash to stop people from learning later in life when wise and looking to learn for greater meaning beyond some public school staff directing them TO a language. But that's my tin foil hat! 😂
It's interesting how we can't make the same noises as people born into Hebrew speaking families can. But I try! I think speaking some Spanish, French, and a sprinkling of ASL and Gaelic have helped me. It's fun to try to translate words into all languages to keep it maintained. And of course to use it in everyday language and Google keyboard in that language. But it's wild how the keyboard and even lessons in Duolingo don't have the vowel markings so that gets confusing.
Van dyke is not that hard it's like the NKJV/MEV version for Arabic.
Van Dyke is not that hard it's about as easy as NKJV/MEV
I became a Christian at a multi-denominational Bible study group. We'd take it in turns to read a few verses, and we all had different Bible versions. If anyone had something interestingly- different, we'd stop and talk about it.
That’s exactly what me and my youth group do 😂. No judgement, just respect. Except for that Passion Translation 🤮
Another kind to look out for is the "spoken word ministry." They don't want their congregation to read the Bible. They want them to just take the pastor's word.
Wouldn't it be a babel of ideas and suggestions.
God has a people who teach the truth. I would get their help. Compare Daniel 12:9,10.
@@jimjuri6490 Hello Jimjuri, if you were replying to that comment about leaders not wanting their congregations to understand:
If I was a leader, I'd want my flock to get good teaching, not bad, and the accessibility of rotten teaching, today, would make me want to shield them from it- maybe censoring and controlling. But I don't think that ultimately would be helpful.
Surely, the goal is to help each person grow into the maturity of faith and wisdom and relationship with the Lord, to be able to face the onslaught of the world, and be ready when storms, temptations or confusing teachings come, so that they can distinguish between the things of God, and the things that are not?
I'd want my flock to be like the Bereans and search and learn scripture so that, with the Holy Spirit and the church family alongside, them, they can think for themselves.
@@tommarshall7247 : Here is what God said about priests. (Not those who had God's authority for Temple Service as provided in the Law Covenant).
To self appointed priests and leaders.
Micah 3:11 Her leaders judge for a bribe,
Her priests instruct for a price,
And her prophets practice divination for money.
And yet they lean on Jehovah, saying:
“Is not Jehovah with us?
No calamity will come upon us.”
Jesus has only one group of DISCIPLES. To them he said,
Matthew 13:11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them (ie. The Priests and Rabbis) it is not granted.
It means that God reveals true understanding of his Word to only those who are Jesus' True Disciples.
Others will read the scriptures. But no understanding is given them.
Compare Daniel 12:9,10.
Remember the incident involving the Ethiopian Eunuch. God sent Philip to help him understand the scriptures. (Acts 8:26-35).
I'd get the help of JWs today. They all believe and teach one set of Bible teachings. Compare 1 Corinthians 1:10.
This was so informative and I'm incredibly thankful for the measured nature of the commentary 👏🏾
I really appreciate this video! I learned so much. I struggled to understand which bible I should be using and now realized I was one of those that put up small walls against others that used translations I thought were not good. Thank you for opening my eyes and heart to truth.
Very informative. Challenged me to think about things I hadn't put much time into.
Sean, you are one of the best interviewers I've seen/heard. You ask great questions - questions that dig into the heart of your topic. And rather than prefacing each one with a long commentary of your own (pet peeve w/ other podcasters who interview) you give plenty of space for the one you are interviewing to cover the bases. Great job!
I totally agree with you, he interviewed well. He also did not interject his views to the point of suffocating the other guy out. I've seen this happen way too much, it almost makes me want to stop listening at times.😮
Ditto! Me too. @@yvonnecolton4483
Ok@@yvonnecolton4483
Very measured without falling into so much nuance that there's nothing of value to say. Thank you Dr. Ward for that display of grace and truth in speech.
That was the attempt! Thank you for the kind word.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching this and a more scholarly discussion on Bible Translations. In my childhood I was primarily taught from the King James while heavily exposed to The Living Bible paraphrase. Later on, I spend much time studying from the New American Standard and currently primarily study from the NIV. In academic studies, I learned that the KJV, often referred to as the "Authorized Version" was the first "sanctioned" translation of scripture to the language of the common people in England. Truly, it is no longer the language of common English speaking people, though still quite useful. Certainly, I believe better understanding can be gained through studying multiple "good" translations of scriptures.
The drunk KNOWS he's a drunk.
The liar KNOWS he's a liar.
The deceived person does NOT know he's deceived. Seek ye the old paths
Very true. One example of this is the fact that people throwing the stone of subjective ( and, therefore, contextually unfair and invalid) comparison in order to subconsciously justify contempt and hatred shatters the golden rule through its contextual unfairness.
Never thought of that way, but well said.
How in the name of HEAVEN can the God of TRUTH have TWO truths that CONTRADICT each other?
I love the Elizabethan language of KJV. I grew up as a child on it and as a teen moved into the NKJV which is indeed easier to understand in whole. I just added to my collection last year the NIV- which I love. I was searching for a good study Bible as I started school for leadership and ministry and I prefer the Thompson chain-reference BEFORE digging into any others or supplements. To see what it is that God reveals to me without the input of others first. Then I added ESV global study Bible as it was a requirement for my OT survey class, the Israel Bible, the Septuagint, the NIV life application study Bible, and I am currently awaiting my NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible to arrive. I also have used the inter linear Bible app on my computer, and have the ESV membership to access those and the basic youversion Bible app. I love comparing them all and when I read a passage that I know is not the correct word, I go through them all to see who translated it correctly.
I would suggest " Spirit Filled" study bible by Jack Hayford. One of the best nonbias study bibles out there. A lot of bibles say study bible, but it is just a rehash of the persons denomination or school he or she went to. The Spirit Filled bible is just the opposite, it allows the reader to make his or her own choice on the nonessentials and is crystal clear when it come to the absolutes of our faith. Look it up and check out the reviews, they just came out with a 3rd edition which says a lot, very popular bible. Lord Bless.
Well I'm glad someone enjoyed the language in the KJV. I always hated it. It seems to me that it makes God's Word unrelateable and contrived. I can really appreciate your care to examine scriptures side by side with multiple translations
@@skylee5029 That's because it was written 400 yrs ago. It was written for the common peeps in those days, farmers, drunks, hookers and the like. The educated actually put it down because it was to common, to easy to read and still is if you take the time. Using the word hate to describe God's word is really lacking respect towards the Lord, try expressing yourself differently or take the time and learn how to read the KJV. It will bless you beyond measure, look up on youtube why some prefer to read KJV. I read several but my heart is NKJV and there are many reason why. Lord Bless
It's written in an archaic language. Good for you but terrible for modern English speakers.
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment
"thou shalt worship whoever you want"
and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god.
is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
I'm 84 and have known at least since high school, when I had not at that time read the King James Version, that "halt" could mean "limping" or "lame". Perhaps I had heard t he expression, :" the halt and the blind" and automatically made sense of it. "Halting" was used with the meaning "hesitating" or "uncertain" or :"stumbling." And now, my problem isn't with the Elizabethan English it's with RUclips English.
I am braziliam I love my New King James Bible, it's receptus text, we can see 1Tim 3:16, God in flesh, 1John 5; 7, you can see, and compare John 10:30, Mat. 28;19, etc. My best english Bible, I love it.
(KJV was the english of the period of King James Stewart V of scotland, I of england, so is technically jacobean, not Tudor. He was the king after Lizzie the first died childless)
HA HA ! RUclips english! Totally. I hear you!
I understood the term "Halt" from childhood. How? You hear it, remember it but don't know where. There are plenty of words in the King James that have changed meaning, giving false impressions.
The word "conversation" use to mean manner of life, not talking.
The word "cousin" between Mary and Elizabeth use to mean, kin, or someone from the same area or country.
The word "doctors" meant "teachers", not someone with a stethoscope around their neck.
Bewitchment meant leading astray.
The word "meet" was what was "fitting" or "proper".
The King James is fine as long as you understand changes to vocabulary is a normal human process and do not hang doctrines upon dictionary word lookups.
@@SpaceCadet4Jesus CORRECTION if you go online to the 1828 Webster's Dictionary you will find this was originally a bible helps book keyed in every word to scripture. And it has the Original Meanings of each word. There are over a dozen words in the KJV that not a single bible believing pastor today understands.
I started reading the KJV cover to cover at age 13. The Generations of pastors that read the bible cover to cover all the days of their lives IS LONG GONE.
I have observed the last two standing generations i went to bible school with hundreds of these 48 years ago and to my shock I only found 2 students that had read the bible cover to cover by the sheer volume of what they Could quote.
THAT WAS OUT OF 800 STUDENTS many of whom never bothered to read a single Gospel.
AVOID ANY PASTOR WHO CAN NOT DEMONSTRATE THEY HAVE READ THE BIBLE COVER TO COVER.
I love the NIV, because I am dyslexic, and by the grace of God, it’s one of the few Bibles, I can actually read, thank you Jesus for the wealth of knowledge you’ve given us
How many times does the NIV have God’s Name in it?? 🤔
NIV has missing verses
Don't use it!
@@cathygray3467 Have you ever considered that the KJV has ADDED verses in it? We know that Erasmus, who compiled what would later be called the textus receptus, added verses for which he had no textual backing. As I recall, he had no Greek Text for the end of Revelation so he simpply translated the Latin Vulgate of that passage into Greek so as to fill out his text. Now, I do not find any of those "additions" to be harmful to the overall message of the Scriptures, so I have no problem with using the KJV. Even though I use the 1984 NIV when I preach in my church, whenever I preach in a church pastored by one of my friends, I use the KJV for that is what my friends use in their churches. As of yet, I have not had any problems preaching the same message from either translation, and I have been a pastor for about 40 years.
Not sure why those who haven’t spent a day in seminary will place all their bets on false claims. NIV and most of the popular translations have been put together by Bible scholars and reference the earliest available manuscripts. Please don’t buy into the KJV only hype unless you are wholly familiar with old English and the meanings of they words and linguistic structure of the language. I can tell you with confidence that your average Joe cannot discern the true meaning of certain words or phrases used in the 17th century. Btw, the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it because a charismatic preacher said so.
@@cathygray3467 The KJV was written in a time before many old greek manuscripts were discovered. So it is not flawless
Great interview. I think Mark is right. We have an embarrassment of riches in English translations. I love rhe ESV, but i have taken to start preaching from the CSB lately for the sake of those in the congregation I serve. The concept of intelligibility that Mark talks about has been really help. There is no one translation at our church. People come with NLT, NIV, GNB and ESV. Our lead pastor usea the NLT. We often joke with each other as which is better. But I just wantes people to understand. I think it is important to take into account the education level of those to whom you are ministering too, and the accuracy of the text. Thats why i have switch to CSB for preaching personally...I definitely prefer my ESV, but for the sake of other i made the change. And i have noticed there are times where the CSB is better than the ESV. But thanks for a great interview. Grace and peace
What is CSB
@@cathygray3467 it is the Christian Standard Bible published by Holman.
This response is more in line with my practices. I was raised on the KJV and was biased heavily toward it for a long time. However, when God sent me to teach a high school group, I taught more from the NIV and NLT. After exploring options for myself as a next-step translation, I tried the CSB but eventually landed on the ESV as my primary study translation because it felt the closest to the KJV. This helps me because I spent years learning and memorizing Scripture from the KJV.
This has been unbelievably helpful. My husband and I were Bible translators for the Kire speaking people in Papua New Guinea. Trying to keep in accurate and having to you phrases for words they did not have made it very complicated. Many other culture differences from Greek and Hebrew really made things complicated too . We had 2 men from every one of our villages join us to study every single verse and then go home to there villages and read it around their camp fires and come back to make sure we were getting the true meaning across on every verse. It was not an easy task. So I truly understood all you were saying and appreciated your attitude of love, and unity , realizing god could use it all. god bless your ministry.
Wondering why you used god rather than God?
Hello Sharon,
I see that you show respect to your country by capitalizing ~
Papa New Guinea.
Respectfully, I want to point out, incase you were not aware,
we should show even more respect for our Heavenly Father by always capitalizing the
G> in God, in reverence to Him. Especially since, in this age, lowercase god implies of false idol gods.
Have a blessed day sister 🙂
@@suekruse978 lots of typos and grammatical english errors in comment. Perhaps they used dictation software
excellent conversation.... thanks Sean!
1928 Prayer Book Anglican here. We use the KJV for all our liturgical readings. I agree new translations were/are needed. That said, the literary value of the KJV is unparalleled. It's a shame that it isn't being read more.
It IS being READ & UNDERSTOOD, but you wouldn't think so because the masses have been taught & manipulated to use the NEW BOOKS, IF one was to dig down deep on this subject one would find that those who use the KJV as their primary source or only source HAS LEFT the church systems as those systems LEFT the SOURCE, the very FIRST SIGNS of places called churches leaving sound teaching , doctrine is using DIFFERENT SOURCES of so called "truth". Different translations comes 1st or 2nd to a plethora of OTHER books & materials being used.
Folks who are Born Again BY experience have NO problem reading and understanding the KJV
Modern faithful translations weren't completed until long after 1928. At the time, the KJV was the most modern version available.
@@REVNUMANEWBERNFolks who are born again and are led by by the Holy Spirit. Will also reject the KJV only heresy, one of Satan's most subtle deceptions.
@REVNUMANEWBERN that's an oxymoron. Being 'born again' shows lack of understanding.
I am just a simple frail guy, saved by grace through faith because of Jesus Christ.
I cannot help being educated and mightily encouraged when serious and dedicated scholars, such as yourselves, are so careful and humble with your words, yet whilst not flinching from the bold ministry given to us all by Jesus. Thank you .. and I thank God for you.
Don't be fooled by their cool explanations they are promoting their own agenda, a Bible which does not have God's name in it like the kjversion should be considered bad. The oldest manuscripts have God's name over 7000 times which many theologians agree but say that they don't use God's name because it is reverd or sacred, they admit that at the beginning of most Bibles saying that it has deliberately been omitted. But the Bible says to call on the name of jehovah so pray tell me how can they call on the name of God when you so called intellectuals have omitted it from the Bible. Jesus knew and used his father's name.
Interesting discussion. Having started with KJV as an early teen and basically given up on understanding it. Then trying again in my later teens and struggling again. Then taking up a Living Bible and devouring it. Then moving to NASB and devouring it. Then moving back to the KJV and loving it. Then trying NIV and having issues with it. I have a bit of personal history. I have many translations but have only read through the Living, the NASB, and the KJV. I lean toward the KJV at this point in my life. I am not KJV only. Earlier i was NASB only. However, one only has a finite span of life here and there is not end of books and many English translations. In the interest of maximizing the time I lean toward avoiding "warts" and false teachings. If one knows the truth, the lies and deceptions become apparent when one is introduced to them and the Holy Spirit uses that the Truth to expose them. God is faithful even when we are not.
Protestant Bibles are corrupted bcse Luther removed 7 books and added the word Sola, meaning the Bible alone. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950s they were translated. The Bible as used by the Catholic Church was found to be 100% identical to the Scrolls. Protestant bibles were not and were hurriedly burned and newer but still inaccurate versions produced. Protestant bibles are also adapted to Protestant theology of which there are TWO? Which one is correct? The first King James was full of errors and was nicknamed the Adulterous bible. The second edition still has many errors. The Catholic version has NIHIL OBSTAT and IMPRIMATUR printed on the inside of the cover. That is the correct version which is identical to the Scrolls. Finally, the Bible is a Catholic book, put together by the Catholic Church 400 yrs after the death of Jesus. For those 400 yrs the Church grew rapidly without any Bible and the Bible says 'The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth'. So, Protestants who think the Catholic Church is false, should throw away or burn their bibles! Then what have they got? Nothing!
What would you consider lies and false teachings? I have the 1611 King James Bible, the Living Bible, the Gideon Bible and the NWT?
King James was a homosexual antsemite Christian killer...why would you support anything to do with him
I use the You version - Bible app - mainly because i can easily switch versions and see what is said in different translations to try and dig deep into what the verse is saying. Most of my daily reading is in either NLT or ESV. I had memorized a ton of scripture in KJV as a child, and I think that the older style of language made a lot of the true meaning of the scripture went right over my head. I memorized several books in NIV, and recently, our pastor was preaching on a passage I had memorized, and they had the passage up on the screen and it said it was NIV, but the words were a little off from what I remembered. Which is when I learned that the NIV has been updated... I was hunting through each translation on the app, trying to figure out how I had gotten so mixed up... lol
I also really appreciate being able to read a passage in five, six, ten different translations when the pastor or teacher is stressing the importance of the way a verse is specifically worded, since it's usually not worded the same, so is the meaning they are stressing still there if we read a different translation? Some times it is, sometimes, well, I think some teachers or pastors get really stuck on just one translation and it's like they have blinders on to anything else.
I do have to give a little shout out for the Message, though. I had grown up immersed in KJV or NIV, and it definitely shocked me out of my rut! 1 Corinthians 13 really came to life for me. And was actually the catalyst for my husband and I reexamining our divorce and we wound up getting remarried and just celebrated 23 years.
I sure appreciated the view points expressed!
That’s wonderful that “the love chapter” in The Message paraphrase reconciled you and your husband!
I wasn’t too hip on it at first. I still don’t read it a lot. However, the Psalms came alive in The Message because of the way Eugene Peterson interpreted David’s conversations with God. David was passionate, not stoic (at least, not in the way we were used to with the KJV). David was almost in God’s face as an close friend would in expressing his frustrations and griefs but he always came back to holy reverence, thanks & faith in God’s faithfulness.
I used to listen to K-Love when I lived in Indiana. Every day around noon, they would read out of The Message on air. While I don't use The Message to study out of, I appreciate the fact that it made me want to get into my bibles and actually read them. I appreciated that The Message brought to life the scriptures for me as if I was just reading a novel. For studying the Bible, I prefer the ESV. When something doesn't make sense to me, I will refer to the NLT because, well, my education comes from a rural town in SE Alabama so I need a translations that is at a 6th grade level (LOL). But, if I am just not feeling the desire to read my bible daily, I think The Message is good for just reading like a novel, but not meant for daily bible study/devotion.
I grew up in a So. Baptist church where we read out of the KJV before they eventually switched to the NIV. Most of the Bible verses I memorized as a child were from the KJV. But, I'm sorry to say that though I think Psalm and Proverbs is beautiful in the KJV, the rest of the books are like reading a foreign language to me. And I think that people tend to forget that the KJV was like the 16th translation at that time for a King that was wanting to divorce his wife. Language evolves so for me, I have to have a bible that I can understand what I'm reading. For me, that's ESV, NLT, and NIV.
I, too, noticed that the NIV has been updated. In the updated version it has gotten even weaker on God's Word. It shows the slippery slope of moving away from Truth using slight-of-hand, practically. Have you noticed how many translations are out there now? As the time of Jesus' return gets closer, more close-but-not-quite versions are showing up. Remember that false teachings may have 99% of truth but 1% of lies which ends up being absorbed, and remembered, with the rest. "Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump." 1 Corinthians 5:7-9
it's so good to have new bibles, the old ones were crap eh.
No, they weren't "crap". The King James Version was like either the 13th or 16th translation at the time. But Biblical archeology is ongoing, new discoveries are being made with writings/tablets and fragments thereof, etc. So I think it would be wrong for people who are in the King James Version only camp to discount more modern translations. After all, they are ALL translations, including the King James Version.
I think Mark’s comments on the Messianic Jews is showing a bit of lack of understanding - in that the Jewish people more often than not speak English with a LOT of Hebrew interspersed throughout even in everyday language. I don’t think this was a superstitious use or mystic traditional use - they do speak a “crazy hybrid language”
Thank you for this comment. I'm Messianic myself. I'm glad the only real critique was we're a little cooky, passionate, and insert some Hebrew/ Jewish-ness in some places. I was more concerned we got a transliteration completely wrong. Yes, I've wondered why the New Testament didn't have Greek listed instead of Hebrew throughout both in TLV and CJB. It would make sense because the texts that were found were in Greek (mostly). This is a common question in Messianic congregations. Both English and Hebrew are transliterations of New Testament scripture. Also, the audience is for primarily Jewish readers first and foremost. It is to be more palatable for a Jewish reader. For anyone curious about Messianic Judaism, if there are Jewish people in the faith, and if Messianics have biblical scholars I would suggest checking out One For Israel.
Thank you for this! I've wondered a lot about the different translations and why some verses are so misinterpreted and often left completely out.
It"s so elementary simple. Because they have been egregiously distorted to the very core by satanic cults like illuminati, freemasonry, catholicism, orthodoxy, JWs, mormons, diverse psychic cults, and presented into the broad spectre of gullible, ignorant of God Audience which, due to their careless negligence are unable to discern a pig from rocket science. The satanic cults do take advantage of that to bamboozle and double-cross this clueless headless Audience, leading it further and further from the Living God and away into hellfire with satan. Folks badly need to wake up and cry out to The Living YESHUA The Messiah before it"s too late!
Fantastic conversation. I just went through a cursory study on translating and some translations. this is right in line with what I was learning. It's always good to know that other Godly men are presenting the same ideas. This helped to fill out my knowledge and ways to view translations a bit more. Loved the view on the Message. I have used it as a secondary source from time to time to get a "fresh" wording of a passage that I am having a hard time digging into, especially if I had seen it a specific way for SO long that I have kind of become numb to it.
This is the same Mark Ward who grew up in my church. I knew he was smart, but WoW, this is great. I’m sure his mom and dad are proud. 😊
I didn’t plan to listen to the entire conversation but this was so enthralling that I had to stay to the end…
Very interesting interview. Mark is honest and so gracious as we are told to be.
Not honest at all. Didn’t bring out all the facts.
Thank you for a great discussion. With Bible apps being so prevalent, even my senior's group bounces between literal and dynamic translations to get to the meaning of a passage :)
Such a thoughtful discussion!
Thank you, brothers!
I'm perplexed that at no time was prayer for understanding, when reading the Bible, mentioned. The KJV was gibberish to me, until I was saved. Then it was a thing of great beauty and opened like a flower, more and more with each time I read it. I never stop learning from the KJV, with the Holy Spirit as my leader/instructor.
If a word has changed meaning, or has an additional meaning (as is more often the case), or if I don't understand something this time around, I pray, as always, and sooner or later, God reveals the meaning. This type of study, alone with God, focusing on each word and the purpose for that word, makes it impossible to attend "book focused" Bible studies with other Christians, however. My study, relying on such a different source (prayer), makes it that I can't help but focus on the errors and flaws in the books and workbooks. So I don't do that.
But, in defense of the KJV, I even heard Mr. Ward himself, within the interview, recite the KJV. When something is written in such a way, it is easy to memorize and recall. Written in currently spoken English, not so much. Not word for word, anyway. But I have a friend who graduated from Biola in the '70's. She is very liberal. During one of our discussions comparing her liberal and my conservative views, I quoted a scripture, which she was sure wasn't in the Bible. I showed it to her, in my KJV. Then she told me that during her 12 years at Christian school, she had memorized a large portion of the Bible. But when she entered Biola, they discouraged her from using the KJV. When she changed to the paraphrase version that they were using, she lost all of her memorized scripture. Now, decades later, though she still reads daily, she doesn't even know what all is in her Bible. It's hard to memorize a paraphrase. But not hard to memorize the KJV. It reads like a poem. Maybe by design?
Anyway I think it's just wrong to lead people to believe that a man can teach them what God cannot. Prayer must always be a huge part of reading, to accurately understand the Bible. And also to know that we build on what we've learned. We don't have a PHD in understanding the Bible, when we are reading it for the first or second or third time. If we expect to fully understand in first grade, what will actually take us many grades, we are already in trouble.
Very nicely said! The Spirit is the key, along with prayer. God Bless You my Sister!
If we don’t understand a word then look it up in Hebrew or Greek dictionary. KJB is a masterpiece. Prayer brings the WORD alive!
Please, take the Geneva Bible translation instead. Or Tree of Life Version / Complete Jewish Bible / Jewish Bible. They are accurate translations. KJV is a freemasonry translation edited by Francis Bacon, chief freemason in King James' service who was head of England"s freemasonry. The KJV was just a swank stepstone for king James to self-establish himself as tyranic monarch who went the whole hog to put England under his foot .
First and foremost, there wouldn't be ANY so-called "King James Bible" had it not been for one avid and thirsty for power tyrant who couldn't part with, but rather clutched to this power-insane desire to retain his one single bottom on the two whole thrones of England and Scotland. And who was also obsessed by the concept of "The Divine Right of Kings" , a teddybear surrealistic fabulous theory of his own fancy which, from his point of view, gave him a license to act like a vicar of God on Planet Earth. However, The Geneva Bible being in predominant circulation of the folks of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland didn't agree with this surrealistic theory of his and called a spade a spade in every aspect of the English, Scottish and Irish (and, later, American) life. So he made up his mind to burk it completely by inventing his own brainchild that would comfortably sit well with his political and social aspirations and suit his power-thirsty notions likewise.
Here are specific facts and figures which go the whole hog and depict this KJV version together with its pompously tough sponsor James all nine yards.
1.. Genesis 22;1 the KJV says: "And after these things God did tempt Abraham". Now, does God really tempt a person? Is God involved in the business of temptation? When even in KJV in The Epistle of James in the N.T. it is explicitly indicated: "for God tempts no one, neither is tempted by evil..." So how come, then, the KJV translators depict God as the tempter in the O.T. and speak well of God Almighty the way it duly becomes of Him in the New one? Does God change????????????????????? WHO, what creature is in the business of tempting people? Is it not satan?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible reads: "And after these things God did PROVE Abraham" which I believe is the TRUE and correct conveyance from the Hebrew original. The terms "TEMPT" and "PROVE" are never synonyms! I hope you would kindly agree with it . God NEVER tempts anyone, God TESTS us, but NEVER tempts - the business of tempting belongs to satan and his demons (Luke 4:1-4)
.2. Genesis 15:6 "And Abraham believed in God and God credited it to him as righteousness". Good grief... didn't Abraham commence to believing IN God since the very inception when God called out to him in Genesis chapter 12 to "leave his country and his people and go to the land God was about to show Abraham"? Did not Abraham believe in God's existence back then? According to the Book of Jasher, Abraham was considered to be the disciple of Noah. And, using Noah, God had been in the thorough process of teaching and guiding Abraham in all things. Therefore, before Abraham had ever reached Genesis chapter 15, he already was in cognition of God, doubtlessly being aware of His entire existence!
In contrast The Geneva Bible signifies lucidly in Genesis 15:6 that. "Abraham BELIEVED The Lord" (not IN the Lord)! And there is also a reference to this verse in Hebrews quoting this verse without "IN"!
3. Psalm 24:6 the KJV says: "of those who seek your face, O Jacob". Now a question, WHOSE face it's deemed for everyone to seek? The face of God, or the face of Jacob, who himself was the one who sought God and prayed to Him?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible says in this verse: "of those who seek your face, this is Jacob" which appears t be the paramount pertinent, intrinsic and lucid one due to its palpable logically reasonable consistence.
4. In N.T. in The Book of Acts chapter 14 it is being narrated about the Passover taking place in the days of Unleavened Bread with king Herod killing Apostle James with the sword and "because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also". The KJV names this period as "The Easter" which can by no means be attributed to this Glorious Event ! But much rather, easter is a revelry-boozing,impurity-cracking pagan feast which was totally illegal in Israel under the penalty of the participants being stoned to death! In contrast, The Geneva Bible you made yourself at liberty to hurl pointless affronts at, this Holy Book , in spite of your super boffin remarks, puts THE CORRECT TERM to this Event: "The Passover" instead of this negligibly obscure term "ester".
5. 1 Samuel chapter 16 verse 14, where the KJV puts it, that "The Spirit of The Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit of The Lord vexed him". A grievous insult upon The Lord again! Do evil spirits co-exist in the Lord"s Kingdom?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible translated it this way: "and an evil spirit SENT of The Lord, vexed him "(emphasis mine). THIS word SENT makes a bombastic, mind-blowing difference indeed. It clearly points out, that The Lord is Sovereign in the Universe, commanding everyone and everything He deems necessary to, for the purpose of carrying out His Sovereign Will!
6. Isaiah 60:1, KJV "Arise, shine. For thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee."
Can anyone perspiciously explicate WHO is being addressed here? WHOM is all this speech conveyed to?
The Geneva Bible says it clearly: "Arise, O Jrusalem, be bright. For thy light is come. And the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee". Here the subject is at face salience. It is Jerusalem that the emphasis is focused upon.
7. Mark 16:18 " They shall take up serpents (KJV). Sorry... what is the point for the disciples to take up serpents? Were they\ disciples meant to caress the serpents like babies in their arms? Does it make any sense?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible is crystal clear about it: "And they shall take away serpents".
"Take up" and "Take away' are not one and same peas in a pod! It is a different story altigether. And it is paramount evident that the "Take away" option is more relevant here, because it emphatically and robustly corroborates what The Lord told the disciples: "I give you power to tread on serpents and scorpions and nothing shall, by any means hurt you". .
8. John 3:36, KJV: "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him
John 3:36 )Geneva) "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him" .
So these are just a few facts of distorted translation which are clear and evident to making a point and difference as to what Bible version is worthy of trust and reliance on.
I read the kjv. I started reading when I was 27 and quickly realized that though the language of the kjv is different what makes it a great translation is that you learn the meaningsof the words as you read it. The pastors who miss use it will do so with every other translation. Not all pastors are good pastors.
I respect Mark's tenacity in responding accurately. I admire his measured and gracious communication. I love my NIV published in 1985. I do not prefer the newly issued NIV.
Sad to break the bubble of love for the NIV but you should be careful of the hidden purpose of that version, it was created by a group of people that included two openly gay individuals that used “inclusive” wording to justify homosexuality, not counting the fact that it’s missing 26 whole verses and it never gives Jesus his Glory.
the NIV translation for the male parent turned into (both) parents is not correct! The original Bible context was to mean the male was to be respected as the Christ- centered provider and protector of the family, since 2 different God loving people can not always agree on everything- so both may need to agree to disagree, with one of the 2 probably having to 'give in' -still loving and respecting each😮 other . Jesus called God Almighty His Father. God called Jesus [my] Son. There is no disputing the need to distinguish between male and female when the inspired Word was written.
I was a TJ for many years, until I noticed how they replaced the name LORD with Jehova in the NT EXCEPT ROMANS 10:9 when All other translations I've seen don't have the name Jehova in the new testament. I prefer KJ.
@@azarellediaz4892The NIV was translated by godly born again Christians, don't know about the baby sprinkling Anglicans who translated the KJV. Especially the alcoholic and adulterer on the KJV translation committee. No homosexuals were on the NIV, that is the lie the KJV only cult loves to tell. We know of course that lying is as much a sin as the homosexual act. So you are a two faced lying hypocrite. Have you been listening to pathological liar and KJV only heretic Gail Riplinger? The NIV is very clear that homosexuality is, unnatural, a sin and an abomination in the sight of God. Much clearer than the KJV. Also there is absolutely no hidden agenda in the NIV translation. That is just the usual conspiracy theories of the KJV only cult that Satan has raised up. No verses are missing, because it was translated from older more accurate manuscripts without the added uninspired verses that are in the KJV. The KJV a translation translated from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope with all those added uninspired verses. The Catholic influence on the KJV is evident, with mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Also Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. The more correct translation is "morning star" even the KJV had day star in the margin. Because of the translators of the KJV were not too familiar with Hebrew. They used a Latin word. Now Satan has deceived so many into thinking that he is Lucifer even though he isn't. No doubt that is why Satan prefers you to read the KJV rather than the more accurate modern translations like the NIV. Of course he would not sooner read the scripture at all. Also the NIV glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ. Makes it clear that he is Almighty God. Salvation only found in him. Name above all names. The NIV is far far stronger on the deity of Christ than the KJV, which calls the Son of God an angel in Daniel ch 3. Also the KJV denies the deity of the Holy Spirit four times denying his deity. No wonder the cults that deny the deity of Christ and the Trinity used the KJV to teach their heresies. Cults like the Mormons, the Christian Scientists, Jehovah Witnesses before they used their own version. Also the KJV only cult started by a Seventh day Adventist cultist. A cult based on a failed prophecy and the false teachings of Ellen G White. Yet still the KJV only cult seek to deceive us, with their rediculous ludicrous claims about the KJV. And their slanderous accusations about the excellent more accurate modern translations of God's word like the NIV. A translation that God is using and blessing to bring many to Christ. That proves what a blasphemous idolatrous cult KJV onlyism truly is. Nothing more than a doctrine of devils. Full of false teachers with double standards.
I love the NIV as well. God has truly blessed me with it. What the KJV only cult says is irrelevant. They are nothing but a bunch of liars anyway.
I keep the NIV 1984 (?), NASB, ESV, NKJV, and KJV at my side at all times because I like to follow along with the pastor/teacher I am studying with. Each of them are equally highlighted and underlined with notations in the margins or attached sticky notes. I also own and occasionally read the CSB because it was recommended by someone I trust, and I am enjoying the Holman CSB Study Bible because of the notes. My Christian walk started with the KJV, then transitioned to the NIV, and then back to the KJV. I took Kay Arthur's Inductive Bible Study classes which used the NASB as the predominant source, so that was how that particular version entered my library. My sister introduced me to the ESV, and I found that I preferred that version over the New American Standard. I have only recently purchased and started occasionally reading the RSV and the NLT because a couple of the Bible Review channels I watch speak highly of them. But, my foundation is the King James Version and it's the one I go to more than any other.
ESV ??????
At least the KJV has God’s Name in it 4 times. Those other Bible translations don’t. The Holman Bible has God’s Name in it but later removed when it became the Christian Standard Translation. How disappointing.
My church uses the ESV, but it is by no means a translation that is in current English. Who says, "Behold," in everyday language?
@@erie910 The ESV doesn’t use God’s Name even once.
Very interesting conversation!!!
I had heard of a New Age believer being led to true Christianity from reading The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ. It was a starting point for this soul. So even a bad translation can be better than no translation at all.
I am so thankful for the topics you cover Sean, very helpful in my walk with our amazing God! Blessings.. xo from Toronto, Canada..
So many people mistakenly believe that the Bible has been rewritten and changed, but God was at hand with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which showed no changes of any significance over 2000 years completed to today. The Holy Spirit is always at work protecting God’s Word!
Thanks to both of you for this video. I went from using the NIV, to NASB, to ESV, now the KJV. I have had to learn and look words up in older dictionaries to gain a better comprehension and I have been surprised at how my reasoning skills have improved by doing this. The main problem I do believe for most KJV users is the scholars selecting verses that are clearly in the Translation before the KJV and also in the KJV, and not including those verse in the current English translations of today. This I do believe is the real issue in why many will choose to stay with the KJV, and until this issue is addressed in a clear and precise substitutive way reconciliations between the two sides will stay as a reason for disunity. I understand the urge to have other Christians to put aside their idiosyncrasy to reestablish a unified body of Christ but is it not also an urge to have a unified front? I would think and do say let God be praised in unity and disunity for God is our redeemer not anyone of us. One more thing we can let Jesus build his church or we can try to build it for him and fall short every time or recognize who our redeemer is which is Jesus Christ the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords who walked out of that tomb on Sunday morning.
@@fredthe47th Thanks for your comment but this is the type of claim that a KJVO would say in return. What I would say is forgive as our Lord and Savior has paid the debt that we all should pay so that we can be forgiven both lovingly and legally. I would rebuke someone for lying if I know that is what that person has done, or thieving, or killing, or other obvious actions that are clearly sinful. But when it comes to what should be translated into any language is a matter not for me but to pray that God be with those He chooses to translate for His purposes not my will be done but Jesus Christs will be done.
@@fredthe47th I do appreciate your continued engagement in this matter of importance. When we are in doubt then we should seek advice through prayer from our King of Kings Jesus Christ. With this I will endeavor to express my opinion on the matter mentioned in the text typed so far. In the Greek manuscripts there are passage that are in many and not in others so the question is which should be translated into the English language. The reasons given by those that choose to not translate those passage are not always congruent with mans fallen nature. So, without prayerful consideration of what the Holy Spirit will guide us in, then making these decision without this seems to suggest that we do not seek His help when He is the inspiration of the written word. The is especially helpful with deciding which portion of the Greek should be chosen for translation into English.
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment
"thou shalt worship whoever you want"
and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god.
is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
@@HarryNicNicholas You are correct it does but it also protects people who choose to leave the satanic temple and join Christianity. In other words if a satanic temple stops any of the individuals from leaving then they violate the 1st Amendment of the Constitution for each individual.
A great way to introduce to KJV to people is giving them NKJV to go along with the KJV even and a strong concordance + dictionaries as you said. It's a good mental exercise
If you are a KJVer, to confirm what Mark meant by listing the KJV under “bad” translations look in the transcript around the 45:50 mark, and Mark clearly says the KJV is an excellent English translation, and what he was getting at is that many don’t understand that English any longer.
As an avid reader of Jane Austen and the Bronte’s I love the KJV😊
@@tilanakrugerI have never had a problem reading and understanding the KJV .
My problem with KJV is illustrated in 1John 5:8,9.
@@revdrjack14 Try reading slowly from the start of the chapter. You will see what John is getting at.
I've never had a problem understanding the KJV. The Elizabethan era English isn't that difficult to understand.
I started watching/listening to this video. I thought I would not go the distance with this one but I am passed the midpoint and finding this good, useful, somewhat refreshing and encouraging. This is good brother. Your guest and brother explains things well.
If we really have Jesus living in us and His Spirit is leading us to all truth, these other translations can be useful tools. I've used a number of them and I still do.
Great comment from Mark at 44:02... "he's not saying what's wrong, he's failing to say what's right."
The new kjv is a lot easier to read than the first version. But I like the RSV, NIV, NAS, and NKJV. They also sell bibles with 2 or 3 versions in one Bible
I love the KJV. When I can not understand something in this Bible, I go to the source. I think the more translations, the more of our human is found in these books.
"When I can not understand something in this Bible" The problem with the KJV is that there are many places where you don't know that you don't understand something. That occurs with words Mark Ward terms "false friends" Examples include "So that", "conversation", "Study", "and "commends" All these words seem as though they fit in our modern usage of English, but in reality they mean something different today than they used to mean.
My son was given a Holman Christian Standard Version from a Nazarene church upon graduation. I got one for myself to read since I had never heard of it. I spent about a year reading it daily alongside my NASB and wrote down the differences. I didn't find glaring warts. I enjoy reading it now devotionally. Would you recommend the HCSB for institutional study?
While I am not an expert, I have studied the Greek text a lot, and the Holman very often hits the nail on the head with its translation. I often thought it was very accurate translation. My primary study Bible was NASB at the time, but I loved the Holman too.
Look to see if it took out Matthew 17:21
I did some research on HCSV, and it truly blew my mind. There's actually a well-published document on HCSV that I found. It's the Bible I used alongside the old KJ version. It's really fascinating stuff!
HCSB is no longer in print, at least not under that name. The HCSB has become the CSB. There are some differences between them but for the most part it's a rebranding to remove the name of a specific publisher from the name of the translation.
59:09
My local bookstore sells both the message & the passion so I don’t think “just go to your local book store” is a good enough response
Not since I was a child in the early 60s have I only used one translation. I grew up in a protestant household, Presbyterian, where we had the new English Bible, the revised standard, and the king James. I was in high school when I got my first NASB. Now, pushing 70, I still have a half dozen Bible translations on my desk at any time it is and can be a habit to look at more than one translation and to enjoy many of them. Great interview, I truly enjoyed it!
I actually like the KJV as kind of a historical reference in helping modern English speakers understand where their language came from and how it got where it is now. I think it's important to understand why we don't use "thou" any more. It also helps them understand other historical documents like the Declaration of Independence and letters from our Founding Fathers. If our understanding of the English language gets too shallow and recent, we will lose the real meaning of it.
When I bought a Greek Interlinear, I could only get it in KJV. Strong's Concordance comes in an enhanced version: "The Strongest Strong's." Again, you only get the KJV. So I love those Bible aids.
But I read daily from the NKJV because archaic Elizabethan words are sometimes laborious to deal with. I was not born in 17th century England, so I don't THINK in their thoughts. ESV and NIV will never work for me, but I'm glad people have heir choices. On the other hand "Passion" Mistranslation makes me wanna vomit. Could be just an offending of tastes? Not very sure on that.
Reading the 1776 to 1865 documents does help us see how printed communication has evolved. I ASSUME that most Americans in 1790, did not make every speech to sound like The Declaration. If a pastor spoke without a written speech to read, then he could make it easier to hear, and would commonly use shorter sentences. But that's an assumption. Maybe they would think in sentences as long as Paul would use.
@@wayneboyer7648 Well, I don't know. The first stanza of The Star Spangled Banner is all one sentence. I actually think people had a better command of English in those days than we have today. They used a wider vocabulary and more people could read than we think they did today. Calligraphy was considered just penmanship. A lot of time and thought was put into writing letters. In some ways, it's hard for people today to imagine the reality of the 1700's or even the 1800's.
As far as I am aware, the NKJV is the most accurate translation available in modern English. Some of the new translations try to make it "more readable" or "easier to understand" and by doing that, they often mistranslate what the Greek actually says and means.
@@raedaily9854 I agree with many points you made. I was saying the written language does not tell us how people spoke. Even Shakespeare used occasional short sentences. Did he originate "Brevity is the soul of wit." ?? He _DID_ use that principle. The 1776 documents and 18th century hymns contained compacted ideas. This is not how people think.
When we study linguistics, it shows that language efficiency trends toward simplicity, conciseness. We dropped the goeth, cometh, heareth. I would grant you in the "debate" that some people COULD think in 30 to 50 word sentences. But that's only useful in reading when you have the time to study it. A listener to a speech, [immediate analysis] does not need 30 to 50 word sentences, in any language. It breeds confusion.
@@wayneboyer7648 I would say that even in everyday speech, people used more precise words than they do today. Dropping the "th" at the end of "go" is a far cry from dropping the whole idea of addressing people with singular pronouns. I find modern people don't understand the full meaning of a word because they don't understand where it came from. I think modern society would profit from people slowing down a little to digest more complex thoughts that take some longer and more complex sentence and word lengths.
A very well spent hour or learning! I appreciate BOTH OF YOU BROTHERS for your insights and commitment to GODS WORD. Thank you so much for this discussion. IT IS SORELY NEEDED in today's church culture. There are so many people who are Bible illiterate. Mark, I appreciate you mentioning the CSB. I use that translation as my daily driver. I also like the ESV and NASB translations, as well as the Full Notes NET. Sean, I regularly recommend Evidence That Demands A Verdict, because it is the STANDARD in Apologetics. Thanks again brothers. I love and appreciate both of you!
I've had the NKJV as a main translation for at least 25 years but this year I've started reading the CSB and am enjoying it immensely.
they are Satanists, not Christians.
So many great points! I have over 20 Bibles - they are each special, from the KJV I was given at 6 months old, to The Message that breathed new life into the text during college, to the Action Bible, because who doesn’t want to see the Bible as a comic? As well as my go-to NASB for studying and NLT for daily reading, and several study Bibles with great commentary.
We do indeed have an embarrassment of riches. I look at my shelf full of God’s Word and appreciate that I am so blessed, but also feel sad that so many people can’t even get their hands on a single translation…and apparently the validity of those translations can also be an issue.
Anyway, thanks for all the good info :)
This was very interesting and enlightening. Thank you both!
As a missionary pilot back in the late eighties, I flew Brian and Candy Simmons. As tribal missionaries they were awesome. Then, Brian had a kind of mysterious breakdown. Then they left our mission organization due to doctrinal issues. I was devastated by their departure. It’s kind of eerie but not terribly surprising to see what they’ve been up to in the years since. What was THAT all about God? So glad God knows hearts and He sorts it all out.
Amen.
Sad, doctrinal issues we need to sort them out as doctrine is of utmost import. As Jesus told us Mt 13:33 kjv even thee very word would would become leavened! See Proverbs 26:7,9 kjv and Ezekiel 17:2 kjv, what is a parable? Btw, "fool on the two proverbs would be better translated, understood as [thee] self confident, who of course is a fool. Keep in mind what He glories in doing, see Proverbs 25:2 kjv.
Interesting. So then after his mysterious breakdown he wrote the Passion Bible translation? If so that would make sense.
Did you by any chance work for JAARS? Just curious.
Thanks Sean and Mark for the informative look on Biblical translations. I am wondering what your thoughts are on the Amplified version? I actually find this translation to be quite interesting in its approach. From what I understand, the intention of the translation is to add more detail to what could be observed in the Greek and Hebrew that cannot be fully translated equivalently to an English word or phrase.
I have a video about it on my channel! Can't link here lest RUclips nix the comment, but you can find it if you search!
Always gracious and brilliant, Mark. Thank you.
I enjoyed your guest speaker Mark Ward, PhD, such a godly man with wisdom and humility. This was very helpful in considering all of the common translations and their value in today's world.
I understand both "halt" and "coasts" correctly in the KJV, and I have no idea why, other than I've used the context clues to understand, as you explained.
I take a little issue with calling KJV "bad" even with quotes.
It is more difficult to understand now than it was 400 years ago, but it can be learned. Mark Ward learned it as a child. I learned it as a child. I know grown adults who are mature Christians who misunderstand certain words or phrases, but are quick to grasp the meaning when taught.
I think we lose something when we say that is a reason to call the translation "bad." To learn about the changes in language over the centuries is to enrich our minds and lives.
I suppose I think we should call it a good translation with a particular weakness instead of a "bad" translation that is really not bad. That seems like a more accurate description to me.
I agree plus the argument about not liking the KJV is not because of bad translation but because the guy doesn't understand certain words. That is hardly a reason to list the KJV as a bad translation as per the title of the video. I often have to look up words when reading certain books because I didn't know the meaning. My vocabulary is now much greater thanks to the KJV.
Amen!!!
He is undermining the Translation that our Western Civilization was founded on. The Geneva and KJV
@@StewartMitchell-xl8cmDon't all the "drs" of theology do that now? The only translation that the world hates on is the KJV. That's telling. Also, with the advent of "modern" watered down versions, we have watered down churches that use them - I don't believe it's coincidence!
The KJV has power and authority and the ldevil hates it.👿
With my own study and search in mind, this video was quite well presented. (It's funny, but I have a copy of Mr. Ward's "authorized" book on my shelf just a few feet away.) Frankly, my heart breaks on several aspects of this topic, both with certain "only-isms" AND on the other extreme of taking in "all" translations as equal. Being asked both what I read (and why) as well as asked for recommendations myself (even just in sharing the Gospel), I always greatly appreciate just hearing others attempting to rightly sift through the topic. It makes me feel a little less "odd", perhaps, (LOL?) for doing likewise and seeing it as important. So, thank you both, gentlemen.
I have used different translations over the years. I was giving the living Bible as a baptismal gift for my church. And University I used a new international version. Ended my career days I switched over to the English Standard Version. Well I have used a King James Bible over the years in between I noticed that I have a hard time looking at bible verses on my phone app with the ESV because I seem to remember the verses or segments that I'm trying to find the verses for in a King James version LOL! I find myself Googling the Bible verses more than using the app.
Upon what authority do you base your recommendations of Bible translations to avoid off of?
Probably his Ph.D
@@cbannen8 So you believe Universities hold a higher authority than the Bible itself?
No. Just that the man has actually studied the Bible extensively and knows what he's talking about.
@@cbannen8 Which Bible?
Mark is one of the most authentically gracious intellectuals I have ever listened to with so much humility and tenacity for balance as well as desire not to throw the baby away with bathwater.
...so wonderful!
Thank you, Sean,for featuring Mark Ward .
Thank you, Mark, for an excellent work from an excellent spirit.
More grace to you both.
Are you for real, his a protestant. a pro - testant heretic. Full of his own waffle.
The Catholic Church chose the books of the bible around the year 389 and only they can interpret their bible. They talk of in the Church or outside the Church when they are outside the church themselves. There is only one Church and that Church is the Church who gave us the Bible, that is a fact
The passion translation sort of reminds me of Joseph Smith regarding how he explained how it came about.
Exactly, that whole gibberish about the Lord telling him he could take any 2 books what a joke😮 You can see he's being led by a deceptive spirit..........
Being Messianic Jewish myself, I will try to explain a few things as best as I can. Yes, Jesus' name in Hebrew is Yeshua. Yeshua means "salvation" in Hebrew. Looking at Matthew 2 in that context it makes sense. "You shall call His name Yeshua (salvation) for He will save His people from their sins." Yeshua was Jewish. The Old Testament was the Bible He read. He kept the kosher dietary laws in Leviticus 11 as well as Deuteronomy 14 and God's feasts in Leviticus 23. It was in the synagogue on the Sabbath when He read the scroll from Isaiah 61 and said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing" that He announced Himself as the Messiah. His last supper was a Passover seder. "I desire to eat the Passover with you before I suffer." He was crucified and then taken off the cross as Passover, a High Sabbath, started at sundown. His resurrection happened three days later, on the Feast of First Fruits. "He is the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep." Ten days after his ascension was the Feast of Weeks, in Hebrew Shavuot, which was 50 days after Passover. "From the first Sabbath after Passover you shall count seven Sabbaths (49 days), and the next day after is a feast to the Lord." That is the day the Torah/Law (more accurate translation is "instructions") was given at Sinai, as the Israelites left Egypt on that first Passover. So on the Shavuot after Yeshua's resurrection was when the Holy Spirit was given to everyone.
The feast of Trumpets, in Hebrew Yom Teruah, is when we believe Yeshua will return. 1 Thessalonians says "He will return in the clouds with a great blast of the trumpet." The trumpets used in ancient Israel were made of ram's horns, they are called shofars. The day of Atonement, in Hebrew Yom Kippur, is when God will judge the earth. The feast of Tabernacles, in Hebrew Sukkot, is the wedding supper of the Lamb described in Revelation. The spring feasts have been fulfilled. The fall ones have not yet.
What we believe honors Yeshua as the Jew He is. God says all throughout the Bible that His covenant is forever. He is not man that He should lie, nor does He change His mind. He is the same yesterday, today and forever, and if we love Him we are to keep His commandments, those found in the Torah. Yeshua kept them Himself, and so should we. He is our Messiah and our example. In Romans it says that we uphold the Torah by our faith, we don't nullify it. Following the Torah doesn't save us but it is evidence of our faith.
I have not read the Tree of Life translation. But using Hebrew doesn't "dilute our Christian heritage", it honors our Jewish Messiah by speaking His language. My personal favorite Bible is the Interlinear as I can read it in the Hebrew and Greek with transliterations and translation. For everyday reading I prefer the Complete Jewish Bible translation by Dr Daniel Stern.
❤
Amen and Amen! Baruch HaShem! You’re 100% in everything you said! You understand Scripture! Blessed one of the Father through our Mashiach Yeshua!
I’m also Messianic based in South Africa but with Lemba Jewish DNA from Israel (Lemba are Jews expelled by Ezra for intermarriage after Babylon and ended up in Southern Africa).
Do you read the black cover Interlinear by Authors for Christ, Inc.?
I also have CJB & went big with OJB, NMV, YLT, and AMP for ease or reading with good rendering! Also have interlinear by Hunderwadel!
Yeshua is Jewish, but I guess it’s easier for me as non-European Caucasian, it’s a Pluto have neutral Middle Eastern teacher as Messiah that is is not blonde as etc…, so I do understand why it’s difficult for some people to accept a Jewish Messiah who won’t look like Scandinavian blonde!, & replace easy to understand terms in English which non-mother-tongue English speakers like us would need a dictionary 😳 to understand!
Shalom & Shalom
Yeshua was quite emphatic on two things: You shall love the Lord with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, (and with all your strength-added later). AND you shall love your neighbor as thyself. Mark 12:30-31. On these two commandments hang ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS. Matt 22:40
I am a 67yo Chinese, converted since I was 12. I read the Bible (OT+NT) daily. What you said is very true to what I have learned in the Bible. THANKS YOU, SIR, for the detail description about Jesus/Jeshua. Hallelujah. Praise the Lord.
If Yeshua was crucified on Passover day then how can the Last Supper be a Passover seder when he celebrated that dinner the night before Passover?
Absolutely WONDERFUL! I have various translations and have always wondered...the best...the worst...the good/bad. This discussion was so helpful in the explanation of ways to evaluate translations. Have never run into to Mark Word online, but I will put him in my list of trusted experts! Thanks to both of you so very much!
Our pleasure!
I really appreciate you guys posting this. I used to be KJV only, but now I'm exploring other translations. I was taught that other translations were basically the devil. I am now trying to figure out which ones are good and which ones to avoid.
Well if it’s wrong to add to or remove Gods word which God specifically stated it is then at least stick with a textus receptus translation. Mark Ward has now moved all the way into the critical text camp of Wescott and Hort.
KJV has plenty that's done poorly. It's an overall accurate translation, but nowhere near the most accurate.
@@davidchupp4460you are basically arguing KJV only because of KJV only, ie stick to the TR because the TR is the only Greek source for Gods word. It begs the question. I love the KJV as well as other translations of Gods word.
I spent a few years studying biblical and modern Hebrew from a messianic Jew who was raised in Israel and converted to Christianity after moving to the US. She is also fluent in half a dozen languages.
What I learnt from her is that because Biblical Hebrew has such depth of meaning, no one translation can do it justice. She gave examples of passages where English had gotten the meaning right but had totally missed the energy and passion of the Hebrew.
She gave me tips for understanding the importance of certain passages. For example, when you see the word 'behold', what follows is really important.
Also Hebrew verbs are much more active than how they come across in English. Hear means to hear and obey. What we tend to do is hear and then think 'that's nice' or 'that's interesting' and leave it at that.
Hebrew word order can also indicate relative importance of the words in a sentence, whether it's the subject, the verb or the object.
So I have to agree with Mark that we can and should read several different good translations, but even then we miss a lot. Having a good knowledge of the whole of scripture will help in knowing when something doesn't seem right. And above all be like the Bereans.
I’m really liking the Berean translation recently
I used to attend the same church that Mark attended in Greenville, SC, but years before Mark was there, I think, as I was there just a while in 1989. This is a great discussion here and I appreciate you, Sean and MArk addressing these issues. I just subscribed and look forward to listening to more.
Always love Mark Ward! So smart, so clear and so concise, so insightful and so gracious, soft spoken and kind. I want to be more like him.
What a kind word to say about a brother! I really appreciate that!!
Mark may be solf spoken and very trustworthy worthy but never allow yourself to be deceived by man !
@@DannyMilan😮
@DannyMilan How is Dr Ward being deceitful?
Yup. All con men do exactly that. “For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.”
Romans 16:18 KJV
Thank you guys for covering this! I recently encountered a "pastor" on tik tok spouting off a series of beliefs based on poor translations, mainly regarding sexuality. I called him out on it, and after calling me names, he blocked my account. After that exchange Tik Tok proceeded to recommend several other videos along the same lines by various Progressive pastors. Have you guys considered, or do you already have a Tik Tok account to address these types of false teachers?
Thank you both of you for the great info that helps me a lot. May the Lord use it for His glory!
Thank you! Very interesting, informative and helpful!!! 😃
In my church we are celebrating this month the month of the bible and I want to thank u both sooooo much for this valuable information.♥️♥️♥️♥️
17:50 the trinity is mentioned where in the Bible? How is this a central truth? As far as I remember yeshua described it best. YHWY is his father. Never heard the ice liquid solid analogy written about in the Bible.
Mark Ward is so balanced and extremely helpful and insightful.
50:46
He doesn’t bring out all the facts on John 1:1.
really? seems a bit sort weird to me.
@@HarryNicNicholas What’s weird to you Harry? 😀
Thanks for this discussion. I use NLT but I always compare it to NASB, NKJV
Mark Ward is being very gracious in his analyzation of these different versions. Very well done/
Also, I agree with his wart analogy. If I think there is an intentional change to Gods word, I will NOT read anything from that source. This is a reason i will not read the Passion Translation among a few others. It is also the reason I stopped watching 'The Chosen' after the first season. I ordered their devotional for season 1 and 2 and on day two or three of season one they put up a scripture and replaced "man" with "woman" so I stopped immediately. Seems like overkill to most Christians, but I have zero tolerance for intentional changing of scripture. I understand the Challenges in translation and why there are slight differences in the different translations, I am fine with that. But I want to read my Bible and know that the translators are trying to get the scriptures to current English as accurately as possible.
I want to say that the Message was how i was able to finally approach the Old Testament. I've since moved on to the ESV. But I'm very grateful for how approachable the Message is.
Be careful with the ESV, it has some verses that have been changed.
I've never heard that reported. Where did you hear that?
And some verses completely left out of some newer bibles.
We are obligated, in God’s wisdom, to vet all new information for ourselves. “See to it that no one misleads you. Many will come in My name…” Matthew 24
Be wary of the large number of KJV onlyists here who believe that somehow a more modern translation can be more accurate than an older copy of the original Greek and Hebrew. It doesn't make any logical sense and it's simply not true.
I will stick to the King James with thee,thus and so on, it's the only one I read and have ever read. Thigh when I started reading it 28ish years ago and I would only read 2 or 3 verses a day, I didn't understand it nor try to because I feared The Lord too much to try and make it say what I thought it said, but...
I fasted 4 days without food years later just to get closer to The Lord and...on the 4th night I laid my newborn down in his baby bed and picked up my bible at 1:00 am and had to make myself put it down at 7:00 am and go to bed 🙌🙌🙌 The Lord opened up His word that night and it breathed and had a heartbeat, because It and He Is The Word of God and it has never been the same since 🙌🙌🙌
I haven't missed 10 days in 13 years and won't 🙌🙌🙌THANK YOU AGAIN HOLY LORD GOD ALMIGHTY YESHUA YESHUA YESHUA 🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
Amen that's beautiful! Praise Yah ❤
@@mki_kitlof thank you, it's amazing what happens when we let The Holy Spirit lead us and see His word come alive 🙌🙌🙌
It's funny how many people think of "thee" as meaning something 'royal' or high-minded... when actually it just means not even the regular "you", but a more informal "you", sort of like "dude", or "you, guy" today. Unfortunately such a distinction no longer exists in English but is found in other languages-- "du" informal versus "Sie" formal polite in German; or "tu" informal versus "Usted" formal polite in Spanish. "Thee" is what was leftover from "du", as English slowly split from German/Scandinavian.
Above comment. What a dumb way to read the bible .two of three verses a day you could never unddrstand. You need to read who is speaking to whom ,what
Period of time, is the thing written things to com?e ect
@@MargaretRobinson-fj2eg I read chapters for years and years, the whole word of God.
I have read it 28 years and haven't missed 10 days in 25 years.
Can you say that?
Also I read Revelation every night out of my son's bible and Daniel starting at verse 21 every morning out of my son's other bible that is beside me while I sleep.
Many people are opposed to the 2013 New World Translation because "it upsets their apple cart", such as "dashing to pieces" the "Holy Trinity", having an accurate reading at John 1:1, 2 as: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God."
This coincides with the Codex Vaticanus of about 350 C.E. (as well as the Codex Sinaticus of about 375 C.E.), that reads in the interlinear: "In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, a god was the Word. This was in a beginning with the God."(Emphatic Diaglott, pub in 1864 C.E.)
And at 1 Timothy 3:16, it says: "Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He (Greek hos, G3739, meaning "who, which, what, that", and NOT theos that means "God", as the KJV reads here, in order to give support to the Trinity) was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory.’ "
For example, at Genesis 13:1-4, the King James Bible mistranslates the Hebrew word negeb as "south" and thus has Abram (or Abraham) as going "south" from Egypt towards Bethel, when in fact, he was going north.
It failed to differentiate between the compass direction and the geographical location (and also failed to place God's name of Jehovah there, substituting "Lord"), for the Hebrew word negeb (H5045) means "the south, specifically, the Negeb or the southern district of Judah".(Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible)
The King James Bible reads there: "And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai; Unto the place of the altar, which he had make there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of the Lord."
The 2013 New World Translation accurately reads here: "Aʹbram then went up out of Egypt to the Negʹeb (or southern district of Judah), he and his wife and all that he had, together with Lot. Aʹbram was very rich in livestock, silver, and gold. He camped in one place after another as he traveled from the Negʹeb to Bethʹel, until he arrived at the place where his tent had been between Bethʹel and Aʹi, to the place where he had previously built an altar. There Aʹbram called on the name of Jehovah."
When a sincere Bible reader examines the 2013 New World Translation against such ancient Hebrew manuscript at Codex Leningrad B19a of 1008 C.E. (along with R. Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (BHK), seventh, eighth and ninth editions (1951-55), as well as Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), 1977 edition), that is found online at Scripture4all, they can see that it is accurately translated, and is NOT tainted with false religious ideologies such as "the Holy Trinity", hellfire, the cross, etc.
For example, the Greek word stauros (G4716, found 27 times in the Bible) is accurately translated as "stake" or "torture stake", as at Matthew 16:24, and NOT "cross", in which it accurately means "a stake or post (as set upright)." It adds "a pole or cross" (which shows it being tainted with apostate Christianity), but this is NOT what Jewish criminals were executed on, as seen at Deuteronomy 21:22, 23:
"If a man commits a sin deserving the sentence of death and he has been put to death and you have hung him on a stake (Hebrew 'ets, meaning "a tree, wood", H6086, found 331 times in the Bible, many times as "tree", as at Gen 1:29; 2:16, 17; 3:3, 6, 11, 12, 17; 18:4), his dead body should not remain all night on the stake. Instead, you should be sure to bury him on that day, because the one hung up is something accursed of God, and you should not defile your land that Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance."
The apostle Paul quoted Deuteronomy 21:23, saying at Galatians 3:13: "Christ purchased us, releasing us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written (at Deut 21:23): “Accursed is every man hung upon a stake.” So, 'ets has the same basic meaning as stauros and xylon (G3586, that means "timber, a stick, club or tree", which is the Greek word Paul used at Gal 3:13, and found 20 times in the Bible).
At Joshua 10, of five kings that were intent on bringing the Gibeonites "back into the fold" when the Gibeonites made peace with the Israelites, were caught and killed, the account says: "Then Joshua struck them and put them to death and hung them on five stakes (Hebrew 'ets), and they remained hanging on the stakes (Hebrew 'ets) until the evening."
"At sunset Joshua ordered that they be taken down off the stakes (Hebrew 'ets) and thrown into the cave where they had hidden themselves. Then large stones were placed at the mouth of the cave, and these remain to this very day."(Joshua 10:26, 27)
And one final notice of showing 'ets as just a single piece of timber, and NOT "cross", is seen at Esther 5:14: "So Zeʹresh his wife and all his friends said to him: “Have a stake (Hebrew 'ets) put up, 50 cubits high (or about 75 ft tall)."
"And in the morning tell the king that Morʹde·cai should be hanged on it. Then go with the king to enjoy yourself at the banquet.” This suggestion seemed good to Haʹman, so he had the stake (Hebrew 'ets) put up."(see also 1 Kings 6:15, whereby "He (Solomon) paneled the inside walls with timber" or 'ets)
Because most people want to be "spoon fed" what a religious leader teaches, and are unwilling to "do the homework", "comparing notes", they will just accept whatever he says, rather than doing as the Beroeans did with regard to what the apostle Paul said when he visited the synagogue in Beroea:
"Immediately by night the brothers sent both Paul and Silas to Be·roeʹa. On arriving, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thes·sa·lo·niʹca, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining ("carefully examining", Greek anakrino, meaning "investigate, examine, inquire into, scrutinize") the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."(Acts 17:10, 11)
So, when a sincere, and NOT biased, person wants to know "the truth", the 2013 New World Translation is exactly what they need.
Passion = crackpot. Yes!
Passion = sectarian. Also yes!
TPT was written based on a crackpot approach which the author used to incorporate sectarian buzzwords and concepts.
My pastor uses KJV and encourages others to use it. Some do, some don’t. I grew up with it but I haven’t used it in probably 10 years. My go to translation is the NLT followed by the NKJV, ESV, and Amplified. It’s always such a treat to watch Mark.
You may have liked Mark Ward, but I think you would be a better guest speaker
@@jackjohns1192 nope. I don’t have his wealth of knowledge. I’ve learned a lot from watching his channel.
Google 'Errors in the KJV' and observe the hits.
The NWT despite a bias by those who want to believe the what they want, restore God's name to over 7,000 times.
(Isaiah 42:8) I am Jehovah. That is MY NAME; I give my glory to no one else, Nor my praise to graven images.
'I am the LORD. That is my name' doesn't make any sense as the Lord is a title. Many had that title, including pagans.
"Despite a bias"? No it denies the divinity of Christ. God does NOT require a Christian to say the word. Maybe for Jews. We are Christians, the law is fulfilled, we are no longer under the law.
@@Dilley_G45 : If Jesus himself denied any divinity, how can some Bible translation change that fact? (cf John 8:40).
'No man has SEEN God AT ANY TIME (1 John 4:12). I believe that Jesus was SEEN by humans as is evident in the Bible. Thus, he couldn't have been God at any time, could he.
Dr Ward, are you concerned at all about the seemingly intentional ESV interpretations which present eternal functional subordination of the Son? This undermines the fundamental principle of equality within the trinity.
For example?
The translation of heautou/emautoú as “on his own authority” (Jn 7:17, Jn 8:28, Jn 10:18, Jn 12:49, Jn 14:10, Jn 16:13) yet this is not the translation in the 300+ other occurrences of this word. It is more often translated “of himself…own initiative” - but why does the ESV use the prior translation, and ONLY of the Son towards the Father? I cannot help but think that this is part of an intentional desire to strengthen complementarian roles - within the Trinity since this is tied so closely to complementarian interpretations of, say I Cor 11…
The POV of the ESV translation team was that of bolstering complementarian gender roles, correct?
@@bethanypetrie4716 This is a perceptive question-but I honestly believe it to be a little too perceptive! I think you may be reading into the ESV something the translators never intended. I suppose it would take the personal testimony of several NT translators of the ESV to fully convince you, but it might help to note a few things.
First, in Logos I can easily search for those Greek phrases ("from himself" and "from myself") and see in a grid how multiple translations render them. The NIV uses the offending phrase, too, in at least one passage.
Second, I just think this is all too subtle. "On my/his own authority" is a) pretty clearly a possible rendering of the rather ambiguous Greek genitive at issue and b) not so clearly (to my mind) a promotion of some clear Trinitarian viewpoint. Did anyone get moved toward complementarianism by reading these ESV renderings? I would be very surprised if that were the case!
And, third, rather importantly for your particular concerns about the ESV, **the ESV matches the RSV in every one of the passages that concerns you.** Well, all but one, in which it actually revises the RSV's "I can do nothing on my own authority" back to "I can do nothing on my own." Unless you want to pull the RSV translators into the conspiracy to subtly promote EFS and/or complementarianism, I think you're going to have to conclude that the ESV translators didn't do anything wrong here. In a sense, they didn't do anything at all. They simply let the RSV stand.
I hope this helps! I think the most you'll ever prove of effectively any serious Bible translator is that they chose from among several genuinely viable renderings the one that best fit with their existing theology. But I'll bet that you could, for any given translation, also find places where they translated something very straightforwardly despite its causing an apparent weakness for their theological viewpoints.
Don't forget the new Chinese version. That'll be another one to avoid.
Just heard about it! Shocking!
I haven’t heard anything “bad” about that version, can you help me out by explaining the known or perceived problem(s) with it? Thanks.
@@azarellediaz4892 for instance in the woman brought in from adultery, Jesus stones her and says I'm a sinner too. That's one example I heard
@@azarellediaz4892 Sorry, I was referring to the Chinese government's version on the Bible. They are re-writing it to suit their political agenda,. Try an internet search on this for more info.
Thank you for discussing Bible Translations Sirs, though this topic may not get that much attention, it is still of great importance to study this to really know the message God is trying to impart through His Word.
When a god is incapable of ensuring that his word is clear and correctly understood by all of the people he chose to worship him, I would say that is a god who hasn't really thought things through very well. Having thousands of denominations all getting it wrong, apart from the correct one that each worshipper KNOWS' is the correct interpretation of the bible of course, and all the other denominations have it wrong, though not as wrong as all the other religions of course. This does not appear to be the actions of an omnipotent and omnipresent supernatural being in my view.
@@JustaNaughtyBoy You have a point but you missed the fact that the Omnipotent and Omniscient God is not controlling humans like robots but gave us all free will to choose our actions, including sin but with consequences (both believers and unbelievers). God's Word (The Bible) is Infallible in it's Original Writings as it is Verbally Inspired of God, denominations are built by humans, the Bible is translated by humans and studying came along with those things, we are to blame for wrong beliefs, building false religions and wrong translations, God is not to blame when we've done wrong things.
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree with you when you say that humans are to blame for building false religions. How do you determine what is a false religion? The Muslims say that Christianity and Hinduism are false religions, The Hindus say that Christianity and Islam are false religions. If I accept these claims of theists, it truly appears that all religions are false religions.
You say that an Omnipotent and Omniscient God is not controlling humans, You suggest that your god is infallible in it's original writings. How did the original writings make it onto earth?
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree with you. Humans are to blame for creating false religions. What is your criteria for a false religion? Mine is the lack of credible evidence that their gods exists. Muslims say Christianity and Hinduism are false, Hindus say Christianity and Islam is false. I agree with both on those points and I think they use the same criteria as I do. You say your all powerful god is not controlling humans, I agree, It is a fallible god that chooses to have humans that he created to ensure his word is clear to all, I therefore dont think an infallible god exists. Are you saying that your god is fallible? To create humans incapable of doing this, is truly a careless thing to do. If I was a perfect god, I would ensure that my word could not be corrupted, if I was all powerful of course. How did these Infallible Original Writings get written? Did a man do the writing?
@@John3_16ReadandBelieve I agree, Humans create false religions. What is your criteria for a false religion? Mine is a religion that has no credible evidence that their god exists. How have you determined that the religions of the Muslims and Hindus are false? I suspect they have determined Christianity is false because Christianity has somehow not shown their god to exist. An infallible god would ensure its word remained infallible and endure time, as this god is eternal. You say the original writings are infallible, was it a man who translated the word of god into these infallible original writings?
I use multiple translations for study: NASV, ESV, NRSV, but my newest translation that I am really impressed with is the Berean Standard Bible. It seems comparable to ESV but flows perfectly for reading aloud. I haven't seen it mentioned here.
The BSB is my #1 Bible. I love it!
I also prefer a multi-translation study approach mainly using NKJV, ESV and NASB as go-tos and CSB and NIV for more difficult passages that I need clearer "thought for thought" support to aid my understanding. I'm now curious about BSB. Can't wait to check it out! Thanks!
Love this dialogue. I especially appreciate how both Sean and Mark speak about The Message as a complimentary to a good Bible translation. As I contemplate my role as a Jesus-Follower in the reconciliation with the First Nations of Canada a trusted Christian friend shared an Indigenous Translation of the New Testament called the "First Nations Version". He cautioned me to use it as a complimentary source to a good english translation (I use the ESV most often). The introduction and prologue give insight to the methodology they used. It's pretty cool as a resource.
Please tell me more about this indigenous translation. Is this a good one only for Native American culture, or could it be a good Bible for helping someone else.
@@cherylaguilar5421 I think The Native Translation of the New Testament is good like The Message translation. I would not exclusively use it but i do think it has value. I’m not as experienced at valuation of documents like Sean or Mark, but I do read it along side my ESV
@@ChristianCareerJoy My dad's from Ecuador and 50% "indigenous", descended from the Incas. Wonder if there's a bible translated to Quechua
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment
"thou shalt worship whoever you want"
and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god.
is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
I like the Jerusalem Bible.
The ‘inclusive’ gender neutral publications are scary
Very interesting topic and podcast. Thanks.
KJV is still my favourite.a beautiful poetry
That's exactly how I feel 😊
Great video... I preach from NASB2020 but in part of my prep I also use NLT / CSB and NKJV ... I think a balance is the best approach to taking in translations
Did Jesus use a "balance" "LEGION" of translations?
@@REVNUMANEWBERN I am not sure exactly what you are trying to get at with this reply, but the answer is, Jesus did not need to use any "translation" because he literally had the original scrolls in a language that was still read and understood in his day. We do not have that luxury, therefore, we need to use all tools available in this day and age to form the best possible understanding of God's Word.
Do you think our God wants us to go farther away from His Word in translations, or forward; OR closer towards His Word in translations ?
All translations can Not be correct?
Some evidently are closer?
What about versions that leave verses out totally?
Thank you Dr Sean! Amazing guest 🎉 I'm so happy over the years it's sensible to conclude you should use many legitimate translations together ❤ thank you Mark Ward
Great interview. Very thoughtful and balanced answers. I really appreciate Mark’s fairness in evaluating all these translations.
Curious why you did not list the New Jerusalem? Do you Sean and or your guest consider it okay?
I started reading the KJV four years ago, whereas I used to read the NIV. It was slow going for the first several months, but it didn't take me long to begin understanding it. The longer I read it, the more I understand it, and it is better than any translation I've read. The language of the King James may be hard to understand at first, but if you try it it won't take long and is more than worth it. I believe it is the most accurate.
Outstanding discussion. I truly learned a lot. Thank you to both of you gentlemen.
Our pleasure!
I really enjoyed listening to this! As I disciple others it's important to have more analitical rhetoric about these translations!
I'm an ESV and Logos Bible Study guy, but I still pick up the NKJV when I'm reading the Psalms (or certain other, lyrical passages.) The KJV has multiple faults, but it's still one of the unsurpassed works in the English language for its beauty. Much of my memory of verse still comes from my early KJV days and my mom's recitations that still ring, so beautifully, in my ear.
Just subscribed to Mark’s channel. Sean, you are a blessing to me and so many. Love your content and your heart for the truth.
I really enjoyed this video great Job!
A new girl to our church brought a New World Translation to pre-teen camp because that was the only bible they had in their house! I made sure to get her a new one right away! I didn't realize that JWs gave out their text, I thought you had to read it with a "pastor" to get the understanding correct?
I actually managed to get one from JW’s on the street and they didn’t require me to study it with them. So I guess they’re quite open to give their translation to others.
Just don’t ever use the New World. It’s garbage.
Not my favourite translation but if you look at it in a less biased way you can see it’s merits while not ignoring its demerits.
I’m gonna try to explain as best as possible (my parents are JWs, and I was raised in the religion - never got baptized so I don’t count lol).
Typically they don’t give them out willy nilly- first you knock, then it’s either a return visit or you start studying. In which case, it usually is the “what does the Bible teach?” Book- they revised it since. At some point they will offer to give you a nwt Bible and invite you to the Kingdom Hall. It’s weird because they have other translations on the app you can download, yet they have a disdain-? or superiority complex when it comes to someone using any- and I mean any- other translation. If you don’t know your Bible, they will pull you in. Added bonus for reading the Bible is that when they come around, you can preach to them and hopefully plant a few seeds.
Hope that did it for explaining the whole thing.
@@cinnamondan4984 Well, the New World Translation does indeed deny that Jesus was and is God in John chapter one. So, I have to agree with the other person here who said the NWT is garbage. Wouldn't waste my time reading it, except maybe to see where the Jehovah's Wiitnesses altered Scripture to fit their agenda.
I appreciate this so much. I love the Message as a casual reading Bible. Not really for study but for casual supplement.
Agreed
I love reading The Message Bible, but only because I think in KJV!
I find The Message interesting and sometimes funny and very interesting. It's not a "Study" Bible. When I just want to relax but keep myself centered on My Savior!